Social Darwinism

After Charles Darwin’s, “On the Origin of the Species” was published in 1859, thinkers saw the need to reconcile the idea of life evolving, human from animal, with the conventional understanding of mankind as God’s creation, superior and soul-bearing destined for life ever after.

As popular thinking slowly grasped the notion that survival in a changing world required adaptation, that only the fittest organisms would survive and thrive, unfair advantage was taken. Within the social milieu of the late 19th century western world, evolutionary thinking justified rampant social inequalities, unequal wealth distribution, as properly rewarding the most fit.

Such a philosophic stance produced an uneven playing field favoring ‘robber barons’ who undermined and swallowed up competition. Any sense of moral empathy for the harsh working conditions of the common laborer became subordinated to the pursuit of wealth despite the dictates of the Christian Church. Individualism became the rule; acquire what one could despite societal needs.

Within two decades, it became apparent that singular selfishness will lose out to a shared cooperative existence and that empathy, innate in the human animal, will produce stability. Morality and ethics are necessary components for mankind to realize life’s primary goal: a degree of happiness.

Not sure if the lessons are being learned.

Plato’s Republic

Plato’s Republic is a dialectical exercise in defining the ideal society.

A Guardian class consisting of the best and most fit physically and mentally is to be selected at a very young age to receive an education through a carefully ordered curriculum that will instill those qualities most favorable to preservation of the state. These Guardians will learn to put the state first above all other considerations, will distain personal gain while living in communal groups without material advantage. the best of these Guardians will be chosen to lead as philosopher kings, ensuring justice for all in this Ideal State.

What could go wrong?

It was argued among the dialecticians that human nature, being what it is, drawn to personal gain, when beyond observation of the populous, will be compelled to forego the practice of justice to gain material advantage. Who will dominate: the just, being good and wise, satisfied with the status quo or the unjust, the bad and ignorant who seek personal gain?

Morality emerges as a potential control factor. (Plato’s)Socrates identifies the soul existing in all people containing the Good as presented in the perfection of the Forms from which the imperfections of the material world are but flawed copies.

Plato’s allegory of the cave relates mankind’s lack of understanding: prisoners chained facing a dark wall, unable to turn, experience only shadows of reality. Not until they are allowed to turn can they see the beauty and complexity of the world. Such is the state of man.

Meno’s Paradox

I’ve been reading a treatise Plato wrote about an exchange between Socrates and Menos regarding the nature of virtue. Socrates wants Menos to define virtue, what it is in essence. All Menos can do is give examples of actions and behaviors that could be labeled virtuous.

Socrates admits he, himself, doesn’t know what virtue is, much to the exasperation of Menos. (who may have suggested): if an inquiry cannot produce new knowledge, but only recapitulate what is already known, new knowledge is impossible.

To which Socrates (might have countered): that the answer is with the ‘immortal soul’ within each of us that has always existed and experienced all things. Tapping the ‘immortal soul’ will reveal the learning we desire simply by ‘recollecting’.

Twisted logic, maybe, but the problem of what constitutes virtue is a good one.

An Open Society

The history of humankind records periods of time when openness to multicultural interactions and beneficial trade opportunities sped the development of civilization. Intellectual exchange produced new ideas that led to economic stability that freed up time for the revelation of personal skill sets that provided a more functional society. Cities grew; living standards improved.

History informs us of other periods of time, of isolationism, when strong leaders were unwilling to participate in open exchange, were content in their belief that autonomous existence was safer, superior to competition imposed by multicultural exchange. Such a mindset, though, was unprepared to flex when the need for innovation to overcome extended drought, for instance, are fend off enemy incursions when alliances weren’t available for support.

The old trope that ignoring history means repeating mistakes of the past seems to be happening again.

Human Nature

A Pragmatist is someone who sees true reality and works with it, within the limitations of what is at hand. An Idealist sees the reality of what is, finds it lacking and seeks to change things for the better. In either case, these are all people of action, seeking positive outcomes, though the results they seek may differ, one being of a personal nature the other altruistic.

There are, however, those pragmatists who choose a life path of least resistance as they seek the easiest means of finding a comfortable existence, which might mean overstepping legal and moral imperatives, taking advantage of an open society. And there are those idealists, who, finding society resistant to change, are unable to reach their goals, give up, living out their lives amorally on the social fringes.

Human nature determines the path taken, but success and well-being will require a moral commitment.

The Avant-Guarde

It used to be the case, as I remember it, an ambitious artist, seeking recognition, would attempt to stretch the envelope. As an artist in the 60’s and 70’s there was great impetus to go beyond what had been done in the arts, to expand the notion of what art is. Not simply to seek ‘the new’ in itself but to find ways to make meaning unavailable to traditional means of artmaking.

Mid-20th century, recognition in an increasingly competitive art world depended on reaching beyond, developing new techniques, challenge tradition aesthetic values. Success in such endeavor would depend on receiving hostile reviews and negative responses from the art establishment. Whether such art offered meaningful content or was simply exploitive, recognition was the key to success, which was likely to be short-lived, undermined by the eventual critical recognition and acceptance, the critics themselves seeking acknowledgement of their depths of understanding.

It being understood, then, that nothing is truly new even as convoluted explanation fought the inevitable decline of the Avant-Guarde.

Spectral Visions

A Short Chat

The increasing use of chatbots these days has me wondering if my modest blog might be thought of as AI produced. Careful as I am-using spell-check and avoiding redundancies, not delving into contexts I know nothing about-it seems my short musings ought to be seen as human produce.

To underscore the obvious, the absence of intricate nuance must make it clear, dear reader, this writer is receiving no help from artificial sources. But, maybe, to be certain no doubt exists as to the origin of my modest posts, a convoluted sentence or two ought to verify these texts human touch.

Good enough? Happy reading.

Stupidogenics

VI’ve been reading about the concerns educators are having regarding technology in the classroom. While the distraction of smart phones can be reasonably curtailed, a more insidious issue is the use of AI to manage homework. Chat GPT, for instance, can produce assigned essays without the need for students to hardly think about the topic. In a test study, students who used the AI app were unable to answer questions about what exactly the produced document said.

Apparently, the problem isn’t restricted to the classroom. The business world, too, is in danger of AI relieving businessmen and women of having to think. Executives may use Chat GPT to produce reasoned argument/policies acceptable in the moment but potentially damaging to corporate goals.

So, it appears, using AI bypasses the need for contextual understanding opening the door to belief in conspiracy theory and the acceptance of disinformation for the multitude of users who find in it justification for their chosen narrative.

It would appear that artificial intelligence may be turning us into a stupidogenic society.

Preppers and the End Times.

I’ve been reading, lately about the vast numbers of American preparing for the Apocalypse. Some sources estimate as many as 10% of the US population harbors deep survivalist instincts informing them civilization is teetering, nearing collapse, and preparation need be made for surviving the end times.

Well maybe all these folks don’t foresee ‘End Times’ exactly, maybe the extravagant preparations being made: building bunkers that include gyms, pools, libraries and shooting ranges complete with moats skimmed with flammable liquid, is just a use of expendable income for an insurance policy that will ease the fear our tumultuous times are imposing. But, considering the political craziness that perpetuates an Us vs Them mentality, it’s not hard to imagine ‘The Four Horseman’ ushering in the demise of civilization and there’s plenty of literature that adds believable detail to what an apocalypse will look like.

Time to reread ‘A Canticle for Liebowitz’ offering, as it does, a light at the end of the civilization terminating tunnel in the person of a young child, maybe she’s a GenAlpha who will be able to correct some of our mistakes.

Sister Chloe

The Disappearance of Truth

What to believe? It appears many of us (more than 50% of the U. S. population some sources estimate) get our news through social media, a source of information through which anyone can post thoughts of their own, ideas that may or may not be consistent with reality.

Expecting, as we do, our daily consumption of news to be based on fact, social media offers instead biases of opinion sometimes meant to deceive or to shock. Motivated by self-interest, unedited, the scroll of ideas repeated over and over will take hold, algorhythms feeding intuitions, reinforcing what the individual consumer believes to be true, bad enough in itself but made many times worse by exacerbating societal divisiveness.

We owe it to ourselves to dig deeper into the news of the day, to seek the facts beyond our intuitive inclinations, as uncomfortable as that may be. Moral truth is out there to be found.