Just a short, slanted video on Fox News' coverage of Barack Hussein Obama.
Thursday, February 22, 2007
Monday, February 19, 2007
Awkward Social Situations
The line at the coffee shop was particularly slow. I'd long ago chosen the food I'd be purchasing, and was deep in thought about which I'd enjoy more: the raspberry danish or the curiously named "Peanut Butter Blonde" (a peanut butter square with chocolate chips. Where's the blonde?). A woman pushed her way through the line, presumably to reach the restroom across the restaurant.
"Excuse me!" An unidentifiably aged (25-50, if I must guess) man behind me said gruffly under his breath. I looked toward him, surprised. Was he talking to me?
"Damn women. Think they can just push anyone around just because they are beautiful. Not even an excuse me!" I looked back over to the woman, thinking perhaps she had malicious intent in pushing through the line: had she simply cut to the front of the line? No. As expected, she was making her way into the restroom.
"Do you think that's what it was?" I asked non-confrontationally, hoping that perhaps he had mistaken the intent and motivation of her restroom rush.
"I know that's what it was," he forcefully asserted.
And now I was stuck. I wanted the conversation to end, but I didn't want to be rude. I wasn't going anywhere - it's not like I could act like I had something else to do while I waited in line, and I didn't have any escape options that would guarantee I left with my good mood and my pastries.
"Well, what can you do?" I said awkwardly, after a slight pause. I even hunched my shoulders and showed him the palms of my hands, visual cues that I felt would further solidify my resignation to the problem of beautiful women who rushed to the bathroom without saying excuse me.
"Bitch about it, that's what I'm going to do." He looked at me, hoping for some kind of approval or validation. Meanwhile, I felt even further trapped. I was next in line; I looked to the cashiers eagerly, hoping one might catch and correctly interpret my desperate glance and call me over preemptively, rescuing from an awkward conversation that was becoming more and more uncomfortable. No such luck.
Is this really the kind of thing people talk about in lines? I felt a bit socially inept. Maybe it was normal to use situations like this to strike up a conversation. That didn't really matter to me...I didn't want to talk to this man. So I didn't. We sat there in awkward silence for minutes that seemed to be an eternity. Ah well, at least I got my pastries. I liked the Peanut Butter Blonde better, though I still don't understand it's lexical origins.
"Excuse me!" An unidentifiably aged (25-50, if I must guess) man behind me said gruffly under his breath. I looked toward him, surprised. Was he talking to me?
"Damn women. Think they can just push anyone around just because they are beautiful. Not even an excuse me!" I looked back over to the woman, thinking perhaps she had malicious intent in pushing through the line: had she simply cut to the front of the line? No. As expected, she was making her way into the restroom.
"Do you think that's what it was?" I asked non-confrontationally, hoping that perhaps he had mistaken the intent and motivation of her restroom rush.
"I know that's what it was," he forcefully asserted.
And now I was stuck. I wanted the conversation to end, but I didn't want to be rude. I wasn't going anywhere - it's not like I could act like I had something else to do while I waited in line, and I didn't have any escape options that would guarantee I left with my good mood and my pastries.
"Well, what can you do?" I said awkwardly, after a slight pause. I even hunched my shoulders and showed him the palms of my hands, visual cues that I felt would further solidify my resignation to the problem of beautiful women who rushed to the bathroom without saying excuse me.
"Bitch about it, that's what I'm going to do." He looked at me, hoping for some kind of approval or validation. Meanwhile, I felt even further trapped. I was next in line; I looked to the cashiers eagerly, hoping one might catch and correctly interpret my desperate glance and call me over preemptively, rescuing from an awkward conversation that was becoming more and more uncomfortable. No such luck.
Is this really the kind of thing people talk about in lines? I felt a bit socially inept. Maybe it was normal to use situations like this to strike up a conversation. That didn't really matter to me...I didn't want to talk to this man. So I didn't. We sat there in awkward silence for minutes that seemed to be an eternity. Ah well, at least I got my pastries. I liked the Peanut Butter Blonde better, though I still don't understand it's lexical origins.
Friday, February 16, 2007
Do all fascist dictators go to heaven?
I asked my high school Physics teacher if Hitler went to heaven.
"If he believed that what he was doing was right, then he tried to do the right thing more than most people do. Doesn't that matter? If his motivation was to do the right thing, then why should he be punished?"
I can't remember the entirety of the discussion, but I do remember that the issue primarily boils down to whether or not there is a universal sense of right and wrong. Is what Hitler did wrong regardless of how he felt, or was it "OK" if he felt that what he was doing was the right thing?
Well, my (Christian) teacher made his viewpoint quite clear when he expressed his disappointment that I even had that question - how could I doubt that there was a universal good and bad? [aside: Let me take a second to point out that our discussion took place during class time: yes, I was basically defending Hitler before a group of my peers]
There is an important point to make: both then and now, I can't say I understand Hitler's motivation. I haven't even read a biography on the man, and I don't plan to. I do have a statement to make on the matter: I do think that there is a "universal" right and wrong, but I think the only place to find it is internally. I can't say I understand how, but I think that our conscience provides us with a tool to judge our actions "goodness". If I were to speculate, I would speculate that Hitler did not act in accordance with his conscience - he ignored his feelings in favor of his distorted reason.
In this sense, there is a danger in ignoring what we feel: while reason is an invaluable tool in life, it can be dangerous to make it our only tool. If we completely shut out feelings, we are nothing but cold, calculating robots.
"If he believed that what he was doing was right, then he tried to do the right thing more than most people do. Doesn't that matter? If his motivation was to do the right thing, then why should he be punished?"
I can't remember the entirety of the discussion, but I do remember that the issue primarily boils down to whether or not there is a universal sense of right and wrong. Is what Hitler did wrong regardless of how he felt, or was it "OK" if he felt that what he was doing was the right thing?
Well, my (Christian) teacher made his viewpoint quite clear when he expressed his disappointment that I even had that question - how could I doubt that there was a universal good and bad? [aside: Let me take a second to point out that our discussion took place during class time: yes, I was basically defending Hitler before a group of my peers]
There is an important point to make: both then and now, I can't say I understand Hitler's motivation. I haven't even read a biography on the man, and I don't plan to. I do have a statement to make on the matter: I do think that there is a "universal" right and wrong, but I think the only place to find it is internally. I can't say I understand how, but I think that our conscience provides us with a tool to judge our actions "goodness". If I were to speculate, I would speculate that Hitler did not act in accordance with his conscience - he ignored his feelings in favor of his distorted reason.
In this sense, there is a danger in ignoring what we feel: while reason is an invaluable tool in life, it can be dangerous to make it our only tool. If we completely shut out feelings, we are nothing but cold, calculating robots.
Thursday, February 15, 2007
Thought Count
First, the question: If science were perfect, would it be possible to look at a brain and tell (merely by physical aspects) exactly what it was thinking?
If your answer is yes, then there is another (less attractive) idea you are supporting as well: a finite number of thoughts.
If thoughts are merely a specific arrangement of some kind of elementary particle (we'll say atoms, for simplicity) then there is a finite number of arrangement possibilities for those particles. Yes, it's an extraordinarily large number, but there is still a cap, a maximum number of thoughts.
Which is more likely: that there is a finite number of "possible thoughts", or that there is a non-physical aspect of thoughts yet to be discovered?
If your answer is yes, then there is another (less attractive) idea you are supporting as well: a finite number of thoughts.
If thoughts are merely a specific arrangement of some kind of elementary particle (we'll say atoms, for simplicity) then there is a finite number of arrangement possibilities for those particles. Yes, it's an extraordinarily large number, but there is still a cap, a maximum number of thoughts.
Which is more likely: that there is a finite number of "possible thoughts", or that there is a non-physical aspect of thoughts yet to be discovered?
Friday, February 09, 2007
Books
In this section, I give books a mini-review, Aaron style.
Click on any of the books below to go straight to their "review" (newest books at the top).
Catfish and Mandala
The Twentieth Wife
Prep
Catcher in the Rye
Conversations on Conciousness
Freedom Evolves
The Light of Other Days
Utopia
Conversations with God
Sophie's World
Something about a book writing about familiar locations seems foreign - it feels like I'm cheating, or like I'm not really reading a book but a classmate's story. Catfish & Mandala was set in very familiar locations - Carmel, Santa Cruz, Crescent City, Portland, Seattle...even Nha Trang, Vietnam. These are all places I've visited, even lived at. This intimate knowledge of the places he describes (ie his friend's house in Southeast Portland, where you can party a little longer into the night without worry) felt odd and strangely comforting. Perhaps it has influenced my outlook, but I really enjoyed this tale of a man and his journey to understand his heritage.
Catfish and Mandala. The catfish are a staple food in Vietnam, strong symbolism for what the author feels the Vietnamese do very well: survive. Not only is the catfish capable of surviving, but the catfish also provides an amazing long-term sustenance for the poor who have to find something to eat. The Mandala, on the other hand, is representative of what his journey was to him. Buddhist monks will use the creation of the mandala as a tool for concentration, slowly placing the sand over a course of weeks before destroying the entire pattern weeks later. His physically strenuous journey allowed him this level of clarity - not because he was able to think so clearly while he exercised: quite the opposite in fact. The exercise cleared his mind of thought, it became a physical meditation.
The author was strangely condemning and disrespectful of the Vietnamese - he didn't see any beauty in his "home" country, only the ugliness of poverty and a beaten people. In his Vietnam the cops are corrupt, the poor shameless, all the women temptresses vying for an opportunity to leave Vietnam to America, the "golden land of opportunity". This was not what I saw in my visit to Vietnam, but there are other things he describes that I connected with. Mostly, just the description of life. The crazy driving, the strange way that every transaction is negotiable (I could never get used to this, I hate bartering to try and get the best price), the shops lining the street...it was all familiar and accurate, it brought back memories that were somehow already buried -- it's only been a few months, and already I'm forgetting.
I recommend Catfish and Mandala to anyone with an interest in Vietnam, but it's not just a book for Vietnamese. It is about a misplaced person on a journey to find his source, trying to find out what it means to be American or Vietnamese, and it's a journey worth reading about.
The Twentieth Wife is a bit of historical fiction detailing the life of the woman Mehrunnissa, wife of the influential Indian Emperor Jahangir. Sundaresan has taken known history of the era and woven a believable and enthralling tale of fiction that believably fills in the blanks. I could hardly put the book down once I started it: somehow the mix of realism and guesswork is irrestible inside the 300-some pages of the book.
With all these positive words of praise, how does the book only come out to a rating of 7.5? Well, it's not fair, but I grade the books not by entertainment value but by how they influence my life. This book was a wonderful story and there are lessons to be learned (both moral and historical), but all in all it was put entertainment first. What I got from the story was a history lesson, an Indian culture lesson, and a first-rate tale.
Prep is an impressive novel. Much like Catcher in the Rye, it doesn't feel like a work of fiction. It's another book providing insight into the real world, allowing me to remember what those high-school years were like. Sittenfeld is an amazing author in her ability to present situations that beg for some kind of moral judgment with a kind of distinct objectiveness. You want to know what's right, you want to know what is to be learned from a situation, but you're forced to make your own decision.
In a certain way, the novel is depressing in that way. Not because we can't come to our own decisions about what's right, but that the protagonist can't. We're forced to live through years of poor decisions, and as such it becomes a very difficult read. It's so easy, from an older age, to look back at some of the problems and insecurities of youth dismissively...but we get no such satisfaction from our protagonist in Prep. Late into her junior year, one of her classmates attempts to come up with a particularly cutting insult. "Lee," she says, "you haven't changed at all since freshman year." The classmate is correct, and reading Prep puts you through all those years with Lee while you agonize over the poor decisions she makes over and over again.
I don't mean to focus on the poor aspects of the book. I highly recommend Prep if you enjoy books that spur thought, self-evaluation, and remind us of our not-so-perfect past. Just don't expect you'll read it and be cheered right up.
Catcher in the Rye has been reviewed and analyzed much deeper and more effectively than I plan to do in this blog. I haven't read any outside reviews (which is a bit unusual) but I want to talk about what really stood out to me about this book: a brutally believable protagonist. Salinger's "coming of age" story isn't a fable with morals and platitudes...it comes across like life comes across: ordinary. What makes this such an outstanding work of fiction is not that it transports you to another world: instead it seems to shed light on ours.
It's a reminder of what it felt like to be in that in-between stage, where you're not an adult and you're no longer a child. As a matter of fact, I'll probably recommend it to my mom: maybe she'll understand my younger brother a little better after reading it.
I was very tempted to give this book a 10/10, but I just couldn't. It was a great book and perfect for me (I would say it's perfect for anyone starting out exploring popular theories on the basis of consciousness and free will) but the book had it's problems.
Conversations on Consciousness details a series of interviews between psychologist and hard determinist Susan Blackmore and a smattering of well-known experts in the fields of philosophy and neuroscience. She does well at finding a variety of scientific viewpoints: you won't find any faith-based supporters in the book, only those who attempt to use our current scientific knowledge and theories as a base from which to make their speculations.
The interviews tended to center around four questions:
1) What is consciousness? Why is it so difficult to define and to study?
2) Do you believe we have free will?
3) Do you think that the Philopher's Zombie is an actual possibility?
4) This question varied, but was related to their specific field of expertise or their most well-known theory.
I didn't understand why Blackmore felt the thought experiment of the Philosopher's Zombie was so important. The question she was trying to ask was: "Do you think conciousness arises merely because of our capacity to behave the way we do?" but using the Philosopher's Zombie thought experiment to ask this question led to more problems than it solved. Too often, the answer was a criticism of the thought experiment rather than an answer to the real question. I agree with those who criticize the experiment: I don't see a lot of value in pure speculation that, at some level, has to be scientifically ungrounded. Of course, the way we live our life is partially through pure speculation, but that is through necessity.
The best thing I got from the book was an understanding of the controversy in the fields of consciousness. Dennett, author of Freedom Evolves, somewhat represents one side of the argument. He's certainly well-known - half of those interviewed used Dennett's views as a way to state their own through contrast. Dennett does not cohesively meld his viewpoint in a way that it represents "the determinists", but his viewpoint is well-known and clearly stated, which at least gives others in the field a way to contrast, a reference point from which to deviate.
Conversations on Consciousness fostered more questions than it answered. It's a book that I've read that's only shown me that I need to read more books. It has moved some authors to near the top of the list though. David Chalmers, Roger Penrose, and Daniel Wegner (well, he was already near the top) all piqued my interest enough that I will certainly read their books to better understand their viewpoint. I identified with Penrose more than any other philosopher, and I'm interested to read more about why he believes what he does.
This was a difficult book to evaluate. It's a philosophical exercise by Dennett - an attempt to point out the inadequacies in a number of commonly held philosophical perspectives, and a best-guess amalgamation philosophy given the body of scientific knowledge at the time of the writing. I separate the book as such because I believe Dennett's goals were only half-met. He faltered a bit in his explanation of the shortcomings of common perspectives while he very reliably and intelligently presented his own view.
Two-thirds of Dennett's book was convincing, fairly clear, and for the most part sensible and comprehensible. Unfortunately (for him) it's the latter two-thirds of the book. Getting through the initial couple chapters proved to be particularly difficult for me...quite simply, Dennett spent a lot of time trying to support determinism by using examples that were completely inadequate. In attempting to provide simple examples to prove his point he lost some of the inherent complexity that is human life. For example, Dennett uses a "game" called Conway's game of life (link). Conway's game of life shows us that in a limited plane patterns of amazing complexity can arise. Conceivably, notes Dennett, given a large enough plane we could mimic the functionality of any computer system. Naturally, this is the case: despite their apparent complexity, computer processors are simple extremely fast at processing 1s and 0s: that is, on and off. A processor simply reacts to strings of electrical current that is either on or off. The data on your hard drive is stored similarly: a byte (1/1024 of a kilobyte, which is 1/1024 of a megabyte, to gigabyte, etc) is 8 bits, and a bit is just a 0 or 1 value.
Anyway, the fact that a simple system can reach extraordinary levels of complexity does not mean it can be used comparatively with the "real-life" system. Dennett's argument is that in a fixed system everything behaves in a predictable and unchanging manner: this is a solid argument. The disconnect takes place when you try to prove that our universe is a fixed system.
Despite all my argumentation on the matter, my real opinion is that the discussion is a waste of time. Whether or not life is deterministic or indeterministic is truly unimportant, and should not have a real bearing on how we live our lives. This is Dennett's conclusion and while I don't agree entirely with the means, it is an end I can fully support.
Two Critically acclaimed sci-fi authors (Arthur C. Clarke and Stephen Baxter) cooperated to write this book. I actually picked it up on accident, intending to read a well-known short story of the same name (about something called slow-glass). I don't regret making the mistake though.
Light of Other Days is an excellent sci-fi book. It's been a while since I last read a purely fictional book, and it was a welcome escape. Well, except for the fairly depressing undertones of the book. The near future (2050, or so) is not quite a dystopia, but it's a depressing place to live. Humanity has come to terms with the fact that a moon sized asteroid is headed towards the earth, due to hit in approximately 500 years. Science sees no foreseeable method of averting what will essentially be the extinction of humanity. The effects on culture as a whole are interesting but not overdramatic - just an increased melancholy with the idea that there's no real need to attempt to progress as a race given the impending extinction.
The title of the book comes from an unrelated scientific development. A purely capitalistic (but somewhat evil) entrepreneur develops a sort of super camera - a device that can look anywhere. To put it simply, he develops a screen that allows for real time surveillance of anywhere on earth. The book is partially about the changes to society that result from what is essentially a complete lack of privacy...political changes (politicians simply can't be corrupt, no one can hide anything) and personal changes.
It's a medium length book, and if you're a fan of the genre I recommend it.
Spoiler (highlight to see)
The book ends on an interesting note. Technological developments from the WormCam (the name of the device that allows you to watch anything) expand to allow us to watch the past (and therefore debunk a number of historical and religious myths). Anyway, the epilogue proposes what I thought to be an interesting idea...if all we humans are is our body, then eternal life is certainly possible. If everything that makes us who we are is physical, then the technology could potentially exist to recreate us exactly as is. The book ends with the main character being woken up some 150 years later, and finds out humanity has started a quest to right it's wrongs...by bringing every human being back to life. Interesting idea.
Thomas More's Utopia is a well-known work describing a communist utopia. More lived in the Middle Ages (17th century, I believe) and was executed in his thirties for refusing to bless the king's divorce and subsequent remarriage (he was an adviser of some sort for the king). I think knowing a little about More can help one understand the book - More loved humor. He joked about everything, and was even accused by a friend of putting forth everything he said in a joking manner...as a sort of safety net so that he could always retract the statement, saying it was merely made in jest. Utopia itself seems to be an example of this practice - the book seems to purvey itself as serious, but upon closer inspection might just be mocking anyone who could believe in a successful communist society. His Utopia is anything but.
Considering how highly I've rated this book, it was startlingly difficult to start. Reading through the first 40-50 pages without just throwing the book down in disgust took a strange kind of persistence. You see, the basis of the book is that the author is having a direct conversation with God (who seems most similar to a Christian God). It's not supposed to be fictional, and I'm confident the author would argue that the experience was "real". I find it much more likely that the author tapped into part of the vast internal knowledge we all have...because, whether or not he spoke with God, the book is impressive. Walsch (the author) puts forth a reasonable and insightful world-view.
Incidentally, I've heard from multiple sources that the book is commonly recommended by Buddhists despite what I see as a fairly Christian basis.
A very enjoyable work of fiction intertwined with a very educational review of philosophy, starting with the first known Greek philosophers and ending with more modern theories like existentialism and logical empiricism. I don't know if it's more enjoyable for the fictional part of the story or the thoroughly entertaining non-fiction/educational part.
Click on any of the books below to go straight to their "review" (newest books at the top).
Catfish and Mandala
The Twentieth Wife
Prep
Catcher in the Rye
Conversations on Conciousness
Freedom Evolves
The Light of Other Days
Utopia
Conversations with God
Sophie's World
Catfish and Mandala Andrew X. Pham 9/10 |
Something about a book writing about familiar locations seems foreign - it feels like I'm cheating, or like I'm not really reading a book but a classmate's story. Catfish & Mandala was set in very familiar locations - Carmel, Santa Cruz, Crescent City, Portland, Seattle...even Nha Trang, Vietnam. These are all places I've visited, even lived at. This intimate knowledge of the places he describes (ie his friend's house in Southeast Portland, where you can party a little longer into the night without worry) felt odd and strangely comforting. Perhaps it has influenced my outlook, but I really enjoyed this tale of a man and his journey to understand his heritage.
Catfish and Mandala. The catfish are a staple food in Vietnam, strong symbolism for what the author feels the Vietnamese do very well: survive. Not only is the catfish capable of surviving, but the catfish also provides an amazing long-term sustenance for the poor who have to find something to eat. The Mandala, on the other hand, is representative of what his journey was to him. Buddhist monks will use the creation of the mandala as a tool for concentration, slowly placing the sand over a course of weeks before destroying the entire pattern weeks later. His physically strenuous journey allowed him this level of clarity - not because he was able to think so clearly while he exercised: quite the opposite in fact. The exercise cleared his mind of thought, it became a physical meditation.
The author was strangely condemning and disrespectful of the Vietnamese - he didn't see any beauty in his "home" country, only the ugliness of poverty and a beaten people. In his Vietnam the cops are corrupt, the poor shameless, all the women temptresses vying for an opportunity to leave Vietnam to America, the "golden land of opportunity". This was not what I saw in my visit to Vietnam, but there are other things he describes that I connected with. Mostly, just the description of life. The crazy driving, the strange way that every transaction is negotiable (I could never get used to this, I hate bartering to try and get the best price), the shops lining the street...it was all familiar and accurate, it brought back memories that were somehow already buried -- it's only been a few months, and already I'm forgetting.
I recommend Catfish and Mandala to anyone with an interest in Vietnam, but it's not just a book for Vietnamese. It is about a misplaced person on a journey to find his source, trying to find out what it means to be American or Vietnamese, and it's a journey worth reading about.
The Twentieth Wife Indu Sundaresan 7.5/10 |  |
The Twentieth Wife is a bit of historical fiction detailing the life of the woman Mehrunnissa, wife of the influential Indian Emperor Jahangir. Sundaresan has taken known history of the era and woven a believable and enthralling tale of fiction that believably fills in the blanks. I could hardly put the book down once I started it: somehow the mix of realism and guesswork is irrestible inside the 300-some pages of the book.
With all these positive words of praise, how does the book only come out to a rating of 7.5? Well, it's not fair, but I grade the books not by entertainment value but by how they influence my life. This book was a wonderful story and there are lessons to be learned (both moral and historical), but all in all it was put entertainment first. What I got from the story was a history lesson, an Indian culture lesson, and a first-rate tale.
Prep Curtis Sittenfeld 8/10 |
Prep is an impressive novel. Much like Catcher in the Rye, it doesn't feel like a work of fiction. It's another book providing insight into the real world, allowing me to remember what those high-school years were like. Sittenfeld is an amazing author in her ability to present situations that beg for some kind of moral judgment with a kind of distinct objectiveness. You want to know what's right, you want to know what is to be learned from a situation, but you're forced to make your own decision.
In a certain way, the novel is depressing in that way. Not because we can't come to our own decisions about what's right, but that the protagonist can't. We're forced to live through years of poor decisions, and as such it becomes a very difficult read. It's so easy, from an older age, to look back at some of the problems and insecurities of youth dismissively...but we get no such satisfaction from our protagonist in Prep. Late into her junior year, one of her classmates attempts to come up with a particularly cutting insult. "Lee," she says, "you haven't changed at all since freshman year." The classmate is correct, and reading Prep puts you through all those years with Lee while you agonize over the poor decisions she makes over and over again.
I don't mean to focus on the poor aspects of the book. I highly recommend Prep if you enjoy books that spur thought, self-evaluation, and remind us of our not-so-perfect past. Just don't expect you'll read it and be cheered right up.
Catcher in the Rye JD Salinger 9/10 |  |
Catcher in the Rye has been reviewed and analyzed much deeper and more effectively than I plan to do in this blog. I haven't read any outside reviews (which is a bit unusual) but I want to talk about what really stood out to me about this book: a brutally believable protagonist. Salinger's "coming of age" story isn't a fable with morals and platitudes...it comes across like life comes across: ordinary. What makes this such an outstanding work of fiction is not that it transports you to another world: instead it seems to shed light on ours.
It's a reminder of what it felt like to be in that in-between stage, where you're not an adult and you're no longer a child. As a matter of fact, I'll probably recommend it to my mom: maybe she'll understand my younger brother a little better after reading it.
Conversations on Consciousness Susan Blackmore 9/10 |  |
I was very tempted to give this book a 10/10, but I just couldn't. It was a great book and perfect for me (I would say it's perfect for anyone starting out exploring popular theories on the basis of consciousness and free will) but the book had it's problems.
Conversations on Consciousness details a series of interviews between psychologist and hard determinist Susan Blackmore and a smattering of well-known experts in the fields of philosophy and neuroscience. She does well at finding a variety of scientific viewpoints: you won't find any faith-based supporters in the book, only those who attempt to use our current scientific knowledge and theories as a base from which to make their speculations.
The interviews tended to center around four questions:
1) What is consciousness? Why is it so difficult to define and to study?
2) Do you believe we have free will?
3) Do you think that the Philopher's Zombie is an actual possibility?
4) This question varied, but was related to their specific field of expertise or their most well-known theory.
I didn't understand why Blackmore felt the thought experiment of the Philosopher's Zombie was so important. The question she was trying to ask was: "Do you think conciousness arises merely because of our capacity to behave the way we do?" but using the Philosopher's Zombie thought experiment to ask this question led to more problems than it solved. Too often, the answer was a criticism of the thought experiment rather than an answer to the real question. I agree with those who criticize the experiment: I don't see a lot of value in pure speculation that, at some level, has to be scientifically ungrounded. Of course, the way we live our life is partially through pure speculation, but that is through necessity.
The best thing I got from the book was an understanding of the controversy in the fields of consciousness. Dennett, author of Freedom Evolves, somewhat represents one side of the argument. He's certainly well-known - half of those interviewed used Dennett's views as a way to state their own through contrast. Dennett does not cohesively meld his viewpoint in a way that it represents "the determinists", but his viewpoint is well-known and clearly stated, which at least gives others in the field a way to contrast, a reference point from which to deviate.
Conversations on Consciousness fostered more questions than it answered. It's a book that I've read that's only shown me that I need to read more books. It has moved some authors to near the top of the list though. David Chalmers, Roger Penrose, and Daniel Wegner (well, he was already near the top) all piqued my interest enough that I will certainly read their books to better understand their viewpoint. I identified with Penrose more than any other philosopher, and I'm interested to read more about why he believes what he does.
Freedom Evolves Daniel Dennett 8/10 |  |
This was a difficult book to evaluate. It's a philosophical exercise by Dennett - an attempt to point out the inadequacies in a number of commonly held philosophical perspectives, and a best-guess amalgamation philosophy given the body of scientific knowledge at the time of the writing. I separate the book as such because I believe Dennett's goals were only half-met. He faltered a bit in his explanation of the shortcomings of common perspectives while he very reliably and intelligently presented his own view.
Two-thirds of Dennett's book was convincing, fairly clear, and for the most part sensible and comprehensible. Unfortunately (for him) it's the latter two-thirds of the book. Getting through the initial couple chapters proved to be particularly difficult for me...quite simply, Dennett spent a lot of time trying to support determinism by using examples that were completely inadequate. In attempting to provide simple examples to prove his point he lost some of the inherent complexity that is human life. For example, Dennett uses a "game" called Conway's game of life (link). Conway's game of life shows us that in a limited plane patterns of amazing complexity can arise. Conceivably, notes Dennett, given a large enough plane we could mimic the functionality of any computer system. Naturally, this is the case: despite their apparent complexity, computer processors are simple extremely fast at processing 1s and 0s: that is, on and off. A processor simply reacts to strings of electrical current that is either on or off. The data on your hard drive is stored similarly: a byte (1/1024 of a kilobyte, which is 1/1024 of a megabyte, to gigabyte, etc) is 8 bits, and a bit is just a 0 or 1 value.
Anyway, the fact that a simple system can reach extraordinary levels of complexity does not mean it can be used comparatively with the "real-life" system. Dennett's argument is that in a fixed system everything behaves in a predictable and unchanging manner: this is a solid argument. The disconnect takes place when you try to prove that our universe is a fixed system.
Despite all my argumentation on the matter, my real opinion is that the discussion is a waste of time. Whether or not life is deterministic or indeterministic is truly unimportant, and should not have a real bearing on how we live our lives. This is Dennett's conclusion and while I don't agree entirely with the means, it is an end I can fully support.
The Light of Other Days Arthur C. Clarke, Stephen Baxter 7/10 |  |
Two Critically acclaimed sci-fi authors (Arthur C. Clarke and Stephen Baxter) cooperated to write this book. I actually picked it up on accident, intending to read a well-known short story of the same name (about something called slow-glass). I don't regret making the mistake though.
Light of Other Days is an excellent sci-fi book. It's been a while since I last read a purely fictional book, and it was a welcome escape. Well, except for the fairly depressing undertones of the book. The near future (2050, or so) is not quite a dystopia, but it's a depressing place to live. Humanity has come to terms with the fact that a moon sized asteroid is headed towards the earth, due to hit in approximately 500 years. Science sees no foreseeable method of averting what will essentially be the extinction of humanity. The effects on culture as a whole are interesting but not overdramatic - just an increased melancholy with the idea that there's no real need to attempt to progress as a race given the impending extinction.
The title of the book comes from an unrelated scientific development. A purely capitalistic (but somewhat evil) entrepreneur develops a sort of super camera - a device that can look anywhere. To put it simply, he develops a screen that allows for real time surveillance of anywhere on earth. The book is partially about the changes to society that result from what is essentially a complete lack of privacy...political changes (politicians simply can't be corrupt, no one can hide anything) and personal changes.
It's a medium length book, and if you're a fan of the genre I recommend it.
Spoiler (highlight to see)
The book ends on an interesting note. Technological developments from the WormCam (the name of the device that allows you to watch anything) expand to allow us to watch the past (and therefore debunk a number of historical and religious myths). Anyway, the epilogue proposes what I thought to be an interesting idea...if all we humans are is our body, then eternal life is certainly possible. If everything that makes us who we are is physical, then the technology could potentially exist to recreate us exactly as is. The book ends with the main character being woken up some 150 years later, and finds out humanity has started a quest to right it's wrongs...by bringing every human being back to life. Interesting idea.
Utopia Thomar More 8/10 |  |
Thomas More's Utopia is a well-known work describing a communist utopia. More lived in the Middle Ages (17th century, I believe) and was executed in his thirties for refusing to bless the king's divorce and subsequent remarriage (he was an adviser of some sort for the king). I think knowing a little about More can help one understand the book - More loved humor. He joked about everything, and was even accused by a friend of putting forth everything he said in a joking manner...as a sort of safety net so that he could always retract the statement, saying it was merely made in jest. Utopia itself seems to be an example of this practice - the book seems to purvey itself as serious, but upon closer inspection might just be mocking anyone who could believe in a successful communist society. His Utopia is anything but.
Conversations with God Neale Donald Walsch 8/10 |  |
Considering how highly I've rated this book, it was startlingly difficult to start. Reading through the first 40-50 pages without just throwing the book down in disgust took a strange kind of persistence. You see, the basis of the book is that the author is having a direct conversation with God (who seems most similar to a Christian God). It's not supposed to be fictional, and I'm confident the author would argue that the experience was "real". I find it much more likely that the author tapped into part of the vast internal knowledge we all have...because, whether or not he spoke with God, the book is impressive. Walsch (the author) puts forth a reasonable and insightful world-view.
Incidentally, I've heard from multiple sources that the book is commonly recommended by Buddhists despite what I see as a fairly Christian basis.
Sophie's World Jostein Gardner 9/10 |  |
A very enjoyable work of fiction intertwined with a very educational review of philosophy, starting with the first known Greek philosophers and ending with more modern theories like existentialism and logical empiricism. I don't know if it's more enjoyable for the fictional part of the story or the thoroughly entertaining non-fiction/educational part.
Friday, February 02, 2007
Short: Global Warming
BBC Article:
Humans are "very likely" the cause of global climate change
In short, the International Panel on Climate Change states that there is a 90% chance that human activity has been influential in recent changes in climate.
Humans are "very likely" the cause of global climate change
In short, the International Panel on Climate Change states that there is a 90% chance that human activity has been influential in recent changes in climate.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
