A positive view of evolution and human beings


David Deutsch writes in his book "The Fabric of Reality" about ethics and aesthetics;

.... beauty and rightness must be as objective as scientific and mathematical truth.

How come?
Well D D is known for his spectacular ideas, even if he works in the scientific field.

He advocates the theory that comes from Quantum experiments. A photon that splits into a real photon and a "shadow photon" in the double split experiment, goes really into parallel universums. For D D that indicates that parallel universes really exist.

Many think that already there he goes too far, but others says that is the plausible outcome of the math formulas of quantum physics.

D D also means that the parallel universes can be in some kind of contact with each other.
And why not have a common strive to better and better knowledge, even about beauty and rightness?
So, in that case the Kantian "objective" moral laws is a reality (even if they can change as scientific knowledge does).

It seems that  the strive for knowledge is inherent in D D's view here. We create knowledge in a never ending progress, and it's not only our knowledge, it's knowledge for the whole universe, or even multituniverse. It seems that he means that knowledge is what life can give to the universe. And therefore we should value scientific and technical progress.
In fact technical progress, as geoengineering, is the best solution for the climate change.

Let's say that our ethical views also are in progress. Nowadays we condemn, rape, murder and robbery and wars. Not long ago it was seen as natural phenomena. We even have started to look with other eyes on our behavior against animals.

In hundred years we probably will have  even more sublime ways of looking at behavior and beauty. Is it some of this  that Hilma af Klint's paintings points at?

That's why our civilization is very precious and maybe also rare. 

Richard Dawkins writes about "memes" as knowledge that is carried from generation to generation.
D D likes that and other of Dawking's views. But he doesn't like Dawkins  metaphor of  humans as a scum on the earth. We know a lot about, for instance, the sun and our own galaxy. That's not bad. We should value knowledge like that.

If we can handle the threats we have before us, we can reach very far. If we stop the strive to go back to the fifties; (racism, homofobia, nationalism and cold war).

And then we may create a far more beautiful earth in the future.

We must be hopeful.


                                          David Deutsch  in a long dialog (to the right):




Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Cora Diamond on eating animals - with the help of Wittgenstein´s ideas

Image
Cora Diamond is a new name for me, even if she has worked as a professor in Philosophy in the states for a long time and is still  teaching at the university of Virginia, even she is over 80 years old. She has written a lot about Wittgenstein and that has helped her to express her view of the topic. Although she, like Wittgenstein,  has lived in a hut in Norway - and actually brought Tractatus with hes - she seems to be different and for sure more glad than W. Anyways, its W: s writings that interests her and especially his critics of metaphysics and ethics in philosophy. As it is said in Tractacus  : " Whereof one  cannot speak , thereof one must be silent." And of ethics philosophy should not speak - why? Is it like in Buddhism - its better to sit in silence and let know yourself, than to speculate about what will happen when we die? But for sure there ethical guidelines in Buddhism,  but the behaviors is often named skilful, not good (or bad). Another
Read more

I think, therefore I am NOT

Image
So Descartes was wrong. He said that he could doubt everything about himself except that he was thinking. That proved that he existed. The word "I" is the central point here. What does it mean? Perhaps we are sure that we know the answer. Is it the thoughts? In that case - where are you when you aren't thinking? Is it your job, your title? In that case - what happens if you loose your job or change job? Is it your house, your nation? Under my course to be a mindfulness instructor, the teacher, Ola Schenström, made us ask to each other; "Who are you?" After each answer the question was repeated by the questioner.We soon discovered that there were no end to the answers - or maybe an adequate end could be; "I don't know."Or maybe; "It seems I have no essence." Other thinkers have come to the same conclusions; Buddha, Sartre and more recently Damasio and Parfit. Sartre, for instance, has said that we are the sum of our actions. We ha
Read more

Wittgenstein and Buddha -buddies?

Image
Ludwig Wittgenstein, the famous philosopher, reflected in the posthumously published  book "Philosophical Investigations" about the picture above; Is it a hare or duck?  He meant that we make, or must make, a statement what it is. And I suppose he meant that we often or always has to interpret the world around us. But two different interpretations can both be right! Language and thoughts controls what we see.....   You can compare with the picture of a glass. Half empty or half empty?  Who decides? Yes, it's you... And whatever you say is right.  But you can be aware of what you think. That can say more of yourself than of the glass....  You can be aware of that you always do interpretations of things that happens.  If you have a pessimistic or a naive point of view, you can be aware of the view and your statements.  Buddha and Wittgenstein were both aware of that different persons uses different perspectives.  But Buddha spoke about the "right 
Read more