________________________________________________________
Things that we do and document, like the philosophy in pubs and dropin, get posted and will appear below !
Topic: Can we Control Ourselves?
The discussion concentrated on the word ‘control’. One group settled for an interpretation something like an organising principle or mechanism: as something inherent and arising almost organically from life’s systems.
Some quotes:
Life is not logical… Where’s the soul in the cytoplasm? …I don’t want to talk about choices confined to what kind of jam to buy!… Perhaps we are all butterflies with no observable control on the system except a possibly chaotic presence…
Control is a concept we don’t need- it is born out of fear and anxiety. It suggests lack of relationship whereas attachment itself is the stabilising factor.
Someone compared control in the classroom to a damping down mechanism. Others thought control could not be divorced from the moral world in which it is embedded.
There was a short history of psychology developing through psychoanalytic insights
of unconscious motives to behavioural stimulus and response theories to cognitive models where the mind was the central organiser, eventually to systems theory which involves understanding rather than the need for control.
Some systems appear simple but are actually very sensitive and complex. In trying to control or even influence it; the system itself will respond in an often counter productive and unpredictable way e.g. in feedback loops. The Gaia theory of James Lovelock is an instance.
Some thought that the minority, usually ignored or suppressed, can achieve relative control of the majority. Perhaps as Nietzsche maintained occurred with Christianity when faced by Roman domination.
The desire for control can also lead to the once oppressed becoming the oppressors. Orwell’s Animal Farm was written as a warning of this.
The balance between controller/ controlled can be difficult to maintain. Parents seek to control children but to what extent does the child co-operate or even control the parent?
Summing Up Comments:
the complexity of the world implies that we are all completely engaged. Control rests on the idea of the I-me- self which is a questionable idea in itself.
We do have control over ourselves? Why else do we have a conscious mind?
Control is exercised – all sentient being have this ability. Sometimes it is a battle: I should know, I’m a control freak.
Maybe it would be more preferable to go more with the flow rather than try to deliberately seek control.
The thought of control originating in anxiety and fear resonates for me. The need to settle my emotions and the desire to please others and conform to their wishes has shaped my life.
Order is at the heart of everything- that is what I place my trust in. I feel conscious but only partly aware of anything.
I had strong sensations of being fearful and of losing control. The more I tried to regulate things the less I was able to. The question of control is not something that occurs naturally but can cause the system to collapse under the strain.
Metaphors can help to explain these concepts. Mathematically chaos is deterministic and mechanistic but Chaos can exist in simple as well as complex systems.
How can you say anything without saying everything?
“Since the beginning, NPS members have expressed interest in postmodern philosophy and in political philosophy.
Here then is an opportunity to discuss both in one go!”
A. Badiou – Infinite Thought
G. Agamben – Homo Sacer
Though I must stress, the reading is not necessary for the paper and subsequent discussion.
The Seventh Seal
Director: Ingmar Bergman
Released: 1957
Main characters : Block the knight, Jons the squire, Death
If there is one film that could not have been made in colour this is it.
The title is taken from the opening line in the Book of Revelations.
The plot revolves around a knight and his squire returning to Sweden after ten years fighting in the crusades. Their return coincides with the appearance of the plague, which is rampant.
Block’s belief in God is flimsy and is further shaken throughout the film; while the squire’s atheism gains strength at every encounter as God fails everybody.
Death comes for the Block, but the knight talks Death into playing a game of chess, with his life as the wager. Death eventually wins this game but only by cheating.
On their journey back to the knights castle they meet various people. A young servant girl is saved from rape by Jons and becomes his servant. The rapist is now a robber but had previously been the theologian who sent Block and Jons to the crusades.
A monk has sentenced a young woman to be burnt as a witch. Through her eyes Block sees reality.
A group of actors includes a couple with a child. Death intends to have them all but Block distracts death by knocking over a chess piece, allowing the actors to escape.
At his castle Block does not recognise his wife but she has no trouble recognising him. They share a last supper.
PHILOSOPHICAL ISSUES: Philosophy of religion, problem of evil
Among these are religion’s inadequate explanations of human suffering, the absence of any compelling proof of God’s existence, religion’s emphasis on self-mortification, religion’s slowing the progress of scientific explanation, the misguided witch hunts by church authorities, the immoral conduct of the clergy, and the tendency of religious leaders to manipulate believers into performing immoral tasks.
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS:
1. Block states the following in his confession to death (who he thinks is a priest): “Why must God hide in vague promises and invisible miracles? … What will become of us who want to believe but cannot? And what of those who neither will nor can believe? Why can I not kill God within me? Why does he go on living in a painful, humiliating way? I want to tear him out of my heart, but he remains a mocking reality which I cannot get rid of. … I want knowledge. Not belief. Not surmise. But knowledge.” Why is religious knowledge so important, and why aren’t many believers satisfied with just belief or surmise?
2. Block continues in his confession that if God isn’t there, “then life is a senseless terror. No man can live with Death and know that everything is nothing.” Believers often assert that a Godless world is gloomy. Would an atheist agree, and, if not, is there much sense in the believer’s assertion?
3. Block also states in his confession that “We must make an idol of our fear and call it God.” This reflects a common view in the psychology of religion that belief in God is initially sparked by fear of the unknown. Is there any truth to this and, if so, does this undermine religion?
4. In one scene, Squire Jons prevents Raval (a former seminarian) from stealing from the dead and raping and murdering a young woman. Raval, Jons states, was the one who persuaded Block to go on his futile 10-year crusade; Raval claims that he initially did that in good faith. This scene illustrates a centuries-old problem about the moral integrity of the clergy, whose hypocrisies are highlighted all the more because their job descriptions require them to spokespersons of religious truth. To what extent do the moral deficiencies of the clergy undermine the religious message that they present?
5. One of the more shocking scenes in the film is the “procession of flagellants” in which believers march through the streets whipping each other. By doing so they aimed to purge their sins, drive away Satan and thereby escape the plague, which, they believed, God inflicted on them as a punishment. Jons asks, “Do they really expect modern people to take the drivel seriously?” Are there contemporary equivalents of this that are less extreme?
6. A group of people sitting at a table in an Inn discuss the devastating effects of the plague. The woman at the inn stated that “It’s judgement day, and the awful omens, a woman has given birth to a calf’s head…. Many have purged themselves with fire and died. But better that than hell, the priests say.” Others insist that it is the end times and judgement day. This is an interesting combining of folk superstition with more institutionalized religious beliefs. Is it possible to completely remove one from the other?
7. Jos, Mia and their child – a kind of Joseph, Mary and Jesus – represent a virtuous simplicity that overpowers evil. In this case, they succeed in cheating Death’s attempt to take their lives. According to the commentary accompanying the DVD, Bergman’s critics have argued that it’s not particularly profound to paint the most virtuous people as being the most simple and uncomplicated. What kind of virtue would be superior to this?
8. At the outset of the film Block stated that he was in quest of one action that would give meaning to his life. At the end of the film he finds that meaning by distracting Death and thereby allowing Jof and Mia to escape. Wouldn’t it take more than a single act of goodness like this to give life meaning?
9. When Death finally enters the castle, Block trembles, recites his prayers, and hopes to be rescued. Jons mocks him saying “there is no one to listen to your lament. I could have purged your worries about eternity, but now its too late. But feel, to the very end, the triumph of being alive.” What is Jons’ point?
10. The DVD commentator tells us that “Many years later, Bergman was asked at a press conference about his true feelings on death. And he answered, I was afraid of this enormous emptiness. But my personal view is that when we die we die, and we go from a state of something to state of absolute nothingness. And I don’t believe for a second that there’s anything above or beyond or anything like that, and this makes me enormously secure.” Can one find security in complete annihilation as Bergman suggests?
11. The DVD commentator also states that the entire film is a conflict between Block’s idealism and Jons’ hedonism. Bergman, he believes, made Jons’ character and perspective more appealing. Do you agree that Jons’ character is indeed more appealing?
References: http://www.philfilms.utm.edu/1/seventh.htm
Philosophy in Pubs
Discussion about ~Aesthetics
Quote from Keats: Ode on a Grecian Urn
“Beauty is truth, truth beauty,- that is all
Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know.”
Summing up comments:
I always though aesthetics was about some piece of art but now I think it is more about being human.
Aesthetics: a branch of philosophy concerned with sensory experience and the feelings it arouses. A reasonable definition.
It is about something transcendental, some feeling that has happened to me at the theatre or listening at concerts and shared with the audience. A feeling, not easy to describe, and although fleeting, very real.
I had thought it was a personal subjective feeling. But there is a possible that there is a formula or that it has a scientific aspect- more than just a feeling.
Perhaps it involves an implicit communication which intrigues and reflects a type of experience.
It is something to do with being human and the ability to understand and express how we are and how we function. However, it often occurs in groups even sitting around in groups singing or chanting om.
A ‘peak’ experience but I am not sure how it arises – it may be possible to be trained to be more receptive and appreciative. Are there key elements? Does it have historical boundaries?
Aesthetics has a lot to do with fashion but can be a deeply seated experience. It is not just about ‘art’ but can be achieved in the countryside. I find it in science and in discovering a formulation of a question or answer can be moving and beautiful; I get nothing quite like that from art.
It is like Om- a vibration from the viscera, a feeling from the gut, deep inside, indescribable otherwise.
Perhaps the aesthetic ideal can only be achieved when the imperfect compliments the perfect in some way.
Pan’s Labyrinth
“Pain should not be sought – but it should never be avoided”
Kierkegaard said, “The tyrant’s rule ends with his death. The martyr’s rule begins with it”
In Spanish: El Laberinto del Fauno, “The Labyrinth of the Faun”) is a 2006 Spanish language fantasy film. It was produced and distributed by the Mexican film company Esperanto Films.
Pan’s Labyrinth takes place in Spain, in May and June, 1944, after the Spanish Civil War. Fascism is an example of the sleep of reason which brings forth monsters. Del Toro’s monsters are pretty extraordinary Also present is the main character Ofelia’s fantasy world which centres around an overgrown abandoned labyrinth. Ofelia’s stepfather, the Falangist Captain Vidal, viciously hunts the Spanish Maquis, guerrillas who fight against the Franco regime in the region, while Ofelia’s pregnant mother grows increasingly ill. Ofelia meets several strange and magical creatures who become central to her story, leading her through the trials of the old labyrinth garden. The film employs make-up, animatronics and CGI effects to create its creatures.
Del Toro stated that he considers the story to be a parable, influenced by fairy tale. Spanish title refers to the mythological fauns of Roman mythology, while the English title refers specifically to the faun-like Greek character Pan. However, del Toro has stated that the faun in the film is not Pan.
The film premiered at the 2006 Cannes Film Festival. It was released in the United Kingdom on November 24, 2006. In the United States and Canada, the film was given a limited release on December 29, 2006, with a wide release on January 19, 2007.Pan’s Labyrinth has won numerous international awards, including three Academy Awards, the Ariel Award for Best Picture and the 2007 Hugo Award for Best Dramatic Presentation, Long Form. The movie was filmed in a Scots Pine forest situated in the Guadarrama mountain range, Central Spain.
Philosophical issues:
Myth and Reality
Del Toro says of the Labyrinth ‘A maze is a place where you get lost,’ he explains. ‘But a labyrinth is essentially a place of transit, an ethical, moral transit to one inevitable centre.’
‘I was also trying to uncover a common thread between the “real world” and the “imaginary world”through one of the seminal concerns of fairy tales: choice.
Existential Choice:
“The way your choices define you. And I thought it would be great to counterpoint an institutional lack of choice, which is fascism, with the chance to choose, which the girl takes in this movie.’ Choice is key in what we are. You choose to be destructive or you choose to be all encompassing and love-giving. Each choice defines who we are, no matter what the reason behind it is, because everybody values the reason behind the act, or the idea behind the act more than the reason. The idea behind the act, they value it more than the act these days.”
The problem of evil and death:
“Pain and beauty, brutality and innocence, the central duality of death and rebirth. ‘Those things are one and the same,’ he says. ‘It would be a cliche to say that, because I am a Mexican, I see death in a certain way. But I have seen more than my share of corpses, certainly more than the average. I worked for months next to a morgue that I had to go through to get to work. I’ve seen people being shot; I’ve had guns put to my head; I’ve seen people burnt alive, stabbed, decapitated … because Mexico is still a very violent place. So I do think that some of that element in my films comes from a Mexican sensibility.”
Instinct contra intellect:
“Instinct will guide you more than intellect towards what’s right for you and actually more naturally right. Disobedience is one of the strongest signals of your conscience of what is right and what is wrong. When you disobey in an intelligent way, you disobey in a natural way, it turns out to be more beneficial than blind obedience. Blind obedience castrates, negates, hides, and destroys what makes us human. On the other hand, instinct and disobedience will always point you in a direction that should be natural, should be organic to the world. So I think that disobedience is a virtue and blind obedience is a sin.”
The Allure of Ideology:
“One of the dangers of fascism and one of the dangers of true evil in our world—which I believe exists—is that it’s very attractive. That it is incredibly attractive in a way that most people negate. Most people make their villains ugly and nasty and I think, no, fascism has a whole concept of design, and a whole concept of uniforms and set design that made it attractive to the weak-willed.”
References:
http://theeveningclass.blogspot.com/2006/12/pans-labyrinththe-evening-class.html
Philosophy in Pubs – The Ship 8/12/2009
Work
Andy gave an introduction to the concept: from the Calvinist protestant work ethic; its development and varied effects explored by Marx and Weber to the more general social and philosophical approaches prevalent today.
Different work ethics were discussed. Many societies in the world regard work as a means to an end, when that end is achieved they have no need to work.
Some historical ideas were explored. From the biblical curse of work and its relegation as suitable only for slaves etc to the modern western idea of work as a psychological necessity for well-being.
The discussion often became political and various Utopian themes were brought up.
Summing up comments:
Work should engage everybody to the benefit of society and not result in profit for a few.
It can be ‘real or unreal’. So much work is alienating and is becoming feminised to the detriment of blokes. Office work is constraining without any real freedom of expression. Work and male identity is the issue for me.
People need a creative outlet and more help is required for them to achieve this. This does not happen in out culture. Organizations become like things in their own right so that the individual is dominated and has too much to bear.
Debate, discussion, argument is important in itself. It raises passions and new ways of thinking. People often think narrowly of politics instead of pursuing a quest for understanding and wisdom.
The labourer is worthy of his hire. Work is usually denigrating: whereas it could be dignified and rewarding.
What is work? Different things to different people. Artists splodge paint around and call it work. Most, however, think work is unpleasant and degrading.
It is an artifact of the human mind. A strange phenomena, but it is so prevalent and accepted we see it as normal.
What will happen if we didn’t have work? We are privileged to live in settled peaceful times.
Work is an important part of our society- it can’t be divorced from politics. Governments should strive to benefit the whole of society not just the elite.
I would like work to provide dignity and permit creativity. It should include the moral quality of integrity not just money making.
I think I worked harder when not physically earing a living. When working I got more money for doing less.
NEWSFLASH: The meeting on Tuesday 8th December will be in The Ship – just the other side of the Ouseburn, next to the Cluny.
We expect to return to our normal home for future meetings.
Peter McTigue and Roy Sturgess present an impression of the man who still provokes strong feelings in contemporary Newcastle.
Venue : Quaker Meeting House (QMH)
Time : Saturday 12th December at 2:00 pm
