Category Archives: Philosophy

The moral and the intellectual

Posted on by Leave a comment

Is it a reflection on modern day society that shows designed to make people think are so popular? I like to think so. I know for a fact that we respect intelligence. You could even say we have an obsession with it. But what about the moral?
My political involvement has largely been propelled by the desire to see more compassion. But in a world of slogans and catchphrases the word compassion is rarely used. Why?
Ancient Greek philosophers were obsessed and fascinated both with human morality. How is it, they questioned, that we can have instinctive moral reactions to something, even before learning any theories of justice? Especially when humans are almost alone in the animal world in our ability to do this. Ethics formed the basis of aristotle’s work, and aristotelianism formed the basis of western liberal socio-political culture.
So where has our fascination with morality gone? Has it disappeared?

Do we need some constants in life?

Posted on by Leave a comment

So I’m Sat here on my iPhone, wondering if this will be how I blog from now on. We tend to think all technological advances are inevitable. And indeed change is a fact of life inherent to all things. But so is our search for constants – parents, religion, tradition etc. So my question to you is this: do we need some constants to form a part of our lives and thus our identities? Or can we be happy with change in its entirety?

Does any one concept trump them all?

Posted on by 5 comments

A bit of dialectical philosophy for you:

Fictional character A: “Would you forgive me for what I did, as you say you would be prepared to forgive him?”
Fictional Character B: “Would you want me to?”
A: “Yes. Yes I want to be forgiven.”
B: “… you’d do it again though wouldn’t you?”
A: “You think that?”
B: “Yes.”
A: “I suppose you’re right. Fine, then this. Would you forgive your teacher his failings?”
B: “Perhaps. He didn’t mean to do what he did.”
A: “Ah! And because I planned, and he blundered, I am more beyond forgiveness than he?”
B: “Yes.”
A: “Then answer me this: would you forgive your best friend or lover if they committed some crime like mine? Or helped someone else commit one?”
B: “Yes I probably would.”
A: “And what’s the difference between your best friend or your lover and I?”
B: “You aren’t them.”
A: “You mean you love them.”
B: “Yes.”
A: “And love is more important than justice.”
B: “Sometimes, yes.”

Do you agree that love is more important than justice? Do you think love should always come above all things? Or would this lead to catastrophic, selfish ends?

Do we have a right to self-determination?

Posted on by 2 comments

The right to self-determination has been implicit within a great deal of Western thought since the Enlightenment and the revolutions of the late eighteenth century. But do we really have such a right? Should we even have such a right? And what does such a right mean?

The Democratic Reform Party scorned the major parties’ efforts to prevent a democratic decision with regards to the Scottish referendum. All three parties openly tried to block the third choice (max-devo), as the Conservatives were able to do with the referendum over the electoral system. To me this is blatant disregard for people’s democratic right to take such a decision for themselves.

However on the other hand there is one thing on which I can agree with these parties, and also the Economist (which has recently been heavily criticised by Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond for declaring that it would be a bad decision for Scotland to vote for independence). I do agree that it would be a bad decision economically, and also socially, for Scotland to vote for independence. The question is whether this should negate their right to self-determination i.e. who takes the decision?

If you think the answer’s easy let’s take another example: the EU. Some people believe that there is decisive proof to say that thousands of people would lose their jobs, and thousands of lives would be ruined if the UK pulled out of the EU. These people say that the people cannot understand all the ins and outs of the labour market, and consequences of speculative forces; and they thus argue against the idea of a referendum on membership. But some of these very same people argue for the right to self-determination in other areas. Is this hypocrisy? Do we have a right to self-determination? If yes should it apply in all circumstances? If no how is it a right and not simply a principle?

Are humans the only people?

Posted on by 2 comments

This article (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/feb/21/whales-dolphins-legal-rights) reports on an increasingly popular argument that whales and dolphins are intelligent enough for us to grant them formalised rights, such as the right to life.
This raises several important and interesting points. It premises that human rights are based on intelligence. And it also suggests that some people are starting to group other species along with humans into an intelligent bracket. We can’t call these species Earthlings, since obviously that would also incorporate are rather less intelligent relatives as well. But is it time for us to stop thinking we’re special? Is it time for humans to recognise the rights of species other than themselves?

A Death Knell for Utopia

Posted on by One comment

Utopian visions have caught the imagination of some of the greatest minds in history, and formed a theme that has been echoed in historic libraries around the world. We have Plato’s Republic, Thomas More’s Utopia, an unparalleled publishing of nearly 100 utopian fantasies between 1875 and 1905, and more recently the publishing of Fukuyama’s ‘The End of History and the Last Man’, in which he says that the future will simply be managing past ideas. Most now agree that ‘the end of history’ reflected no more than a mood at the time. In fact it’s no coincidence that each utopian vision is eventually discredited. A state of universal perfection is a backward concept. It belongs with the absolutes of Newtonian physics; not with society past the teachings of Einstein. What’s perfect to one person is an abomination to another. And what is perfect to someone at age 40 may be an abomination to that same person aged 50.

So in fact there is no such thing as a true Utopia. However there are such things as ideals, and as such the closest we will ever get to utopia is a state of constant reform, adaptation and evolution.

Do you agree? Is the mood today one that will result in a death knell for the continued publishing of utopian visions?

Is America shifting towards the left?

Posted on by 2 comments

The United States defined itself during the Cold War against the USSR, and some people believe that made the US more right wing than it might otherwise have been. Obama is today accused of being a socialist, and he has provoked a right wing ‘tea party’ movement. But is his getting into power part of a wider trend, whereby in the long run we will see America more ideologically aligned with Europe?

« Older Entries Recent Entries »