BCC Ethics
Eric Gerlach
1/29/10
Kant, Principles and Morals
Kant (1724-1804) was the European philosopher who argued for always following morals and laws universally. His position is opposed by Mill, who believed that morals are only in the service of getting good consequences. This is one of the biggest oppositions of perspectives in ethics. Should we create morals and laws and always stick to them, or should we do whatever results in the best consequences?
As Europe rose in the 1600s and 1700s, science had begun discovering many new truths about the world. This created an opposition between rationalists who believed that the world has absolute laws that we can know certainly by reason and empiricists who believed that we can only assume what we know and that the rules our reason finds could be wrong. One of the most famous empiricists was Hume, who argued that one can only assume that one billiard ball causes the other billiard ball to move.
Kant was "awoken from his dogmatic slumbers" by Hume. Kant wanted to balance empiricism with rationalism, but he comes down on the rationalist side. In all knowledge, including ethics, Kant believed we must use our reason to figure out the universal laws of our rational and ordered universe. Notice that Kant, as a rationalist, trusts that the world and the mind are reasonable and that there are universal laws out there for us to grasp.
The central example we will consider is the moral "Do Not Lie". Kant believed that one should never lie, and our reason can show us this with certainty. He argued that one is seeking unconditional and universal laws in ethics (as well as every area of human knowledge), which Kant also calls categorical imperatives, and so one should only act in a way that one could expect everyone to always act everywhere at any time. If everyone lied all the time, then society would collapse. Therefore, Kant argued, it is one's duty to not lie and hold to this moral and law.
Consider the "guy with the butcher knife" thought experiment. Let us say you are at home, and the doorbell rings. You answer it, and your friend runs in looking afraid. A minute later the doorbell rings again, you answer it, and a scary guy with a butcher knife asks you where your friend is. Kant would allow one to shut the door and say nothing, but Kant would argue that it is wrong to lie to the scary guy and say you don't know or that your friend took off down the street the other way. Even though we can assume that if you lie it would improve your friend's chances of living, Kant would argue that this would be wrong. We can contrast this with the position of Mill and utilitarianism, which would argue that in some circumstances the lie is the lesser of two evils and one should behave in accord with the ends of ones actions rather than stick rigidly to morals and laws.
An interesting issue here is that rationalists and positivists like Kant believe that one should anchor ethics in good beginnings while empiricists and skeptics believe one should anchor ethics in good ends. Kant believes that one must start with good intentions and principles no matter the consequences, while Mill believes that one should aim at the best consequences no matter the principles or intentions one has. As usual, both sides agree that one should have good intentions, principles and consequences, but they come down on opposite sides when arguing for what is really the essence or importance of the matter.
We will come to Mill's position in the coming weeks. Another contrary position to both Kant and Mill is Nietzsche, who we will also hear from soon. Nietzsche does not trust human reason, so he trusts neither Kant nor Mill. Nietzsche argues that people who believe they know the true morals and people who say they know what led to the best consequences for everyone are capable of deceiving themselves and thinking they know what is best for everyone.
Friday, January 29, 2010
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Intro Philosophy Lecture Jan 28: Tribal Shamans and City-State Priests
BCC Intro Philosophy
Eric Gerlach
1/28/2010
Lecture on Tribal Shamans to City-State Priests
This lecture covers the passage of human culture from early tribes and shamans to city states and priests. Before we turn to the philosophers of India, Greece and China we must look at the experts and questioning of knowledge in the earliest human societies.
Tribal Shamans and Ecstatic Quests
“Shaman” is a word from an old Turkish-Siberian dialect that means “one who knows”. Consider that a “scientist” is “one who sees” from the Latin root. The Shaman is the expert of the tribe, the one who not only holds the traditions of knowledge but who seeks new answers to problems. The shaman is both the conserver of old knowledge and the seeker and questioner of the new.
It is quite amazing to consider that shamanism is the original human culture, found from Africa to Europe to the Americas to small islands in the pacific. While it is always different in each place, the similarities are quite profound.
In tribal culture, traditional knowledge is often kept and passed on in the form of stories or narratives. These stories explain the world and help people with their problems. There are, however, times when an answer must be sought for a problem. To do this, the shaman goes on a quest (both physical and mental) for the solution and new knowledge needed to solve the problem. Often the shaman is selected as a youth who has gone through a near death experience (sickness, struck by lightning, attacked but survives). The shaman is thought to have an affinity for seeking into the unknown because they are already experienced in the unknown.
To quest for knowledge, the shaman employs techniques of ecstasy known to produce an ecstatic experience. “Ecstasy” comes from the Greek and means “standing outside”. When one is in an ecstatic trance or having an ecstatic vision, one is standing outside normal reality and seeing it from a different place and context. Consider that shamans often go down into a cave or up on a mountain to go to the lower or upper “other world”. Some shamans have been known to climb trees. One gains perspective and is capable of abstraction when one removes oneself to contemplate reality. In fact, thought is itself a form of standing outside reality, so it makes sense that the shaman is regarded as the original thinker, expert and seeker, as well as the doctor, therapist, biologist, physicist, etc.
Methods of ecstasy include not only thought itself, but drugs, pain, rhythms (chanting, drumming, rattles) fasting, sleep deprivation, removing oneself from society and meditation (including contemplation and prayer).
One early philosophical puzzle was the problem of the One and the Many: this reality is one thing, but also many things. Shamans in many different cultures had visions of an All Tree or Tree of Life, the one yet many of all things. All or Being itself is the trunk, and the many things and species of the world are the branches or the fruit. One of the recurrent philosophical insights we will see in India, Greece and China is that it takes wisdom to see that the many things are all one reality and the one reality is seen from many perspectives.
City-State Priests and Specialized Knowledge
As human beings progressed and traded devices and thinking between groups, they gathered into larger groups and settled into cities. Often the city was the state (hence, “city-state”), and the city would be the single center of a region it controlled. Then, many nations with a city each would conquer each other to make the earliest empires (consider Summer was conquered by Babylon, Babylon by Assyria, Assyria by Persia). We can see that as many tribes joined together to create city states the number of experts and types of experts multiplied. The shamans of the tribe became many types of priests and scribes in many temples. This means that experts became specialized. We can see that this pattern continued until the present time. Some priests would specialize in types of math used to chart the stars, others would specialize in healing people and animals. The many hats (or masks, rather) of the shaman became the many types of priests and scribes who recorded knowledge and made new discoveries.
Cities were centers of trade, such that not only was the city a site for many groups to converge and form a new culture but this culture also traded with other convergent cultures. Many are surprised to learn that ancient Sumer and Egypt traded with India hundreds of years before the Greeks and Israel arose. From the earliest times, culture, trade and thought have been international.
Consider the Assyrians. “Assyrian” did not name one ethnicity but rather a citizen of Assyria. Many people of different ethnicities called themselves Assyrians just as many people call themselves Americans. Assyria invented all of the siege weapons that were used in feudal Europe, but the Assyrians conquered others mostly by trade and diplomacy. Princes would be sent to be educated in Assyria, the center of knowledge in its day, and then the Assyrians would make contracts with the prince’s people to put them on the throne to maintain political control. Just like today (read Confessions of an Economic Hitman), the primary method of conquest is economic and military solutions are called for only when the economic methods have failed.
Egyptian Wisdom
Before considering passages of the Egyptian wisdom texts, I want to address two common misconceptions about the Egyptians.
First, the Egyptians are rarely portrayed as an African people but rather museums and text books portray them as a semi-European/Asian people who are quite light in skin color. When we consider that the Egyptians painted all of their statues and carvings (as did the Greeks), and they always painted men as dark red and women as yellow, as well as having black braided hair (Herodotus the Greek historian describes the “wooly” hair of the Egyptians) it seems that the Egyptians were an African people and we are only slowly growing to recognize this. It is a big debate between Eurocentric and Afrocentric scholars today.
Second, another common misconception of the Egyptians is that they were a slave-driving, brutal people who were all about authority. This is then contrasted with the Greeks, who are considered to be wise and questioning and the birth of civilized politics. In fact, the Egyptians treated foreigners, slaves and women considerably better than the Greeks, and the pyramids were built not by slaves but by conscripted labor. Recently tombs for workers have been discovered, confirming what Egyptologists have thought for several decades. This misconception comes largely from the Bible and movies like the Ten Commandments.
The Egyptians had many types of texts and scribes, including fictional comedies and tragedies, lists of minerals and plants, essays on medicine, ethics and politics, and important to this class, wisdom literature. The Egyptian wisdom proverbs we read come from this last class of Egyptian texts.
As many tribes converged to live in city states, people began to see more of people than they had before. Suddenly, obvious truths became questionable. Rather than be unquestioning of authority, the Egyptians had more variety of authorities and questioning of authority than most cultures before them. We can see in the wisdom proverbs the questioning of authority, nobility, knowledge, teachers, prediction, wealth, luxury, punishment, and other fundamental aspects of civilization. The Egyptians were not just great builders and rulers, but also wisdom seekers and questioners.
One last concept that appears in the texts is the “heart guided individual”. The heart was thought to be the physical and mental center of the human individual. As Egyptian society developed, increasingly being “guided by the king” was replaced with being “guided by the heart”. The heart is the essence of the human and the intention within the action. Repeatedly in the text, individuals are called to listen to their heart rather than build luxury and maintain authority. These are issues that we all struggle with to this day, and so we can learn much about early human experience by reading these proverbs.
Next time, we will study the readings on India and look into its thought and thinkers.
Eric Gerlach
1/28/2010
Lecture on Tribal Shamans to City-State Priests
This lecture covers the passage of human culture from early tribes and shamans to city states and priests. Before we turn to the philosophers of India, Greece and China we must look at the experts and questioning of knowledge in the earliest human societies.
Tribal Shamans and Ecstatic Quests
“Shaman” is a word from an old Turkish-Siberian dialect that means “one who knows”. Consider that a “scientist” is “one who sees” from the Latin root. The Shaman is the expert of the tribe, the one who not only holds the traditions of knowledge but who seeks new answers to problems. The shaman is both the conserver of old knowledge and the seeker and questioner of the new.
It is quite amazing to consider that shamanism is the original human culture, found from Africa to Europe to the Americas to small islands in the pacific. While it is always different in each place, the similarities are quite profound.
In tribal culture, traditional knowledge is often kept and passed on in the form of stories or narratives. These stories explain the world and help people with their problems. There are, however, times when an answer must be sought for a problem. To do this, the shaman goes on a quest (both physical and mental) for the solution and new knowledge needed to solve the problem. Often the shaman is selected as a youth who has gone through a near death experience (sickness, struck by lightning, attacked but survives). The shaman is thought to have an affinity for seeking into the unknown because they are already experienced in the unknown.
To quest for knowledge, the shaman employs techniques of ecstasy known to produce an ecstatic experience. “Ecstasy” comes from the Greek and means “standing outside”. When one is in an ecstatic trance or having an ecstatic vision, one is standing outside normal reality and seeing it from a different place and context. Consider that shamans often go down into a cave or up on a mountain to go to the lower or upper “other world”. Some shamans have been known to climb trees. One gains perspective and is capable of abstraction when one removes oneself to contemplate reality. In fact, thought is itself a form of standing outside reality, so it makes sense that the shaman is regarded as the original thinker, expert and seeker, as well as the doctor, therapist, biologist, physicist, etc.
Methods of ecstasy include not only thought itself, but drugs, pain, rhythms (chanting, drumming, rattles) fasting, sleep deprivation, removing oneself from society and meditation (including contemplation and prayer).
One early philosophical puzzle was the problem of the One and the Many: this reality is one thing, but also many things. Shamans in many different cultures had visions of an All Tree or Tree of Life, the one yet many of all things. All or Being itself is the trunk, and the many things and species of the world are the branches or the fruit. One of the recurrent philosophical insights we will see in India, Greece and China is that it takes wisdom to see that the many things are all one reality and the one reality is seen from many perspectives.
City-State Priests and Specialized Knowledge
As human beings progressed and traded devices and thinking between groups, they gathered into larger groups and settled into cities. Often the city was the state (hence, “city-state”), and the city would be the single center of a region it controlled. Then, many nations with a city each would conquer each other to make the earliest empires (consider Summer was conquered by Babylon, Babylon by Assyria, Assyria by Persia). We can see that as many tribes joined together to create city states the number of experts and types of experts multiplied. The shamans of the tribe became many types of priests and scribes in many temples. This means that experts became specialized. We can see that this pattern continued until the present time. Some priests would specialize in types of math used to chart the stars, others would specialize in healing people and animals. The many hats (or masks, rather) of the shaman became the many types of priests and scribes who recorded knowledge and made new discoveries.
Cities were centers of trade, such that not only was the city a site for many groups to converge and form a new culture but this culture also traded with other convergent cultures. Many are surprised to learn that ancient Sumer and Egypt traded with India hundreds of years before the Greeks and Israel arose. From the earliest times, culture, trade and thought have been international.
Consider the Assyrians. “Assyrian” did not name one ethnicity but rather a citizen of Assyria. Many people of different ethnicities called themselves Assyrians just as many people call themselves Americans. Assyria invented all of the siege weapons that were used in feudal Europe, but the Assyrians conquered others mostly by trade and diplomacy. Princes would be sent to be educated in Assyria, the center of knowledge in its day, and then the Assyrians would make contracts with the prince’s people to put them on the throne to maintain political control. Just like today (read Confessions of an Economic Hitman), the primary method of conquest is economic and military solutions are called for only when the economic methods have failed.
Egyptian Wisdom
Before considering passages of the Egyptian wisdom texts, I want to address two common misconceptions about the Egyptians.
First, the Egyptians are rarely portrayed as an African people but rather museums and text books portray them as a semi-European/Asian people who are quite light in skin color. When we consider that the Egyptians painted all of their statues and carvings (as did the Greeks), and they always painted men as dark red and women as yellow, as well as having black braided hair (Herodotus the Greek historian describes the “wooly” hair of the Egyptians) it seems that the Egyptians were an African people and we are only slowly growing to recognize this. It is a big debate between Eurocentric and Afrocentric scholars today.
Second, another common misconception of the Egyptians is that they were a slave-driving, brutal people who were all about authority. This is then contrasted with the Greeks, who are considered to be wise and questioning and the birth of civilized politics. In fact, the Egyptians treated foreigners, slaves and women considerably better than the Greeks, and the pyramids were built not by slaves but by conscripted labor. Recently tombs for workers have been discovered, confirming what Egyptologists have thought for several decades. This misconception comes largely from the Bible and movies like the Ten Commandments.
The Egyptians had many types of texts and scribes, including fictional comedies and tragedies, lists of minerals and plants, essays on medicine, ethics and politics, and important to this class, wisdom literature. The Egyptian wisdom proverbs we read come from this last class of Egyptian texts.
As many tribes converged to live in city states, people began to see more of people than they had before. Suddenly, obvious truths became questionable. Rather than be unquestioning of authority, the Egyptians had more variety of authorities and questioning of authority than most cultures before them. We can see in the wisdom proverbs the questioning of authority, nobility, knowledge, teachers, prediction, wealth, luxury, punishment, and other fundamental aspects of civilization. The Egyptians were not just great builders and rulers, but also wisdom seekers and questioners.
One last concept that appears in the texts is the “heart guided individual”. The heart was thought to be the physical and mental center of the human individual. As Egyptian society developed, increasingly being “guided by the king” was replaced with being “guided by the heart”. The heart is the essence of the human and the intention within the action. Repeatedly in the text, individuals are called to listen to their heart rather than build luxury and maintain authority. These are issues that we all struggle with to this day, and so we can learn much about early human experience by reading these proverbs.
Next time, we will study the readings on India and look into its thought and thinkers.
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
Logic Lecture Jan 27: Logic as Human Thought
BCC Logic
Jan 27, 2010
Eric Gerlach
Logic and Reason in the Earliest Human Cultures
This lecture covers the three articles from the same book: Rational Mastery by Man of his Surroundings by Malinowski, Baseball Superstition, and the Shotgun Cult. The first article shows us that the earliest and most basic human cultures are logical and rational, and the next two articles build on the work of the first.
Rational Mastery by Man of his Surroundings by Malinowski
Malinowski did work among the tribes of Papua New Guinea as an anthropologist. Unfortunately, he uses the word “savages” throughout the article, but he concludes that they are rational and logical.
He asks: Is tribal life rational or irrational? Does magic saturate the lives of “primitives” and “savages” such that they are illogical? He observes two things.
First, all cultures, including the basic cultures of New Guinea tribes, have words for whole and part (being/existence and substance/attribute/quality), cause and effect, and if and then. These are the terms and concepts of ancient Greek Logic (Aristotle) and modern European Logic (Wittgenstein). This suggests that logic and reason are basic to the human mind, language and culture.
Second, there is a basic difference between the everyday, safe and known practices and the special, dangerous and unknown practices of the tribes people. This can be described as the difference between the practical and the theoretical. Malinowski uses the example of shallow and deep sea fishing. When fishing in shallow seas, no theory, ritual or magic is required, but when fishing in deep water the tribe gets theoretical and brings in a system of thought involving rituals and “magic” to influence their outcomes. When one is building a fishhook, one does not call on the gods or spirits. When one is asking for fertile crops for the year, one calls on gods and spirits with ritualized activity. In a similar way, one does not need philosophy, logic or science when one is opening a door. However, if one is designing a door no one has invented before, one needs to bring theoretical systems for understanding the unknown. “Science” literally means “seeing” in Latin (Sciencia), a culture of thought and theory that looks into the unknown from the base of the practical. Likewise, “Logic” literally means “speaking” in ancient Greek (Logia), as Logic was the art of debate, speaking and arguing well about the unknown.
If you ask what would happen if one did not use the theory and rituals, no one could tell you because they have never tried it. However, if you suggested that ritual and magic alone will grow crops without farming and practical work the tribes people would laugh at you. Thus, the theoretical is an extension of the practical into the unknown and the two are always building on each other. Tribes people do not believe in magic such that rationality is excluded. Rather, theoretical systems like magic and science are extensions of rationality and logic into the realms of the unknown that concern this life on earth.
Also, tribes people do not all share the same views and beliefs within the cultural system, but rather humans display individual as well as collective thought. Most think that we are the individualistic and earlier civilizations did not question their systems. This is true to a degree due to technology and new complexes of culture, but tribes people disagree with one another within a cultural system. The example: one person thinks their failure means they are cursed by an evil spirit, while their neighbor argues with them and says they are just stupid and clumsy. Thus, a theoretical system allows for debate and progressive understandings, including early “magical” systems and later “scientific” systems.
If all this is true and humans have always been logical and rational, why is science so successful and powerful? What makes science different from earlier systems? In early and ancient cultures, religion, physics and psychology were all one theoretical system (often referred to today as cosmology). Particularly as Islamic and European civilizations rose, technology and education meant many specialized equipment and areas of study. While the theoretical systems have always observed the natural world and this life we live, observation was increasingly supplemented and supported by experimentation. Today, we have many cultures of experimentation that are powerful at expanding and overturning our views. However, as already noted, humans have always been experimenting, changing and evolving.
Baseball Superstition
The author says he is taking Malinowski’s distinction of shallow fishing and deep sea fishing and applying it to superstitions of modern day baseball players. Baseball players are modern day human beings who are raised in a “scientific” culture, but they show the same differences in behavior as the tribes people when it comes to theorizing and the unknown.
In baseball, there is a great difference between fielding and hitting/pitching. Fielding is successful 9 times out of 10, and so it is not dangerous or risky. Hitting and pitching, however, are quite risky. There is far less chance of success, and success does not guarantee winning the game overall. What do we observe? Baseball players come up with superstitious practices that follow basic cause-effect reasoning regarding their pre-game behaviors and their performance in hitting and pitching but not in fielding. A pitcher or slugger will, for instance, eat two chili dogs the night before every big game to pitch or hit well, but fielders do not. While we may not consider these superstitions “scientific”, we can see that theory grows in the gap of the unknown and it follows the basic mechanisms of logic (hypothetical reasoning of cause to effect). Again, it seems that reason and logic are basic to human culture and language, and they extend from the observable and practical into the unknown and theoretical.
The Shotgun Cult
In the third article, we can see a new growth of theoretical culture that has practical purposes in the Shotgun cult of a tribes people given one shotgun shell at a time to hunt wild boar (guess why the Europeans give them one shell at a time). If a hunter misses a shot, the whole community comes together and they try to figure out where the social issue is in the community that caused the hunter to miss the boar. This brings the community together to solve its problems (created by individual differences of views and opinions) and it is impossible to say this has no positive effect on the hunter whatsoever. Again, we see that the practical is extended by the theoretical for figuring out the unknown as a culture.
Final Question:
Is following a cultural system more rational or logical than questioning or changing it? Both are in fact reasonable and logical. Belief and doubt, positivism and skepticism, are in constant tension in all societies. If human beings are always rational and logical because this is the way that thinking works naturally, then humans are rational and logical when they conform to their systems and when they question their systems.
The great Dada art movement’s manifesto writer Tzara said that we must have the courage to stand for and against thought. If one loves ancient culture but hates modern culture or loves modern culture and hates ancient culture, one is standing for and against human thinking and logic in either case.
Next time, we read Riddling Tales from Around the World to see that questioning logic and reason are just as ancient and human as logic and reason themselves.
Jan 27, 2010
Eric Gerlach
Logic and Reason in the Earliest Human Cultures
This lecture covers the three articles from the same book: Rational Mastery by Man of his Surroundings by Malinowski, Baseball Superstition, and the Shotgun Cult. The first article shows us that the earliest and most basic human cultures are logical and rational, and the next two articles build on the work of the first.
Rational Mastery by Man of his Surroundings by Malinowski
Malinowski did work among the tribes of Papua New Guinea as an anthropologist. Unfortunately, he uses the word “savages” throughout the article, but he concludes that they are rational and logical.
He asks: Is tribal life rational or irrational? Does magic saturate the lives of “primitives” and “savages” such that they are illogical? He observes two things.
First, all cultures, including the basic cultures of New Guinea tribes, have words for whole and part (being/existence and substance/attribute/quality), cause and effect, and if and then. These are the terms and concepts of ancient Greek Logic (Aristotle) and modern European Logic (Wittgenstein). This suggests that logic and reason are basic to the human mind, language and culture.
Second, there is a basic difference between the everyday, safe and known practices and the special, dangerous and unknown practices of the tribes people. This can be described as the difference between the practical and the theoretical. Malinowski uses the example of shallow and deep sea fishing. When fishing in shallow seas, no theory, ritual or magic is required, but when fishing in deep water the tribe gets theoretical and brings in a system of thought involving rituals and “magic” to influence their outcomes. When one is building a fishhook, one does not call on the gods or spirits. When one is asking for fertile crops for the year, one calls on gods and spirits with ritualized activity. In a similar way, one does not need philosophy, logic or science when one is opening a door. However, if one is designing a door no one has invented before, one needs to bring theoretical systems for understanding the unknown. “Science” literally means “seeing” in Latin (Sciencia), a culture of thought and theory that looks into the unknown from the base of the practical. Likewise, “Logic” literally means “speaking” in ancient Greek (Logia), as Logic was the art of debate, speaking and arguing well about the unknown.
If you ask what would happen if one did not use the theory and rituals, no one could tell you because they have never tried it. However, if you suggested that ritual and magic alone will grow crops without farming and practical work the tribes people would laugh at you. Thus, the theoretical is an extension of the practical into the unknown and the two are always building on each other. Tribes people do not believe in magic such that rationality is excluded. Rather, theoretical systems like magic and science are extensions of rationality and logic into the realms of the unknown that concern this life on earth.
Also, tribes people do not all share the same views and beliefs within the cultural system, but rather humans display individual as well as collective thought. Most think that we are the individualistic and earlier civilizations did not question their systems. This is true to a degree due to technology and new complexes of culture, but tribes people disagree with one another within a cultural system. The example: one person thinks their failure means they are cursed by an evil spirit, while their neighbor argues with them and says they are just stupid and clumsy. Thus, a theoretical system allows for debate and progressive understandings, including early “magical” systems and later “scientific” systems.
If all this is true and humans have always been logical and rational, why is science so successful and powerful? What makes science different from earlier systems? In early and ancient cultures, religion, physics and psychology were all one theoretical system (often referred to today as cosmology). Particularly as Islamic and European civilizations rose, technology and education meant many specialized equipment and areas of study. While the theoretical systems have always observed the natural world and this life we live, observation was increasingly supplemented and supported by experimentation. Today, we have many cultures of experimentation that are powerful at expanding and overturning our views. However, as already noted, humans have always been experimenting, changing and evolving.
Baseball Superstition
The author says he is taking Malinowski’s distinction of shallow fishing and deep sea fishing and applying it to superstitions of modern day baseball players. Baseball players are modern day human beings who are raised in a “scientific” culture, but they show the same differences in behavior as the tribes people when it comes to theorizing and the unknown.
In baseball, there is a great difference between fielding and hitting/pitching. Fielding is successful 9 times out of 10, and so it is not dangerous or risky. Hitting and pitching, however, are quite risky. There is far less chance of success, and success does not guarantee winning the game overall. What do we observe? Baseball players come up with superstitious practices that follow basic cause-effect reasoning regarding their pre-game behaviors and their performance in hitting and pitching but not in fielding. A pitcher or slugger will, for instance, eat two chili dogs the night before every big game to pitch or hit well, but fielders do not. While we may not consider these superstitions “scientific”, we can see that theory grows in the gap of the unknown and it follows the basic mechanisms of logic (hypothetical reasoning of cause to effect). Again, it seems that reason and logic are basic to human culture and language, and they extend from the observable and practical into the unknown and theoretical.
The Shotgun Cult
In the third article, we can see a new growth of theoretical culture that has practical purposes in the Shotgun cult of a tribes people given one shotgun shell at a time to hunt wild boar (guess why the Europeans give them one shell at a time). If a hunter misses a shot, the whole community comes together and they try to figure out where the social issue is in the community that caused the hunter to miss the boar. This brings the community together to solve its problems (created by individual differences of views and opinions) and it is impossible to say this has no positive effect on the hunter whatsoever. Again, we see that the practical is extended by the theoretical for figuring out the unknown as a culture.
Final Question:
Is following a cultural system more rational or logical than questioning or changing it? Both are in fact reasonable and logical. Belief and doubt, positivism and skepticism, are in constant tension in all societies. If human beings are always rational and logical because this is the way that thinking works naturally, then humans are rational and logical when they conform to their systems and when they question their systems.
The great Dada art movement’s manifesto writer Tzara said that we must have the courage to stand for and against thought. If one loves ancient culture but hates modern culture or loves modern culture and hates ancient culture, one is standing for and against human thinking and logic in either case.
Next time, we read Riddling Tales from Around the World to see that questioning logic and reason are just as ancient and human as logic and reason themselves.
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Ethics Syllabus & Schedule Spring 2010
HUMAN 30A – ETHICS Spring 2010
Instructor: Eric Gerlach
Fri 9-11:50 AM
Office Hours: Mon 11-12 @ K’s Coffee
Class Code 22131
Room: BCC 53
Email: ericgerlach@gmail.com
Blog: ericgerlach.blogspot.com
Ethics: Syllabus and Schedule
Course Description
This course introduces students to central concepts and issues of Ethics and systems of human values. We will first study concepts such as principle, virtue, balance, utility, drive, and perspective. We will then study issues such as theft, lies, violence, environment, class, gender and race from an individual and social perspective.
Required Texts:
-The text for the class is the Course Reader, available at Lazer Image,
61 Shattuck Square, Berkeley, (510) 644-3339
-A copy of the reader will be put on reserve in the Berkeley City College Library.
Required Assignments:
- Three In-class Reading Responses (best 3 out of 4) 30%
- Midterm Exam 30%
- Final Exam 30%
- Class participation 10%
Class Schedule
Readings (in bold) are to be completed by the class date for discussion
Jan 22 Introduction to the Class
Jan 29 Principles and Morals: Kant’s Metaphysics of Morals
Feb 5 Virtue: Aristotle’s Ethics (in-class writing response)
Feb 19 Balance: Egyptian Wisdom & Confucius’ Analects
Feb 26 Use & Consequence: Mill’s Utilitarianism
Mar 5 Drive & Desire: Nietzsche’s Beyond Good & Evil (in-class writing response)
Mar 12 Perspective & Plurality: Heraclitus’ Fragments & Chuang Tzu
Mar 19 Review for Midterm
Mar 26 Midterm Exam
Apr 2 Theft: Zinn’s People’s History of Am. Empire & Andreas’ Addicted to War
Apr 9 Lies: Herman & Chomsky’s Manufacturing Consent
Apr 16 Violence: Lt. Col. Grossman’s On Killing
Apr 23 Life & World: Carson’s Silent Spring & essays from BCEP (in-class response)
Apr 30 Class & Power: Karp’s Indispensable Enemies & essays from RC&G
May 7 Gender & Sex: De Beauvoir’s The Second Sex (in-class writing response)
May 14 Race & Culture: Hannaford’s Race & more essays from RC&G
May 21 Review for Final Exam
May 28 Final Exam
Instructor: Eric Gerlach
Fri 9-11:50 AM
Office Hours: Mon 11-12 @ K’s Coffee
Class Code 22131
Room: BCC 53
Email: ericgerlach@gmail.com
Blog: ericgerlach.blogspot.com
Ethics: Syllabus and Schedule
Course Description
This course introduces students to central concepts and issues of Ethics and systems of human values. We will first study concepts such as principle, virtue, balance, utility, drive, and perspective. We will then study issues such as theft, lies, violence, environment, class, gender and race from an individual and social perspective.
Required Texts:
-The text for the class is the Course Reader, available at Lazer Image,
61 Shattuck Square, Berkeley, (510) 644-3339
-A copy of the reader will be put on reserve in the Berkeley City College Library.
Required Assignments:
- Three In-class Reading Responses (best 3 out of 4) 30%
- Midterm Exam 30%
- Final Exam 30%
- Class participation 10%
Class Schedule
Readings (in bold) are to be completed by the class date for discussion
Jan 22 Introduction to the Class
Jan 29 Principles and Morals: Kant’s Metaphysics of Morals
Feb 5 Virtue: Aristotle’s Ethics (in-class writing response)
Feb 19 Balance: Egyptian Wisdom & Confucius’ Analects
Feb 26 Use & Consequence: Mill’s Utilitarianism
Mar 5 Drive & Desire: Nietzsche’s Beyond Good & Evil (in-class writing response)
Mar 12 Perspective & Plurality: Heraclitus’ Fragments & Chuang Tzu
Mar 19 Review for Midterm
Mar 26 Midterm Exam
Apr 2 Theft: Zinn’s People’s History of Am. Empire & Andreas’ Addicted to War
Apr 9 Lies: Herman & Chomsky’s Manufacturing Consent
Apr 16 Violence: Lt. Col. Grossman’s On Killing
Apr 23 Life & World: Carson’s Silent Spring & essays from BCEP (in-class response)
Apr 30 Class & Power: Karp’s Indispensable Enemies & essays from RC&G
May 7 Gender & Sex: De Beauvoir’s The Second Sex (in-class writing response)
May 14 Race & Culture: Hannaford’s Race & more essays from RC&G
May 21 Review for Final Exam
May 28 Final Exam
Intro Philosophy Syllabus & Schedule Spring 2010
PHIL 1 – Intro to Philosophy, FALL 2010
Instructor: Eric Gerlach
Thursdays 6:30 – 9:30 pm
Office Hours: Mondays 11-12 @ K’s Coffee
Class Code: 22341
ROOM: BCC 14
Email: ericgerlach@gmail.com
Blog: ericgerlach.blogspot.com
SYLLABUS for Introduction to Philosophy
Course Description
This course introduces students to the history of Philosophy and world thought. We will study Egyptian, Indian, Greek, Chinese and modern European philosophers.
Required Texts:
-The only text for the class is the Course Reader, available at Lazer Image, 61 Shattuck Square, Berkeley, (510) 644-3339. A copy of the reader will be put on reserve in the BCC Library.
Required Assignments:
- Three In-class Reading Responses (best 3 out of 4) 30%
- MIDTERM Exam 30%
- FINAL Exam 30%
- Class participation 10%
CLASS SCHEDULE
Jan 21 Introduction to Philosophy: Positivism & Skepticism in world cultures
Jan 28 Shamanism, Early City State Priests & Egyptian Thought
Feb 4 Indian Thought (1st In-Class Response)
Feb 11 Greek Thought: Heraclitus
Feb 18 Greek Thought: Plato
Feb 25 Chinese Thought: Confucius
Mar 4 Chinese Thought: Daoism, Lao Zi & Zhuan Zi (2nd In-Class Response)
Mar 11 Review for Midterm Exam
Mar 18 MIDTERM EXAM
Apr 1 Islamic & Medieval European Thought
Apr 8 Descartes & Modern European Philosophy
Apr 15 Hume (3rd In-Class Response)
Apr 22 Hegel
Apr 29 Nietzsche
May 6 Wittgenstein
May 13 Art, Humor and Philosophy (4th In-Class Response)
May 20 Review for Final Exam
May 27 FINAL EXAM
Instructor: Eric Gerlach
Thursdays 6:30 – 9:30 pm
Office Hours: Mondays 11-12 @ K’s Coffee
Class Code: 22341
ROOM: BCC 14
Email: ericgerlach@gmail.com
Blog: ericgerlach.blogspot.com
SYLLABUS for Introduction to Philosophy
Course Description
This course introduces students to the history of Philosophy and world thought. We will study Egyptian, Indian, Greek, Chinese and modern European philosophers.
Required Texts:
-The only text for the class is the Course Reader, available at Lazer Image, 61 Shattuck Square, Berkeley, (510) 644-3339. A copy of the reader will be put on reserve in the BCC Library.
Required Assignments:
- Three In-class Reading Responses (best 3 out of 4) 30%
- MIDTERM Exam 30%
- FINAL Exam 30%
- Class participation 10%
CLASS SCHEDULE
Jan 21 Introduction to Philosophy: Positivism & Skepticism in world cultures
Jan 28 Shamanism, Early City State Priests & Egyptian Thought
Feb 4 Indian Thought (1st In-Class Response)
Feb 11 Greek Thought: Heraclitus
Feb 18 Greek Thought: Plato
Feb 25 Chinese Thought: Confucius
Mar 4 Chinese Thought: Daoism, Lao Zi & Zhuan Zi (2nd In-Class Response)
Mar 11 Review for Midterm Exam
Mar 18 MIDTERM EXAM
Apr 1 Islamic & Medieval European Thought
Apr 8 Descartes & Modern European Philosophy
Apr 15 Hume (3rd In-Class Response)
Apr 22 Hegel
Apr 29 Nietzsche
May 6 Wittgenstein
May 13 Art, Humor and Philosophy (4th In-Class Response)
May 20 Review for Final Exam
May 27 FINAL EXAM
Logic Class Syllabus & Schedule Spring 2010
PHILOSOPHY 10 - LOGIC, Spring 2010
Instructor: Eric Gerlach
Monday & Wednesday 9:30-10:50 am
Office Hours: Mon 11-12 @ K’s Coffee
Class Code 22427
Room: BCC 51 Email: ericgerlach@gmail.com
Blog: ericgerlach.blogspot.com
Logic: Syllabus and Schedule
Course Description
This course introduces students to the history and practice of Logic in ancient and modern cultures. We will study the human origins of Logic, Indian, Greek, and Chinese Logic texts, and modern European Logic including Wittgenstein’s truth table method.
Required Texts:
-The text for the class is the Course Reader, available at Lazer Image,
-A copy of the reader will be put on reserve in the Berkeley City College Library.
Required Assignments:
- In-class & Homework Assignments 30%
- Midterm Exam #1 30%
- Final Exam #2 30%
- Class participation 10%
Jan 25 Introduction: What is Logic?
Jan 27, Feb 1 The Human Origins of Logic & Reason: Magic, Witchcraft & Religion
Feb 3, 8, 10 Indian Logic: Kanada’s Vaisheshika Sutra & Gotama’s Nyaya Sutra
Feb 17, 22 Indian Logic: Jainism, Buddhism & Skepticism
Feb 24-Mar 3 Greek Logic: Aristotle’s Categories, On Interpretation, Prior & Posterior An.
Mar 8, 10 Greek Logic: Skepticism
Mar 15, 17 Chinese Logic & Paradox: Sourcebook of Chinese Philosophy
Mar 22 Review for Midterm
Mar 24 Midterm Exam
Mar 29, 31 Islamic & Medieval European Logic: Avicenna & Aquinas
Apr 5, 7 Medieval to Modern European Logic: Russell & Mill
Apr 12-19 Truth Tables & Early Wittgenstein’s Tractatus
Apr 21, 26 Contradiction, Dialectic and Hegel’s Logic
Apr 28-May 5 Late Wittgenstein’s Philosophical Investigations
May 10, 12 Logic, Nonsense and Lewis Carroll’s Alice Books
May 17, 19 Logic, Art and Humor
May 24 Review for Final Exam
May 26 Final Exam
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)