philosophy

Ignorant Wisdom

There is a pervasive attitude based upon pride and a hidden weakness that undermines the ability to be great and erases the path towards it. There must be a word for it as it comes in many forms. It is found in typical places, where the weak and the prideful mingle and hover.

It is empathy gone awry. It is a bloated sense of importance concerning personal endeavors and interests. It is both humble and braggart in the same voice and is spoken with a smile or a “concerned” look. It comes from those who do not do hard work or are not accustomed to discomfort. They are blatant in their ignorance but thinks themselves wise.

They are not lazy, and so the thing is not laziness. It is not the same as the arrogance found in those familiar places. It is, perhaps, fear of the unknown and a grasping at a self-satisfactory savior. But all things are fear of death in the end, even this thing. But it is more than that. It is a fear of ego. It turns away from the unknown and despises the difficult.

The strong often bow to it because it is easier to do so than to fight. “It” is unending and blind. It turns the world beige and normalizes the lowest common denominator. It is soil in which only the genetically modified, the typical, the unspecial and spoiled can grow. This is the empty-eyed stare of the future.

Listening

The art of listening is a giving and un-egotistical activity. But, we are all somewhat egotistical by our very nature. While we know the world exists and does not revolve around us, we wish that it did; at least to an extent. This is often recognized when we talk to others. We might wait impatiently to speak rather than listening while someone else talks. We might “zone” out if we are not interested. we might notice when others do these things to us.

We all probably do this to a lesser or greater extent. We see it all of the time. Those that “check” their phones or “multitask” while someone is trying to have an intentional conversation with them. This is not listening. Listening takes work if not interest in the person if not the topic.

To listen is to be generous with our time. It is to give something precious over to someone else. To listen is to be involved in what it is to be a person rather than just a human being with an ability. We understand by listening. We learn by listening. The world is aural and as we make our way through it we can listen to the universe sing if we so choose.

It is ironic that it is noise that keeps us from listening. It is everywhere, pumped in by lost souls and those that fear truth and silence in all their forms. It is the noise of our inundated lives, of bad decisions and lost causes. These things keep us from giving our attention to others because we are lost in our own lives.

But if we listen closely through the noise and the turmoil we can hear the beauty of a single songbird, or a friend who needs a shoulder, or the laugh of someone we love. If we listen closely we can hear the silence that we’ve needed in our lives as well as learn a thing or two.

Easy

Easy is not lessening pain or misery, nor is it necessarily to help lessen unwanted chores, work or mind-numbing repetition. To lessen these things is not always easy. To have more time for leisure is not necessarily creating more time for creativity or imagination because these things are not easy. So, what is it to make something “easy”?

The first possible explanation is that it does not take much effort or understanding in order to accomplish an easy thing. A second possible explanation is that one already has the knowledge and understanding to accomplish a task. However, that does not mean that it has always been easy to that person.

In the same way technology is not necessarily progress. It does not make life creative or allow uncreative people to be creative or imaginative. Technology, however, does make life easy. This has an interesting effect.

First, it would seem to have creative and progressive effect on a few creative and imaginative folks while lessening that effect on most others. Also, it seems to create the illusion of creativity and imagination for those that are actually not creative or imaginative.

In the worst-case scenario, wisdom becomes information and creativity becomes a cut-n-paste project. In the best case scenario, technology makes it easy to further the difficult task of actually being creative and imaginative.

The Art of Conversation

We can communicate with each other. Think about that. We can share ideas and understand subtle humor. We can ponder our own existence and philosophize about the importance of life itself. We created many languages grown out of necessity and culture, and desire, and passion.

We can tell someone we love them.

Think about the times in life that we have missed doing this, that we chose not to, and instead allowed ourselves to be carried away by trinkets and blinking lights or by laziness. It is almost as if we die from a thousand unthought decisions that slowly drain our souls from our bodies.

Time is infinite but we do not have infinite time.

Our time is short and although time seems so absurd, time is all we have.

Words hold power and we hold words in our heads, at the ready. To share. We can choose to pretend and simply bide our time with meaningless chatter and we can choose Truth. We can communicate these words in so many ways. And through these many scenarios, learn ourselves, about ourselves and even from ourselves.

Words hold no value but language does.

Words are art and we must share this art as a musician must share the notes on a page. We owe it to ourselves and to others not to waste this precious art form that we come to dismiss for so many toys and trinkets. We must learn the art of conversation before we lose our way through the forest of rhetoric and the rocks of the mundane.

Become an artist and have a conversation.

Truth is Like Poetry: 11

Problem: Fascism and Dictatorships

Unfortunately, this particular problem is apropos to the times that we are currently living in.  In 2022 Vladimir Putin is attacking the Ukraine and Donald Trump seems to be gearing up for another run at western Democracy.  These two individuals are typical examples of what fascism and dictatorships are.  And a further unfortunate truth is that they are not, and have not been alone.  Throughout history there have been fascists and dictators that have wrecked and ruined otherwise civil societies.  That’s what fascists and dictators do; they do it to further their own, selfish ends.

The ultimate problem of fascism and dictatorship ought to be apparent.  But the problem that fascism and dictatorships stem from is deeper.  Typically, they take power by promising and fear-mongering.  The basis of fascism and dictatorship is the same: groups of people within society that are fearful, ignorant, or are generally unhappy with the society that they live in.  These people tend to be a faction of the minority (in a Democracy) in a given society.  They feel their “rights” have been suppressed in some way or that they have been unjustly represented (in a representative government)

The other side of civil unrest is civil apathy, and this too allows for fascist and dictatorial ideas to come to fruition and grow.  As apathy towards politics grows so do the chances for fascist and dictatorial ideas gain traction.  It is often in the dark, un-visited corners of our societies that these ruinous ideas are born.  And so it is with apathy towards the politics of one’s society.  If few pay attention, then a few will do as they will.

Solution: *Eradication of Poverty***, re-implementation of separation of powers

            The solution to government overthrow by those who would disregard civil societies is not a simple one, nor is it one that will last without close attention by citizens who want civil societies.  There must be, of course, consequences for those that would be dictators as there should be for those that would have fascist tendencies.  However, it is the strength of any civil society to allow for voices and viewpoints from all sides.  This is why it is important to allow even violent voices a place. 

            However, the true eradication of these tendencies would be in eradicating the reasons that they come to exist.  Poverty has been, throughout history, a breeding ground for revolution because poverty is often the result of unfair and unjust government policies, greed, over-reach.  With this in mind, the eradication of poverty is necessary in order to undermine the need for, or the belief that there is a need for a fascist and/or dictatorship.  With poverty eradicated, there must be a voice for citizens in the government by which they are a part of.

            Government itself can lend a helpful hand to undermining fascist/dictatorial movements.  But like these movements, government itself has been, or allowed itself to be, part of the problem.  The founding fathers of the United States borrowed concepts from their forefathers, and their forefather’s forefathers when they introduced the concept of a governing citizenry.  Whatever form of government that a society takes upon itself, that government must be able to be held accountable.  One of the best ways to do so is to separate powers, sequester the chance for a government to allow fascist ideas to breed, or dictators to manipulate.  Donald Trump is a perfect example of what can happen when powers are separated in theory only rather than in reality.  He is the dark and foreboding face of apathy and governmental greed and the ignorant masses that follow dictators and fascists.

Truth is Like Poetry 10

Problem: Poverty           

There have always been the poor and most likely there will always be impoverished people.  Poverty has been an excuse, a plague, a problem, and a scapegoat throughout history.  In other words, the problem of poverty seems to be a natural consequence of civilization.  The solution for this general poverty would be the allocation of funds, goods, and services to people across the planet, but this takes money, planning, and a political desire.  These are in actuality the problems of poverty.

Income disparities are often the consequences of politics and greed, corporate greed in particular.  Corporate greed alone probably accounts for a great percentage of global poverty, which is to say that most poverty is human-born.  Even if corporations (which hold the vast majority of the wealth on the planet, not including governments*) were to find the motivation to try to solve general poverty, planning such an endeavor would prove unlikely given the history of governments across the planet.  Furthermore, most governments are at least in part controlled by large sums of corporate monies.

Lastly, the political desire to eradicate global poverty would be necessary.  This alone is enough to make this endeavor impossible.  Human beings are tribal and primarily understand their immediate surroundings.  An endeavor to end world poverty is beyond the scope of human empathy not to mention political will.  There might be a way to conjure political will to eradicate poverty, but it would most likely be limited at best.

Solution: John Rawls “invisible curtain”

            John Rawls, an ethical philosopher, wrote The Theory of Justice which introduced a philosophical theory of justice based upon two principles which are important.  They are:

First Principle: Each person has the same indefeasible claim to a fully adequate scheme of equal basic liberties, which scheme is compatible with the same scheme of liberties for all;

Second Principle: Social and economic inequalities are to satisfy two conditions:

  1. They are to be attached to offices and positions open to all under conditions of fair equality of opportunity;
  2. They are to be to the greatest benefit of the least-advantaged members of society (the difference principle) (JF, 42–43).

These two principles play a part when citizens (individuals within a given society) are put behind what he calls the “invisible curtain”.  In short, all theories of justice in that given society are to be made by everyone within that society.  However, no individual actually knows their particular place in that society.  In this way, everyone has ‘skin in the game’ so to speak.

With Rawls’ hypothetical ‘curtain’ in place, the likelihood of anyone allowing for extreme poverty would at least be lowered.

Truth is Like Poetry 9

Problem: Racism

For the sake of this argument, I will state that we are all racists.  Racism is, after all, a bias.  Given that, racism is not limited to two or more races of human beings.  However, racism in the sense that is meant here, is a conscious giving in to that bias based upon fear and/or ideologies.  Typically to be a racist is to be biased against someone’s skin color, which is ludicrous.  So, in the simplest sense of the word, racism is irrational and based in ignorance at best.  This simple problem is problem of stupidity and has its own solutions which will not be covered here.

However, racism, in a broader, more complex sense, encompasses much more than just skin color.  Racism is cultural, it is social, it is tribal.  And so, the problem of racism is found in those concepts rather than simple bias based upon skin color.  Culture and social norms are primarily tribal, and so it would follow that racism is a tribal problem.  But human beings are tribal by nature.  For most of our history we have lived in small groups that have been completely ignorant of any others, or at least very few others, and we have and continue to view strangers, people different than ourselves, and people with different viewpoints, with quite a bit of wariness.

The problem, therefore, is not racism in the broad sense, but that we are no longer limited to living in small groups.  We continually meet others, mostly strangers that are different than ourselves.  And we constantly meet those with differing viewpoints.  Now we must live with these “strangers”.  These “strangers” are people that live in the same country, in the same town and in the same city.  Furthermore, with the inception of the internet, these “strangers” are virtually anywhere and anyone with any viewpoint at any time of any given day, month or year.  The problem is that we as individuals are still tribal while we live in a global environment.

Solution: travel/internet/time

The solution to simple, stupid racism is ironically enough, more complex than the solution to racism as tribal problem, although both the narrow sense and the broader sense are very closely related.  The narrow solution is primarily a cultural one, encompassing ridding ourselves of religious views, ridding ourselves of irrational fear, and confronting the major issue, poverty, which inevitably creates ignorance in both realms.  In the narrow sense of the word, the solution lies in regulation of false claims by religious, social and political institutions while making a good education (one steeped in critical thinking) available to all.

In the broader sense, the solution is a bit of the opposite.  While the spread of disinformation and misinformation is ubiquitous online and should be regulated, any other censorship should not be allowed.  While not everyone has the means to actually travel, the internet gives those that do not a chance to explore the world far outside of their own.  Part of the solution is to make this virtual “world” as close to the “real” world as possible.  However, in Europe it is much more the norm for young people to take off and travel for months early on.  This is in part due to the social systems in place in most countries of Europe.  And so, this too is part of the solution.

Lastly, innate problems like both the narrow and the broad senses of racism take time, generations often, to work themselves out.  The older generations cling to the “old” world ways and beliefs while the “new” generations do their best to break free and be “normal”.  There are several ways to promote this generational shift but many of those are often deemed immoral or simply not realistic.  And so, time is of the essence.  We can only hope that we have enough.

Truth Is Like Poetry 8

5.    Problem: War*

War is, of course, waged for numerous reasons but all of these reasons can be summed up into two basic camps.  First, there is the need and desire for resources, and then there is the desire for political power.  These two often coincide with each other.  Of course, the problem of war is steeped in human limitations (greed, arrogance etc…) as well.  As the population grows, the world becomes smaller, and more and more nations become richer, resources will continue to grow in importance.  The obvious problem here is that there is limited resources and a seeming exponential growth in population.  The other side of the population growth is that more and more people desire to live in more and more luxury: more things, more tech, more consumerism.

Secondly, the desire for political power is a ubiquitous problem for those in power.  And, as political power often equates to economic power, war is often waged for money.  Money and politics rarely mix well, especially when business and government coincide.  Oligarchical and plutocratic tendencies are as old as human society.  So common and accepted is the idea of corporately-corrupt politicians that a new term has been bandied: corporatocracy.  But these problems have now become even more dangerous with the easy spread of disinformation coupled together with public fear and ignorance.

War is often the result of the sordid soup of politics, money, and power, but it is almost always based upon fear and ignorance.  While we may never rid ourselves of our warlike tendencies, we can at least accept that we are a violent species and start changing from there.

Solution: National governments/Global Economies (the UN)

            The solution to war is, of course, a complicated one.  Not so easily come to and won’t happen quickly.  But, in order to create a workable basis government(s) must work together, which they rarely do on a larger scale.  For this reason, an international government is needed.  This sets the stage for two things.  First, national interests become cultural and social, not economic; and secondly national interests are separated from the economic interests.  The European Union is, perhaps, an example of this on a smaller scale.  Each country keeps its autonomy to an extent, but economic needs and desires are defined on a larger scale.

            With an economic “government” on a global scale, economic power and decision-making are spread over numerous countries, which still maintain power and decision-making on a cultural and social level.  The idea is the separation of political power while maintaining a global interest economically.  With a global economic system, each country will hopefully have a more vested interest in each other while at the same time being separate countries.  A global economic government which is comprised of both economic and political powers will only be larger cauldrons in which the same old problems cook.

Truth is Like Poetry 6

Problem: Government*

A good government (one that increases the amount of happiness for most people) must balance the desires of individuals with the desires of the society in which the individual lives; think of government as a seesaw with individuals on one side and society on the other.  The seesaw will always swing one or the other way, but not too much.  This is its natural state of what I will call the “rights-relationship”.  It is when the natural state of the governmental seesaw is changed artificially by individuals or society that problems become inherent.  The seesaw starts seesawing radically.

It is important to remember that government is a philosophical idea and an objective reality, and at the same time it is defined by human limitations. So, a second problem is that the essence, the ultimate goal of government becomes biased, or corrupt unnaturally by human limitations instead of progressing towards its philosophical ideal.  One might say that one of the jobs of government is to regulate stupidity: to lessen human limitations in order to progress towards social and philosophical ideals.  It has failed in this.

Lastly, governments are defined by laws and so it would seem to follow that any law ought to protect the “natural state” of the rights-relationship, the natural state of the seesaw, between individuals and society.  It is the concept of rights, after all, that we are discussing when we discuss the concept of government.  However, laws are linguistic and so there will always be the problem of interpretation.  It is when interpretation of the law is used for the above reasons that bias and corruption become problems.

*see problems 4 & 5

Solution: Enforceable Law/social changes/re-establishment of separation of powers/money

First, rights are defined by law.  They are not “God-given”.  Nor can they be assumed simply because we are human beings.  That being said, any law must be written and enforced as to allow for the most rights for both individuals and society; both must compromise.  In essence, laws are amendments, and as such are changeable (amendable) but the ultimate goal, the most rights for both individuals and society, must always be the end-result.  Once in place, any and all laws must be enforceable and applicable to all individuals, the whole of society.

Secondly, unlimited lobbying and money must be taken out of governmental decision making.  The ability of the rich (or any minority) to control the government must be ended.

Lastly, law is interpretable.  Language is a tool of interpretation, and government is defined by the language that it uses.  This is where the issues start most of the time.  It is important to remember that interpretation itself is not a problem.  However, the issue is interpretation that is unnecessary, rhetorical, biased or corrupt towards an end other than the natural state, or that amendable laws are arbitrary.  This is typically caused by one or another section/part/power of the government gaining an upper hand through legal and sometimes illegal methods by re-interpreting law to their favor in lieu of the ultimate goal. To combat this inevitable problem, a true separation of powers is necessary.  This will need to be done legally and be enforceable.

All of this may sound like a mess, but it is the nature of government.  At the base of this mess must be a platform.  What that platform is must be clear, but can change if enough individuals within a society deem it necessary (a legal majority).  Enforce laws and change society, if needed, in order that laws may be enforceable and amendable if necessary.