For a long time
I wondered why since Aristotle, Aquinas, Descartes, Kant, Western Philosophy seemed not to change anymore.
Until I realized that the western paradigm around Aristotelian ideas, as made by Aquinas, Descartes, Kant, Einstein, is awfully strong
and until now smothered paradigm shifts.
Are young promising thinkers addicted to old concepts like 'intelligence' and 'rationality' (hard drugs), before they can come up with something completely different?
For sure addictions like 'intelligence' and 'rationality' suppress change.
Something like 'intuition'?
Western 'Science' as started as 'scientia' indeed is virtually dead.
Not as technological discipline of polishing and upgrading western tools, but as research and way of life based on Roman Christian prejudices.
It is enlightening to see what neighbouring culture can teach the stagnating Western Culture.
Russia shows us that life is about effectivity. Forget about the Putin-gang then you might recognize that
Russian people in reactions rely more on intuition/emotion than on the western notions intelligence/understanding.
Nevertheless Russia is there and cannot be ignored. Chinese culture amongst others shows that life is about 'doing'.
Not endless debates about what is best, but just trials. Brazilian culture shows us that being more spontanuous by using intuition
certainly improves 'happiness'. ....And so on.
Young brilliant people all over the world started making SF movies to escape the rigid 'theories' of 'science'.
If such a
movie becomes a success then at least one might presume that the behavior shown was attractive (even handsome or pretty players and other eye catchers
can't make up for a bad scenario, not even porn). Because until now only few
people were reached by philosophy through books and articles (say 1%).
Science Fiction movies as examples of behavior in special circumstances proved to be a winner. On a t.v. channel like Discovery in addition many practical subject's are treated in an insightful way. 'Scientific Revolutions' by Thomas Kuhn would still make a spectacular movie (about 'mind' travel).
I often look
at episodes of the series Star Trek,
because in it subjects are treated that are THOUGHT to be interesting in
the future of earth evolution. A valuable snapshot of today's prejudices.
Supposing 'intelligences' in the universe is one of those,
not reconizing that 'intelligence' is a cultural notion based on nothing but imagination. Looking
seriously in that way at an episode of for instance Star Trek is much
more than only enjoying a technical war movie, that happens to play in future. Deep
Space 9 and Babylon 5 became familiar names to me, as well as main
characters captains Benjamin Sisko and John Sheridan.
Looking seriously in that way at an episode of for instance Star Trek is much more than only enjoying a technical war movie, that happens to play in future. Deep Space 9 and Babylon 5 became familiar names to me, as well as main characters captains Benjamin Sisko and John Sheridan.
Movie director Francis Ford Coppola said that if the Jedi creed had been fully developed as a Jedi Religion it would have attracted billions of followers. Coppola amongst others is known through his movie The Godfather. Meant like a title of honor I call these hordes of sci-fi fans reli-junks
Star Wars fan Won Park told the New York Times: If George Lucas turned [his Jedi philosophy] into a religion, it would blow Ron Hubbard's Dianetics [a central part of the sci-fi writer's controversial belief, Scientology] out of the window' (while Won was dressed in black as Jedi master Qui-Gon Jinn).
This Jedi creed is that The Force is an energy field created by all living things. It surrounds us and penetrates us . Reading 'The Force' as 'Common Sense' that connects all humans like air makes a very interesting concept. Indeed local common sense shapes cultures. And Cultures shape Paradigms that VERY MUCH influence local cultural behavior. Stuff for deep digging research, who dares? I started at 'Comeback of Intuition/Deeds'. My own lucky guess (not unlike Nietzsche) of fresh ethics I described in The Next Paradigm is that evolutionary energy is expressed in 'willpower' = creativity
Sir Alec Guinness even opinioned in Star Wars in 1977: It binds the galaxy together.
Let's not overestimate SF, but the present 'radio silence' in formal philosophy suggests the opposite (probably not deliberate , and partially caused by lack of funds). Quality SF can amongst others be recognized by appropriate use of self humor, too often this trait is painfully missed in formal science.
For a moment as adult of over 30 imagine yourself being 10 to 15 years younger, and try to picture your future. Then you will have to admit that often images you saw in SF movies come to your mind.
Internet I found that the subject
philosophy and SF is by now discovered by formal philosophy.
But most sites about SF in this traditional branch of the sport thinking for some reason are just opened, already closed, or never started.
In fact the only site found by me that in my opinion is worth reading both as SF-fan and as to be philosopher was The Possible World Machine from Pathways professor Geoffrey Klempner.
Not surprisingly somebody practicing philosophy on the new medium Internet. (http://www.philosophos.com)
There must be more sites, but I didn't find them.
Science fiction is perfectly suited to contain views on near and far future. Movies like Star Wars and Star Trek contain a high amount of philosophic messages, like:
comes a time in every man's life when he must stop thinking and start doing.
- Captain Benjamin Sisko, Star Trek : Deep Space 9
Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads
- Yoda in Star Wars Episode I : Phantom Menace
Reason is the path to the dark side. Reason = Thinking. Reason is one-dimensional dividing in 'good' and 'bad'. Accumulated 'good/bad' = science. When digital science then good/bad becomes TRUE/FALSE. Science... leads to suffering. - Henkt Tuten
It is easy to laugh away the content of such sentences, but be careful: lots of philosophic messages when interpreted in a wrong way can as well be used as top jokes.
The text writers of these stories surely don't shake such messages out of their sleeves. But what's more important, young people came to digest a considerable part of philosophic knowledge through movies. That also painfully came to show the weak part of movies, i.e. if not used for debate they trigger more questions than giving answers. Questions like: "are time machines possible?", "do computers have a mind?" , what about philosophy and happiness, etcetera.
Here TOTALLY renewed version of traditional philosophy should take over, and by using the same media. By answering the raised questions it could tremendously improve the enthusiasm for the exact side of philosophy. But there are no strong signs that this happens.
It is counterproductive only to say that time machines are nonsense, because every week they appear on television. And the same applies for computers having no mind, if almost daily is suggested otherwise. More serious reactions are needed, the inherent answers may be right, but just waving away questions away is far from sufficient.
Some modern movie sentences replace several books, like: I really believe that if there's any kind of God, he wouldn't be in any one of us---not you, not me, but just in the space in between. If there's some magic in this world, it must be in the attempt of understanding someone else, sharing something. Even if it's almost impossible to succeed, but who cares, the answer must be in the attempt."
Said by Julie Delpy as Celine in the movie Before Sunrise.
When I was young
my ambition was to go to a major town, have a lot of sex, and become a good
scientist. Having lots of sex remained goal till I was 40. Sex even changed in the meantime
in a major industry, although many young people came to weigh this subject
My view on 'science' changed completely after realizing that 'science' is the religion 'rationality', although I recognize the merits in technology of 'rational' thinking. Einstein must have realized this too, but probably was deeply convinced that 'rationality' reflects space conditions. And the goal of going to a big town changed for many young people in the 'western world' into the ambition of exploring space.
As a teenager my view of being a forty years old middle aged male played in a town environment on earth (even in my own country). To be honest, marrying and having kids was never a great challenge for me. But I understand that generally this is the way in evolution to keep surviving. Maybe some redundant males are destined to do deep philosophizing. In general for the present western youth their goal rapidly moved to space.
In my early forties I myself appeared to be traveling the whole world as engineer, showing how fast things may change. And then the image of their future of people like my parents is even already forgotten. But it only figured in a small part of their country. In 3 generations (say 50 years) the image of future changed from a dot on in a country on earth, via a dot traveling the earth, to a dot in space.
Former hero's like James Bond and Superman became middle aged. A need for new hero's developed (and surely not for younger versions of secret agent 007)
It's in space
that the new human hero's are found. People like Benjamin Sisko and John
Sheridan. These are movie hero's but because real space captains are very
scarce they perfectly suit the job. No reason to escape into fiction, but why
should life in movies always be only unreal?
That brings me to the following eye opener: the movies in a culture show through which 'window' or paradigm in this culture 'the world' is perceived.
This view especially is eye opening when considering western or christian culture. Realize that its most developed shape of the catholic mind-body split is found in the U.S. ...... , though Western Europe is rapidly copying views.
That makes one reconsider: Batmans, Rambo's, Starwars, Vampires, etcetera. A world full of Dark Warriors.
Science fiction is a rational product. Amongst others that shows in predictable shapes of life in space.
Be sure that life in space can have such weird 'shape', that it is invisible.
Science Fiction is a modern version in American shape of the fairy tales of the German Grimm Brothers . Both 18th century Grimm Brothers were Calvinists and wrote very moralistic fairy tales. Always about white western people, and using western morals.
Fundamentalist Protestantism introduced individualism or egoism. Luther is a hero in modern neo-nazi circles. When the Calvinists lost terrain in Europe (except in Holland, England and parts of Germany), they fled to South Africa and The New World (America). That led to Apartheid and Slavery.
And now in the 21st century president Bush wants freedom of speech for Baptist churches in China. That is like suggesting to tolerate cancer cells in a healthy body.
New ideas following a paradigm shift always are considered 'wild' for a time. Fifty years later they appear dead common.
One man's villain is another man's hero, Captain. -Dukat in Deep Space 9 episode "By Inferno's Light".
|The "Star Trek" Law Don't interfere with Evolution (Science Fiction), is awfully arrogant. This 'puritan' view places Earth Humans outside Evolution, on level 'God'. Evolution is about Interferance, or would someone prefer an Earth still dominated by Dinosaurs. Interferance is DECISION Making. Decisions are discrete direction changes, not 'continous'.|