value wrote: ↑October 18th, 2023, 10:41 am
My perspective is the following:
Barbarians reflect on cruelty in nature to fuel cruelty. Moral beings reflect on reason to become reasonable. The potential for philosophy shows what path is right to choose.
Sy Borg wrote: ↑October 18th, 2023, 2:56 pm
Then I am proud to be a barbarian and consider such "moral beings" to be living in Fantasy Land.
It's clear that in actual reality, eight billion humans are utterly incapable of being reasonable en masse. In fact, humans en masse have never at any stage displayed reason over a sustained period.
What interests me more is why you are even speaking about it if you were to be correct.
I am currently finishing The Principles of Psychology vol 2. by William James
and came across a chapter in which he described the bestial nature of humanity. He mentioned the following in his works ‘Remarks at the Peace Banquet’ and ‘The Moral Equivalent of War’:
The plain truth is that people want war. They want it anyhow; for itself; and apart from each and every possible consequence. It is the final bouquet of life’s fireworks. The born soldiers want it hot and actual. The non-combatants want it in the background, and always as an open possibility, to feed imagination on and keep excitement going.
Why the effort for an anti-war philosophy then, one wonders? Is William James somehow different from 'people' due to his intelligence or specialism in human psychology? Is Pattern-chaser different from 'the human specie' due to his being a self-proclaimed gaian-daoist?
Why would otherwise than war and bestiality be possible, as can be seen in the moral theory/vision developed by the philosophers who held a view such as William James, one of the founders of pacifism? Why would one intend to 'strive against nature' and formulate a moral theory that prevents war?
Those philosophers seem to have been motivated to go against their reflection on human nature in history
American philosopher Henry David Thoreau
provides an insight that may explain the motivation for the philosophical effort of anti-war philosophers. Thoreau once said the following about the evolution of human morality:
"Whatever my own practice may be, I have no doubt that it is a part of the destiny of the human race, in its gradual improvement, to leave off eating animals, as surely as the savage tribes have left off eating each other when they came in contact with the more civilized."
The behavior observed in newer generations of people supports Thoreau's assertion about the evolution of morality in human culture. Humans are gradually improving their moral behavior, just as Thoreau predicted. Millennials (Gen Y) have been driving a global shift away from eating animals for moral consideration and Gen Z is accelerating a shift to veganism.
Then rests the question: why would humanity improve morally?
And there comes in the profound importance of the work of Jewish philosopher Emmanuel Lévinas
- an icon of Western philosophy that is researched by dedicated scholars today - with his concept eschatological vision
that by its possibility proves that humanity has an intellectual responsibility to be ethical and respectful to others.
The possibility of eschatological vision is what I meant with 'the possibility of philosophy' and how that possibility would 'show the right path to choose' when it comes to either reflecting on cruelty on nature or reflecting on reason.
Of peace there can only be an eschatology.
This "beyond" the totality and objective experience is, however, not to be described in a purely negative fashion. It is reflected within experience. The eschatological, as the "beyond" of history, draws beings out of the jurisdiction of history and the future; it arouses them in and calls them forth to their full responsibility.
The idea of being overflowing history makes possible existents both involved in being and personal, called upon to answer as their trial and consequently already adult - but, for that very reason, existents that can speak rather than lending their lips to an anonymous utterance of history.
Peace is produced as this aptitude for speech. The eschatological vision breaks with the totality of wars and empires in which one does not speak. It does not envisage the end of history within being understood as a totality, but institutes a relation with the infinity of being which exceeds the totality.
The first "vision" of eschatology (hereby distinguished from the revealed opinions of positive religions) reveals the very possibility of eschatology, that is, the breach of the totality, the possibility of a signification without context. The experience of morality does not proceed from this vision - it consummates this vision; ethics is an optics. But it is a vision without image, bereft of the synoptics and totalizing objectifying virtues of vision, a relation or an intentionality of a wholly different type - which this work seeks to describe."
Pattern-chaser asked the following a few posts back:
Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑October 18th, 2023, 10:48 am
value wrote: ↑October 18th, 2023, 10:41 am
I believe that reason can overcome darkness before it was ever present. There is simply no place for Evil in the context of reason and thus is there no place for anxiety and fear.
There is no place for Evil in the context of reason only because that context does not admit subjective value judgements like "good" or "evil", yes?
In the context of reason there is just good because reason is an intellectual pursuit of good.
Ethically, there can be no justification for acts that originate from a lack of reason. One can hide behind error, but error should not be the intended result. Therefore barbarism such as war, violence, revenge or cruelty should be prevented on behalf of reason.
In practice, morality can be seen as an intellectual capacity that is dependent on the potential for moral consideration and that potential needs to be facilitated in some way, which is done through culture.
A cultural demand is a very strong demand which explains the cited vision of Henry David Thoreau with regard the moral evolution (civilization) of humanity.
Culture is shaped by philosophy and therefore my conclusion is that philosophy should be held responsible.
Sy Borg wrote: ↑October 17th, 2023, 5:50 pm value wrote: ↑October 18th, 2023, 10:41 am Sy Borg wrote: ↑October 17th, 2023, 5:50 pm
There's eight billion people on a planet that is already far less bountiful than it was a mere century ago in the midst of an extinction event. Someone's got to die - and in big numbers, because it's significantly unsustainable. This huge population locks in future catastrophes with unprecedented death tolls.
That's an horrific perspective in my opinion. Elon Musk recently wrote the following about it on Twitter in response to a viral video in which primatologist Jane Goodall argued that it would be best for the planet when the human population would be 90% reduced.
I did not provide a perspective, I spoke of an absolute certainty. Anyone who is not in denial would agree.
It perplexes me how often people - even on a philosophy forum FFS!!
- cannot tell the difference between observation and endorsement.
What do you think of Elon Musk his argument that with proper (wise) management the planet can support many billions more people than the amount of people that inhabit earth today?
It is said that with a transition to micro algae based food innovation, the planet can not only support billions of more people, who have the ability to become significantly more healthy than humans today and even much beyond that (top sport performance capacity), but would also improve the health of the planet on the long term when humans would cultivate those algae.
(2022) Microalgae are nature’s ‘green gold’
Abundant sustainable food of the future to end global hunger. Algae offers the advantage of requiring neither soil nor pesticides nor irrigation. On top of that it provides enormous ecosystem services, creating a very rich habitat for fauna (shellfish, fish) and flora while also feeding the top of the ocean food chain (phytoplankton, bivalves) and ultimately animals.
https://phys.org/news/2022-09-microalga ... nment.html
(2020) Potential of Chlorella Algae to Promote Human Health