| Collected below are 22 talks, presentations, and interviews on various matters that I have recently bookmarked during my wanderings through various archives, such as the TED Talks series and the University of California's series, of presentations by various researchers and philosophers that I have found interesting, here arranged into a sort of meta-essay layered on top of those presentations and divided roughly into some broad domains of philosophy. (Please view these videos in full-screen mode if your machine has the horsepower to support it, as there are image details in many of these that are essential to the presentations being made.)
Metaphysics ~ On the Nature of Existence | | | The first part of philosophy is what exists? From the largest to the smallest, from infinity to empty, what is the fundamental reality we exist in? These questions address the undergirding upon which all else rests, so let's take a look at some of them first. | | | | • | Hubble Telescope | The Most Important Image Ever Taken | | | Let's begin with a fairly well-known video that takes a look at the results from the Hubble Telescope's Deep Field Camera's exploration to the edges of the largest scales we can see. In this video, we find that a little tiny portion of the sky, that until these images we thought was dark, contains on the order of ten thousand galaxies (of the roughly hundred billion galaxies that we think exist, each with on the order of a hundred billion stars). | | | | • | Rick Rothschild | The Universe is Rated R for Violence | | | One of the limitations of the Hubble Deep Field images shown in the previous presentation is that they are static, that is, they don't show the changes that are happening on huge scales within existence. In this video, Rick Rothschild introduces us to some of these majestically powerful phenomena, of which thermonuclear burning is perhaps my favourite. | | | | • | David Deutsch | On The Fabric of Reality | | | In this talk, Mr. Deutcsh, legendary physicist and author of The Fabric of Reality, takes a look at the relationship between the macroscopic scales explored above, the vast emptiness of space when considered on those scales, and our relationship to that domain of discourse, as cognitive human beings, thus providing us with an introduction to the matters of epistemology discussed below, and the issues of problem solving v. the inevitability of problems. | | | | • | Kim Griest | The Mystery of Empty Space | | | So what's with the huge emptiness of the universe, v. the notably non-empty nature of our existence? What is the common microscopic scale that pervades all these things, including emptiness itself? In this video, Mr. Griest takes a look at what exists in nothing, introducing particle physics, the standard model, and the fascinating notion that the ten dimensions of string theory are related to the standard three dimensions of space, multiplied by the three generations of quarks, plus time (32:30 in the video). It shall indeed be interesting to see what the Large Hadron Collider has to say about the Higgs boson. If the properties of nothing are determinative, then that might lead to an explanation of how nothing produced the putative big bang, that is, we might automatically get always was and always will be for free. |
Epistemology ~ On the Matter of Knowledge | | | Ok, so what fundamentally exists looks pretty much like it is given, for some value of given, the question then becomes what do we know about existence, how do we explore and model it, and how does that lead to our solving the inevitable problems we will encounter, as David alluded to. Obviously, the above talks do discuss that, yet now we move more to matters of how we know rather than what we know. Clearly this is principally based on the history of human exploration and discovery as alluded to in my Top 50 Documents Ever essay; here we look forward from about the end of the history discussed in that essay, and look in more detail at how this history happens, rather than the particular results it produces. | | | | • | James Watson | The Double Helix and Today's DNA Mysteries | | | Let's begin with a historic account of one of the two arguably greatest discoveries of the twentieth century (relativity and DNA). We've taken a look at some of the relativity and derivative issues above, in this video Mr. Watson, co-discoverer of the structure of DNA, takes a personal look at some of the human factors involved in the discovery of knowledge, and ultimately, explores the essence of life and in particular our lives, with some interesting reflections on how we are each and every one genetically different unique individuals. | | | | • | Jeff Hawkins | Brain Science is about to Fundamentally Change | | | I think it can be reasonably argued that my meta-essay so far has some dependence on the processing engine involved, even though I don't think that effects the fundamental undergirding, and so it is that if we are to look at knowledge, then we must consider our implementation of knowledge. Epistemology, like metaphysics and reason, doesn't depend, in my opinion, on the human engine, but we do. In this video Jeff takes a look at some of the ways in which our understanding of our processing engine are changing, thus providing us with a connection to some of the Reason items discussed below, most notably that intelligence might not be principally about logic and reason per se, rather, it might be more about memory and the predictive accuracy of our pattern matching skills (of which logic and reason are two particularly effective examples). | | | | • | Hans Rosling | Global Change ~ What the Data Says | | | Above and beyond all the high falutin' theory stuff, we must not forget the actual data that gives us the information on which we base our knowledge. This is a particular problem area because of the unfortunate limbic nature of our species that results in good news not selling. Yet the actual data, as shown so beautifully by Mr. Rosling in this video, shows that generally speaking things are getting better everywhere and generally for everyone. If we are going to base knowledge on information, then at a minimum we must look at the actual data and its derivatives, not just the so-called information claimed by the fraud-artists of the day. | | | | • | Stephen Wolfram | A New Kind of Science | | | Right, back to high falutin' theory. There is, I think, at least a sense in which science is a tool we use for obtaining epistemology about metaphysics. Thus there remains an interesting question of epistemology relating to the fundamental tools we use to discover & model knowledge. In this video, the controversial Mr. Wolfram takes a look at some of the kinds of modeling tools that might be underlying our current modeling tools, upon which we may augment our understanding to more accurately apply our tools to reality. I would suggest that one can easily see why Mr. Wolfram's ideas are at least interesting. |
Reason ~ On the Properties of Thought | | | After metaphysics and epistemology, the next interesting philosophical question is what we do with our knowledge of what is. This is the domain of things like reason and logic, or as Jeff alluded to, perhaps it's a question of pattern matching skills. Rather than focus on treatises of reason and logic per se, here are two presentations that highlight the uniquely human nature of reason in practice, followed by two presentations that return to the nature of reason in theory as tempered by the realities of our growing understanding or our own processing engines. | | | | • | Clifford Stoll | 18 Minutes with an Agile Mind | | | Let's begin with the inimitable Mr. Clifford Stoll, who happens to be a very intelligent person, yet who is not necessarily a good example of the type the commons would typically consider to be a normal person. This a good place to enter into the question of the relationship between reason and logic and their mapping into our processing engine. As Clifford mentions, in regard to the inscriptions cast into the tower bells... All truth is one.
In this light may science and religion labor here
together for the steady evolution of mankind.
From darkness to light;
from prejudice to tolerance;
from narrowness to broadmindedness.
| | | | • | Temple Grandin | The Mind of a Visual Thinker | | | Right, now let's build a bit further on Watson's references to autism-related genetics and their relationship to how we reason and think. This presentation, by Temple Grandin, who designs livestock handling facilities for a living, takes a look at how her particular and relatively peculiar style of reasoning can still lead to most useful applications of metaphysics and epistemology. Indeed, perhaps, such brain structure may not only be sufficient for such results, but necessary, for if normal brains are doing normal things, then are not exceptional things done by exceptional brains? (Note that my aspergers profile is not based on the same brain structure genetics variations as Temple's high-functioning autism is, I'm in category 2 in her 19:02 graphic, a form of visual thinking that is more abstract and not verbally limited.) | | | | • | Dan Dennett | Can We Know Our Own Minds? | | | Okey dokey, thanks Temple, now lets abstract out the individual genetic uniqueness of each humans' brain structure. In this presentation, philosopher Dan Dennett makes a compelling argument that not only don't we understand our own consciousness, but that half the time our brains are actively fooling us. As Dan says, "Your consciousness is not quite as marvelous as you may have thought it is [...] consciousness is a bag of tricks." (Ergo, if Dan is correct, my consciousness too. No chutzpa in this meta-essay eh what, for self-deprecation is known 'round these parts to be an important aspect of any big-mouth shtick ;-) | | | | • | Al Seckel | Your Brain is Badly Wired ~ Enjoy It! | | | In this talk, Al Seckel, a cognitive neuroscientist and master of visual illusions, builds on some of the material introduced by Dan, and in particular relates them to the relationship between happiness and instances of our expectations being violated in a pleasing way. What a fascinating idea. Al's presentation provides the last part of our introduction to where the nature of the human structural and experiential values enter into the domains of philosophy, as explored below. |
Axiology ~ On the Issues of Value | | | Fine, so we have what is, and what we know, and how our wacky brains work with it, now what do we do with all of that? What's the point? Axiology, from the Greek "axios" (value, worth), is the study of value or quality. It includes ethics and aesthetics - philosophical fields that depend crucially on notions of value - and sometimes it is held to lay the groundwork for these fields, and thus to be similar to value theory and meta-ethics (so says Wikipedia, yeah, yeah). The aesthetics part is pretty straight-forward, de gustibus non disputandum est and all that. The ethics part is perhaps more interesting, so lets take a quick review as from the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy: The field of ethics, also called moral philosophy, involves systematizing, defending, and recommending concepts of right and wrong behavior. Philosophers today usually divide ethical theories into three general subject areas: meta-ethics, normative ethics, and applied ethics Meta-ethics investigates where our ethical principles come from, and what they mean. Are they merely social inventions? Do they involve more than expressions of our individual emotions? Meta ethical answers to these questions focus on the issues of universal truths, the will of God, the role of reason in ethical judgments, and the meaning of ethical terms themselves. Normative ethics takes on a more practical task, which is to arrive at moral standards that regulate right and wrong conduct. This may involve articulating the good habits that we should acquire, the duties that we should follow, or the consequences of our behavior on others. Finally, applied ethics involves examining specific controversial issues. By using the conceptual tools of meta-ethics and normative ethics, discussions in applied ethics try to resolve these controversial issues. The lines of distinction between meta-ethics, normative ethics, and applied ethics are often blurry.
Axiology is the first place in the layered structures of metaphysics, epistemology, reason, and axiology where the particulars of our human structure and experience enter into existential undergirdings, knowledge, and abstract concepts of thinking, because it's the first place in philosophy where our values matter. Before axiology, philosophy doesn't care about us. I would argue that aesthetics is principally related to our old brain, and ethics to our new brain, but perhaps that's a topic for another essay. And so without further ado, here are a few presentations addressing some issues axiological. | | | | • | Moshe Safdie | What Makes a Building Unique? | | | There is, in my opinion, a lot of crap being peddled in the name of architecture these days by a cadre of big-ticket narcissists such as Frank Ghery and I. M. Pei, as perhaps typified by Ghery's Weisman Art Center. As you can imagine, writing as Vitruvius, who wrote De Architectura (the ten books of architecture, ca. 25 BC, and who is considered to be the founding father of architecture, even though by today's standards he was more of an engineer), and who said that "A good building should have Venustas (Beauty), Firmitas (Firmness), and Utilitas (Utility); architecture can be said to be a balance and coordination among these three elements, with none overpowering the others", the violation of the human scale in much modern architecture does not please me. Of course, all is not lost, as the tradition of good architecture remains upheld by other practitioners, such as my favourite, Mr. Moshe Safdie. Once, when asked whether or not he would design a traditional or a modern building, he said, "If I succeed, you will not be able to tell the difference". At the end of his presentation as linked above, he returns to the notion of beauty, and closes with a poem he wrote over twenty years ago: He who seeks truth shall find beauty. He who seeks beauty shall find vanity. He who seeks order shall find gratification.
He who seeks gratification shall be disappointed.
He who considers himself the servant of his fellow beings
shall find the joy of self-expression.
He who seeks self-expression
shall fall into the pit of arrogance.
Arrogance is incompatible with nature.
Through nature,
the nature of the universe and the nature of man,
we shall seek truth.
If we seek the truth, we shall find beauty.
| | | | • | Lynn Hunt | Inventing Human Rights | | | Moshe layed out some of the groundwork for matters axiological, but what about perhaps that greatest accomplishment of our species to date, the notion of human rights (never mind for now the oppressive corruption to which the notion is now being subjected)? In this presentation, Lynn Hunt explains how this new ethical concept of individual equality (upon principle, as Abe Lincoln labeled it), arose almost solely in the United States and France between 1760 and 1790, with, as Lynn explains, the rise of the self contained person and, interestingly perhaps, portraiture and individual bedrooms. Which is rather unique, if you think about it, and which is central to our modern notions of due judicial process for each and every one, and which brings us back to an interesting riff on Watson's notion of the genetic uniqueness of each individual human being. (You may wish to skip the first 08:40 of bureaugenuflection that occurs at the beginning of this video.) | | | | • | George Ayittey | Cheetahs v. Hippos | | | Ok, so now we've set up the axiological notions of aesthetics, meta-ethics, and normative ethics, now what about the applied ethics problem of sub-Saharan Africa, which by any reasonable measure, including Professor Rosling's exposition of the actual data (good though it is), is the farthest behind the rest of the world in terms of the evolving benefits of civilization. In this video, Mr. Ayittey presents a thesis that stands solidly on the notions of von Mises, Hayek, Friedman, Greenspan, &c, namely that it is the corruption perpetrated by the parasites leading and feeding off our attempts to establish effective systems that is the cause of the circumstances that oppress the citizenry. | | | | • | Muhammad Yunus | Banker to the Poor | | | In this interview with Charlie Rose, Mr. Yunus, winner of a Nobel Prize in economics, explains how he introduced micro-credit in Bangladesh, and the benefits thereto, and the notion of, rather than non-profit organizations, non-loss organizations. Muhammad notes, "I'm opposed to charity ~ you take away the dignity from the person. Humans thrive on challenge. [...] They [who receive charity] are in a zoo." | | | | • | Onora O'Neill | Why Doesn't the Public Trust Scientists? | | | One can see, perhaps, how this entire meta-essay is a set-up for the question of trust. How can one trust anyone? In this presentation, Baroness Onora O'Neill addresses the rather more restricted question of trust in professions such as science and medicine, yet the parallels to the matter of the judgment of the axiological value of trust in the broader sense are clear, and her notes on our misguided attempts to replace trust by regulations and methodologies are at least interesting, or at least so I think. |
Politics ~ On the Relationships between People | | | I think that one (self) is company, two's a conversation, three's politics, four's a crowd, and five's a mob. Which is probably about what one would expect from a brain structured like mine. Yet even within that prescription, politics is inevitable. One neuron is neurology, one might say, two is politics ;-) So here are a few interviews that relate to matters political, and in particular they are with a few notable old folks, because, in my opinion, while age is not sufficient for wisdom, it is necessary. | | | | • | Milton Friedman | Charlie Rose Interview | | | In this interview with Charlie Rose, about a year before his death at age 84, Mr. Milton Friedman, Nobel Prize winner in economics, revisits some of the advances in economics, education, and liberty that we have achieved over the last hundred years, and which are now unfortunately all too often forgotten (or worse) by todays politicians and voters. I'm generally in favour of liberty. I think we have achieved significant gains in liberty. I'm in favour of conserving those gains. Am I a Liberal or a Conservative? | | | | • | Alan Greenspan | Charlie Rose Interview | | | In this interview Mr. Greenspan begins at 04:00 with a note on his brain structure, a review of his long relationship with Ayn Rand, and the brilliant question by which she forever changed the logical positivism perspective of his youth. Further, at about 48:45, Mr. Greenspan makes the single most effective argument against ideological libertarianism, and for that matter, any other utopianist or distopianist ideology, namely that if the successful do not sufficiently account for the unsuccessful, eventually the resulting abundance of unsuccessful will find a way to smite the successful, which tends to obviate their success. | | | | • | Lee Kuan Yew | Charlie Rose Interview | | | Lee Kuan Yew, the founding father of the modern city state of Singapore, was the leader of an effort that successfully changed a third-world people to a first-world people in a generation. Singapore is perhaps one of the best examples of the potential for the success of a benevolent democratic autocracy, so even though the city-state model cannot scale to global realpolitik, and taking into account John Stuart Mill's advice against the tyranny of the majority, I still think that Lee Kuan Yew's reflections, again, as an old wise person, are worth considering, especially considering the way he juggles his Oxford economics and his Confucian philosophy. | | | | • | Henry Kissinger | Charlie Rose Interview | | | Well, we've finally gotten in the previous paragraph to the matter of realpolitik, at which point everything else I've had to say pretty much doesn't matter, other than the vote that you I and both have, because in the big picture we don't matter that much unless we're revolting, and, so far as possible, I'd rather not be. Yet it remains the case that one of the wise old masters of global realpolitik who is willing to speak about it is Mr. Henry Kissinger. While many folks hold a grudge against him for decisions made in the now politically distant past, still Mr. Kissinger is, I think, worth listening to, now in his old age, as he discusses some of the global political structures and methodologies at hand. In this interview with Charlie Rose, Hank indulges in two of my favourite aspects of his shtick, first that often when asked about the solution to any problem, he starts by saying literally or the equivalent of "well, there are two parts to the problem", and second, now that he doesn't have to know as a matter of his job description, he reminds us again of the need to be able to say: I Don't Know | |
<< Home