Thursday, December 31, 2020

Thoughts for the Day: Thursday 31 December 2020--Happy New Year's Eve!

 



Wittgenstein also saw the true process of philosophy as a way of transcending or healing the effects of philosophy in the philosophical mind: philosophy is itself a disease, as Karl Kraus said of psychoanalysis, for which it purports to be the cure.

This second implication leads directly to a third: that severe resource scarcity is not a problem of excessive growth of either population or consumption in a world of fixed resources, as neo-Malthusians claim, but of the failure of economic institutions and policies.

As Morgenthau had said, “The statesman has no assurance of success in the immediate task, and not even the expectation of solving the long-range problem.”

Pareto not only shows that non-logical conduct is predominant; his crucial point is that the conduct which has a bearing on social and political structure, on what he calls the “social equilibrium,” is above all the arena of the non-logical. What happens to society, whether it progresses or decays, is free or despotic, happy or miserable, poor or prosperous, is only to the slightest degree influenced by the deliberate, rational purposes held by human beings.

Of the thousands of breathing methods that exist, they all break down between those that ramp you up and those that bring you down. As a general rule, if you take more air in than you let out, you up-regulate your body, giving yourself an energy boost and heightened alertness. If you let out more air than you take in, you down-regulate, meaning you will relax and fall asleep easier.


Wednesday, December 30, 2020

Thoughts of the Day: Wednesday 30 December 2020


One of the facts about man as man is that his vitalities may be elaborated in indeterminate variety. That is the fruit of his freedom. Not all of these elaborations are equally wholesome and creative. But it is very difficult to derive “in a necessary fashion” the final rules of his individual and social existence. It is this indeterminateness and variety which makes analogies between the “laws of nature” in the exact sense of the words and laws of human nature, so great a source of confusion. It is man's nature to transcend nature and to elaborate his own historical existence in indeterminate degree.

When everybody is swept away unthinkingly by what everybody else does and believes in, those who think are drawn out of hiding because their refusal to join in is conspicuous and thereby becomes a kind of action. In such emergencies, it turns out that the purging component of thinking (Socrates’ midwifery, which brings out the implications of unexamined opinions and thereby destroys them—values, doctrines, theories, and even convictions) is political by implication.

Can a story really be so powerful that it overrides experience, scientific evidence, logic, and common sense? Of course it can, as Eric Hoffer showed us long ago in his book The True Believer.--David Sloan Wilson.

Today [2020], the most important politician in the developed world lives by facts supplied via political chat shows on his favoured propaganda network, tweets from unknown origins and his own rampaging id.--Nicholas Gruen, Australian economist.

Comparing these two time scales, [Brian] Arthur estimates that technology evolves at roughly “10 million times the speed of natural evolution.”



Tuesday, December 29, 2020

Thoughts for the Day: Tuesday 29 December 2020

 



Basins of attraction are places of local stability or equilibrium where the system in question is more likely to settle and remain, because less energy is needed to keep the system there. In the state-space model, the basins are locations in the state space where large numbers of people don’t have to invest a lot of cognitive energy— they don’t have to think much— to maintain their political ideologies, because (among other reasons) the ideologies at those locations align with their temperaments and moral intuitions. Psychologists can measure people’s investment of cognitive energy by using methods such as the implicit association test, which captures the degree of subconscious association between mental representations in a person’s mind. Generally, the more conscious an association, the more cognitive energy is invested in making the association.

Buzz Holling practically despairs on this score. “Because we are only now beginning to understand the changing reality,” he writes, “there is consequently no limit to the ability of good scientists to invent compelling lines of causal explanation that inexorably support their particular beliefs. How can even the best-intentioned politician possibly be expected to deal with that? How can even the most reflective of the public?”

Psychology is not history but science, a science constructed on naturalistic principles.

The ideal of equality in freedom could never be static, frozen in time, because in truth it could never be realized; each generation had to define the concept anew. And so the American Revolution was “an endless process rather than an isolated act,” and the ongoing effort to achieve the ideal constituted “a restless and dynamic search for a state of society that could at best be approximated, never fully attained.” It was a Sisyphean task, but no less real or desirable for that.

One of the more telling examples [of criticism of Hannah Arendt's political ideals] came from the German philosopher Jürgen Habermas, who lamented what he called Arendt’s “curious perspective.” She imagined “a state,” he said, “which is relieved of the administrative processing of social problems; a politics which is cleansed of socioeconomic issues; an institutionalization of public liberty which is independent of the organization of public wealth; a radical democracy which inhibits its liberating efficacy just at the boundaries where political oppression ceases and social repression begins—this path is unimaginable for any modern society.”
Agree.

Monday, December 28, 2020

Thoughts for the Day: Monday 28 December 2020

 



The first entirely new notion brought in by the new age—the seventeenth-century idea of an unlimited progress, which after a few centuries became the most cherished dogma of all men living in a scientifically oriented world—seems intended to take care of the predicament: though one expects to progress further and further, no one seems ever to have believed in reaching a final absolute goal of truth.

The world appears in the mode of it-seems-to-me, depending on particular perspectives determined by location in the world as well as by particular organs of perception. This mode not only produces error, which I can correct by changing my location, drawing closer to what appears, or by improving my organs of perception with the help of tools and implements, or by using my imagination to take other perspectives into account; it also gives birth to true semblances, that is, to deceptive appearance, which I cannot correct like an error since they are caused by my permanent location on the earth and remain bound up with my own existence as one of the earth’s appearances.

Heidegger, whom Carnap singled out for attack, retorted by stating that philosophy and poetry were indeed closely related; they were not identical but sprang from the same source—which is thinking.

All laws, including the Bolshevist and Nazi laws, become a façade whose purpose is to keep the population constantly aware that the laws, no matter what their nature or origin, do not really matter.

What is this strange need to lead, and the equally strange one to follow? What is this will to power? Why do we pursue it? Must it always corrupt? Charismatic leaders cast a spell over their followers in the same way that a magician casts one over those he wants to enchant. The power of the image, of glamour, of one’s self-confidence, is at work in both—as it is in the confidence trickster. The medium is the imagination, whether in its traditional forms or in its new electronic version.

Weariness and compromise—the workings of the Mixmaster “market”—have puréed all Nixon’s separate virtues to an unoffending mush.

Some people are going to be left behind, and societies with rapidly widening inequalities can’t be politically stable for long.



Sunday, December 27, 2020

Thoughts for the Day: Sunday 27 December 2020

 


For, in the final analysis, our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this small planet. We all breathe the same air. We all cherish our children’s future. And we are all mortal. ---John F. Kennedy.

The historian’s business is with fact; and there are no future facts. The whole past and present universe is the field of history, to its remotest parts and in its most distant beginnings. Over this field the historian is absolutely free to range in whatever direction he will, limited not by his ‘authorities’ but by his own pleasure. For the maturity of historical thought is the explicit consciousness of the truth that what matters is not an historian’s sources but the use he makes of them.

When the mind is mastered by the will, then may new territory be conquered.

Anxiety disorders occur when autonomic systems bypass the mind and hijack the stress response. The emotions that created neural symbols in the first instance were so powerful, and tied together so tightly, that they hardwired stress into the patients’ systems.

It is important not to overestimate our understanding even of simple agrarian societies. Applying history’s lessons to the present day presents even more difficulties because we live in a different world from the one of the Assyrians, the Romans, and the Mongols. Abundant food and energy, rapidly developing technology and science, mass media, the World Wide Web, and the mobile phone make any direct comparisons between historical agrarian empires and the modern industrial states problematic. On the other hand, modernity did not remake human nature.

Saturday, December 26, 2020

Thoughts for the Day: Saturday 26 December 2020 (Boxing Day)


In honor of the Feast of the Nativity (Christmas) yesterday, this quote: 

The new therefore always appears in the guise of a miracle. . . . [W]ith each birth something uniquely new comes into the world. With respect to this somebody who is unique it can be truly said that nobody was there before. If action as beginning corresponds to the fact of birth, if it is the actualization of the human condition of natality, then speech corresponds to the fact of distinctness and is the actualization of the human condition of plurality, that is, of living among equals. 

--Hannah Arendt, THE HUMAN CONDITION


And something very similar is true for the will, which neither reason nor desire can move. “Nothing other than the Will is the total cause of volition” (“nihil aliud a voluntate est causa totalis volitionis in voluntate”), in the striking formula of Duns Scotus, or “voluntas vult se velle” (“the will wills itself to will”), as even Thomas, the least voluntaristic of those who thought about this faculty, had to admit.

Democratic society as a living reality is threatened at the very moment that democracy becomes a “cause,” because then actions are likely to be judged and opinions evaluated in terms of ultimate ends and not on their inherent merits. The democratic way of life can be threatened only by people who see everything as a means to an end, i.e., in some necessary chain of motives and consequences, and who are prone to judge actions “objectively,” independent of the conscious motives of the doer, or to deduce certain consequences from opinions of which the holder is unaware.

Holling asks: “Is the reserve and insurance that the resilience of nature has given us going to be the very attribute that blocks people’s abilities to perceive and adapt to abrupt change on planetary scales?”

Reason may (as Hobbes and his liberal followers argued) instruct us in virtue, but this is likely to be effective only for philosophers. The rest of us need stronger medicine. Without such medicine, the sentiment that keeps individuals law-abiding even in the absence of positive law is fated to grow ever weaker as reason succumbs to passion.

Mores are a matter not of rational calculation but of heartfelt conviction.

“For most of history, life has been hierarchical. A few have enjoyed the privileges that come from monopolizing violence. Everyone else has dug.”


Wednesday, December 23, 2020

John le Carre

 

John le Carre (1931-2020)

The recent death of John le Carre has garnered a lot of retrospective consideration of his works, and I feel that I'd be remiss if I didn't join in. I've read most (if not all) of his novels, and I've seen many adaptations of his work (more on these to come). (C has read about as much, as well.) There is something about the grittiness of le Carre that draws me into his work. Of course, there's intrigue, although surprisingly little violence (although nasty enough when it appears). Le Carre studied people in situations, sometimes in committee meetings, sometimes at gunpoint. But his granular lens is always focused on the characters. Of course, this can also make for wonderful adaption to the screen if done well (and it often wasn't). But there is one set of exceptions beyond question: the BBC productions of Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy and Smiley's People, both starring Alec Guinness as Smiley and both staffed with a terrific supporting casts. I haven't changed my opinion about this; indeed, C & I watched both series again this year during pandemic confinement. I've lost track of how many times I've watched these two series, but I don't tire of them, they're so nuanced. 

For a thoughtful reflection on the many incarnations of George Smiley--foremost of which are now those of Guinness and Oldman, but which has also included James Mason--and for contrast with Ian Fleming's (and later imitators) James Bond, read this article by James Parker in the December 20011 issue of The Atlantic


Guinness: My favorite Smiley


Also, here's a 40th-anniversary reflection on Tinker Tailor from The Guardian (2019). And here's a photo of the three-plus Alleline: 




A great supporting cast, especially Bernard Hepton (far left) and Ian Richardson (next to Hepton)
Hepton was even better in Smiley's People. 

So to honor le Carre and to indulge in a walk down memory lane of my own, here are some of my earlier blog posts concerning le Carre. And if you must, skip the posts and read and watch le Carre's works. 



John LeCarre: Our Kind of Traitor


John LeCarre's A Most Wanted Man



And from a list of "favorite movies" [sic] I made in 2010: 

Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy (1979) and Smiley's People (1982). Okay, C already complained that these are not movies. True, they were made for TV; however, because of the quality of the script, acting, and production design, I have to treat them as films. These are to me what the Godfather films are to C. I'm not sure that I can quote as well as her from the script (a frightening ability that she possesses when she quotes Vito or Michael to me), but still, if you want more, I'll give you an earful. Alec Guinness is superb as Smiley. The supporting cast consists of great actors.


John le Carre: RIP. 

Thoughts for the Day: Wednesday (again) 23 December 2020

 


The Sapir–Whorf hypothesis has partial truth – if you don't have the word, you are likely to lose the concept; but this research demonstrates that the concept can arise without the word, and is therefore not dependent on it. So thinking is prior to language.

According to Mannheim, all human thought is “existentially bound” and can be properly understood only by taking into account the particular situation from which it arises. This applies even to philosophical thought, which claims to be unaffected by particular points of view and to embody truth as such, thus assuming absolute validity for itself.

Nestled inside the worldview component of this “growth WIT” [worldview, institutions, technology] is the dominant intellectual rationalization of today’s world order: conventional economics. This elaborate apparatus of theory, empirical evidence, mathematical gymnastics, value judgments, and self-congratulation legitimizes globalized capitalism and the social power of its elites.

Central to interpretation (whether by cop or by prof) is question-and-answer logic, which may be better thought of less with the daunting severity of the logician and more as a series of consequential inquiries arranged, so to speak, with the connectedness (and logic) of a tree-diagram.
From an old lawyer: yes.
"Self-betrayal" 1. An act contrary to what I feel I should do for another is called an act of "self-betrayal." 2. When I betray myself, I begin to see the world in a way that justifies my self-betrayal. 3. When I see the world in a self-justifying way, my view of reality becomes distorted.


Tuesday, December 22, 2020

Thoughts for the Day: Wednesday 22 December 2020

 



But this notion of value [“utilitarian values”] reflects an astonishingly impoverished understanding of human beings: it’s based on the assumption that we’re nothing more than decision-making machines choosing among options based on how much they satisfy our hedonistic desires.

The law of movement itself, Nature or History, singles out the foes of mankind and no free action of mere men is permitted to interfere with it.
If you've followed what I've written from time to time, you should know that I'm a big fan of history as a form of knowledge (or a way of knowing), but I'm not at all a fan of "History" as a replacement for human thought and decision-making, a "plan" that we must recognize, reveal, and realize. So, I contend, say Arendt and Collingwood, among others.

"It’s the integration of cognition with affect that appears to be key to self-awareness.” [Dr. Donald Stuss.]
“You seem to be suggesting,” I [Dr. Thomas Homer-Dixon] “that affect, or emotion, is very important for the brain’s high-level integrative and executive functions. Yet conventionally people think of emotion as a primitive aspect of human psychology. They believe the highest level of human intellectual function is rationality—cold, detached, and instrumental. And this conventional perspective suggests that, ideally, we should strip emotion out of our decision-making and cast it aside.”
“Exactly. I’ve [Stuss] spent decades studying the role of frontal lobes in logical cognition, but I’m now bringing in affect. We’ve shown that the polar region of the right frontal lobe—a region long regarded as useless—is a place important for humor and intentionality. The frontal lobes are also the source of our ‘gut feeling,’ which is something largely dissociable from knowledge and logic. The essence of human life is the integration of these things.”