Blogs

There are many discussions between the difference of needs and wants, from personal satisfaction and happiness to the aggregate social benefits. Certainly there is much in our political economy which actively encourages the idea that the path to happiness is to be achieved by having a bigger house (and more houses, and especially more land), a powerful car or three, expensive clothes, and the various trappings of luxury, such as being surrounded by gold and marble.

The earliest recorded advocacy of hedonism comes from Siduri in "The Epic of Gilgamesh". It basically suggested enjoy the sensuality of life, and don't worry about other things, specifically in the case of Gilgamesh, give up your quest for immortality. The Epicureans gave a more nuanced version, that we should seek a life of simple pleasures (especially intellectual pleasures), cultivate friendships and avoid conflicts (they didn't participate in politics as a result). It from the Epicureans that one witnesses the development of the many versions of utilitarianism and consequentialism etc.

Whilst both argued in favour of living in accord to nature, there is a stark contrast between the quasi-hedonistic Epicureans and their quest for "ataraxia", the freedom from disturbances, and the Stoic quest for "eudaimonia", happiness through the control of one's mind, virtuousness towards others, etc. The Stoics argued that this control and virtue could be achieved independently of wealth or poverty, sickness and health, etc. The the Peripatetics argued against the Stoics on this matter, with Aristotle suggesting that some external goods were necessary for virtue and control and beyond that the Delphic Maxim of the Golden Mean applied, i.e., moderation. This is clearly close to the teachings of Gautama Buddha in the Noble Eightfold Path against the extremes of self-mortification through austerity and the coarse addictions of sensual pleasures.

Expressed in over forty thousand words and separated into twelve "books", the Meditations by the Roman Emperor (161 to 180 CE) Marcus Aurelias has been recognised as one of the major contributions to the philosophy of Stoicism even if almost certainly written for his own consideration during a military campaign, rather than for wider publication. Indeed, the earliest manuscript title in Kione Greek was "ta eis heauton" ("to himself"). In particular, in these days of a devastating and ongoing global pandemic there has been a revised interest in Stoicism and especially Aurelius' Meditations.

With the exception of Book I, it is difficult to discern a temporal, logical, or thematic order, although some attempts have been made (e.g., Gourinat, 2012). Writing for himself has meant that they are written in an unassuming manner, even for an Emperor. But it also means that the books do seem to lack a sense of development; one often finds a returning to questions that have been previously considered, with a new angle, but similar dispositions. Whilst there is often pithy insight to be gained from these considerations, their repetition does lead one to consider whether Marcus was documenting his own attempts to use Stoic philosophy to stave off the challenges that it must confront with depression from the past, anxiety of the future, dissatisfaction with the natural world, and discontent with the behaviour of oneself and that of others.

Veganism is the practice of abstaining from the use of animal products as far as is possible. A vegan diet uses only plants and hence no animal foods, i.e. no meat, no fish, no dairy foods, no eggs and no honey. Vegans also avoid the use of animal products such as leather, feathers, fur and wool.

Some people become vegans because they do not want to exploit animals. Some people become vegan for health reasons because some research has linked vegan diets with lower blood pressure and cholesterol and lower rates of heart disease, type 2 diabetes some types of cancer and some research has given evidence that a balanced vegan diet is useful in combatting diabetes and arthritisi. Some go vegan for environmental reasons - giving up animal products lowers carbon emissions; also to produce food for an omnivore uses about five times the amount of water food produced for a vegan uses.

The vegan diet contains four food groups: (i) grains (ii) vegetables (iii) fruit and (iv) legumes, nuts and seeds. In addition vegans should take a source of vitamin B12 (e.g. a tablet). For a balanced diet one should eat from all four groups.

There has been a lot of discussion about the concept of progress for many years, and the topic is still controversial.

There are lists of the benefits from the progress we have made over the past few centuries, and there is a lot of dissent about them.

The idea of progress might seem to be straightforward, but it has its subtleties and its contradictions.

What is Progress?

There is much talk at the moment about "religious freedom" in Australia, and there is about to be a great deal more. The Federal Coalition government, pledged a Religious Discrimination Act in the last election, and in recent weeks we have witnessed the Prime Minister, Scott Morrison, declare that he is seeking a bipartisan approach to the Act with discussions with the leader of the opposition, Anthony Albanese. From all accounts the bill can be expected very soon; indeed a month ago a draft was prepared with suggestions that it would be presented to parliament in mid-August.

While the science of physics is able to explain an enormous amount of things about the world, there are still enough mysteries to keep physicists busy for a long, long time. I will talk about mysteries relating to fundamental physics. Fundamental physics explains the rest of physics and provides the basis of chemistry.

Fundamental physics is just one small part of science, but discovering solutions to its mysteries can reveal new kinds of scientific knowledge.

Creationists say that the existence of scientific mysteries demonstrates that all science is unsound. This is their argument against the theory of evolution.

Some aspects of science may be hard to understand or believe. But, at a time when there are so many global problems that cannot be addressed without scientific guidance, the many groundless alternative beliefs and fake news are a threat to humanity.
It would help humanity if more people had some idea about scientific mysteries and the large body of science that surrounds them.

Some people expect that we will soon be able to make computers that will be conscious.

Their argument is that since brains are intelligent physical structures that can make us consciousness, it should also be possible for other intelligent physical structures, such as computers, to be made conscious.
The concept of manufacturing machines that are conscious raises a few issues.

Early this year Christian numerologist and astrologer David Meade proclaimed that April 23 would be the days of the second coming of Christ, the Rapture, the end of the world. It generated some media attention just prior to that date although, it must be said, not much after. Mind you, this was the second attempt of David Meade who also reported that end-times would occur on 23 September in 2017.

Some of you may remember that almost ten years ago, I an address gave at this church on the alleged prophecies of a 2012 destruction based on a destructive interpretation of the Mesoamerican long-count calendar and an associated science fiction disaster film. That address was entitled "2012 : From Ancient Brilliance to Modern Nonsense" [1], where I gave great credit to the Mesoamericans for developing a sophisticated calendar, and castigated contemporary (albeit fringe) interpretations for trying to make it something that it was not.

For this century alone there has been almost twenty-five major predictions of the end of the world that have passed, and several that are yet to come. Ronald Weinland, of the "Church of God Preparing for the Kingdom of God" has predicted the end of the world and the second coming of Jesus in 2011, in 2012, in 2013, and most recently June 9, 2019.

If we go back into the twentieth century there are of course many, many examples. The Jehovah's Witnesses made four such predictions. Herbert Armstrong, the leader of the Worldwide Church of God, also managed four. Some of these were quite tragic; on the 26th March 1997 thirty-nine members of the Heaven's Gate cult committed suicide under the belief that the souls would join a UFO on the tail of the Hale-Bopp comet, escaping the "recycling" of Earth (their website is still kept in its 1997 glory [2]).

Inverting A Common Assumption

It is common that technology is defined as "applied science", deriving from Jacob Bigelow's 1829 definition as "principles, processes, and nomenclatures of the more conspicuous arts, particularly those which involve applications of science". Webster's defines technology as "industrial science; the science of systematic knowledge of the industrial arts", Collins offers "the application of practical sciences to industry or commerce", and Oxford has "the application of scientific knowledge for practical purposes". For what it's worth, the etymology of the word is from the Hellenic "tekhnelogia", tekhne art, creation, and -logia, explanation.

These contemporary definitions imply that science has priority over technology and precedes technology, and historically the philosophy of technology has been confined as a minor tangent to the philosophy of science, and occasionally touching on the history of technology. However, in the past forty years or so, various philosophers of technology invert this common assumption [1], claiming that it is an idealist view that places epistemology over ontology. Rather than technology being applied science, they have argued that science is applied technology. Once we are beyond our natural capacities of observation, all our empirical information is technologically mediated. Science is a rational abstraction of data gained from technology that predicts empirical results. But the empirical results have a priority, discoveries of fact trump the scientific theory, and the scientific theory must adapt to empirical truth or die (e.g., spontaneous generation, miasma theory of disease, phlogiston theory, luminiferous aether, classical physics, phrenology).

"Being Dead" could seem like a gruesome topic, but there are lots of human activities relating to people who are dead. There is the annual celebration of ANZAC day, which is an established part of Australian life. For tens of thousands of years there have been traditional procedures relating to dead people.

Many people don't like talking about or hearing about dying or becoming dead. I wonder whether anyone who usually comes to the Philosophy Forum was put off by this topic.

There are euphemisms about being dead. The "dear departed" have "passed away" or "gone to their Maker" or are "no longer with us". There are also less delicate expressions whereby the person "bit the dust", has "carked it" or "kicked the bucket".

Most of us have justifiable concerns about death – what our own death might be like, and that of our family and friends. Most people take some kind of care to avoid doing anything that could have some risk of death. Some people carelessly or knowingly do things that risk premature death, such as smoking, or texting while driving a motor vehicle. Some people, sometimes called "daredevils", get a thrill from doing things that have a risk of death. They enjoy "cheating death". These various kinds of action display something of what people think about being dead, and about being alive.

There are many things that concern us about being alive, such as sickness and comfort and money and social status and boredom. Sometimes we look forward to being dead as a welcome relief from the pain and suffering of being alive.

There is also a fascination with death. Reports of death are eagerly discussed, irrespective of whether the dead are known or unknown. Murder mysteries are the topic of many novels, television series and films.