Midterm!

4. What is your real name?
5. What is your "user" name?
6. What is your email address that you use for this class?
7. Name and address for your website
8. Have you done all the reading for the first three weeks? Yes, but not as thoroughly as I would have liked. There was a lot of information and a limited time to read it all but I was able to at least make it through all of the assignments. I even started (and enjoyed) Stoicism Lite and will probably attempt to complete it and the other recommended readings after my brain recovers from this class.
9. Have you watched each of the films that were required? Yes
10. Please place here all of the postings you have done for thisclass (you can copy and paste them)
11. Why does Lisa Randall believe that there may be many moredimensions than we presently know in current physics? Is there anyevidence at this stage for her beliefs?
The fact that gravity is so weak as if it has spread itself thin leads Lisa Randall to believe in the possibility of multiple dimensions. It’s as if we are getting the tail end of gravity. Even if there is not yet any definitive evidence for this theory, it would answer a lot of questions. Could gravity be concentrated somewhere else (on another dimension)? – maybe that is why we consider gravity so weak. It seems that science is beginning to show that we have been thinking about space wrong and that one possible solution/reason is that we have just (since the 1970’s) taken into consideration the possibility of multiple dimensions. The physics community is currently working on the implementation of a high energy accelerator that could possibly change the mass of a particle as it travels through an extra dimension. Just reaching this energy level could answer a lot of questions and reveal new information into the understanding of the nature of space and time.
12. What are Pythagoras' philosophical views in a nutshell?
Pythagoras sought to inspire a love of liberty and stressed the importance of ridding the body of disease, the soul of ignorance, the city from lawlessness, households from discord and opposed a lack of moderation all together. He believed that children should honor their parents and that adults should practice courtesy and encouragement in dealing with youths. He instructed that self-control/temperance should be applied universally to all matters of body and soul. He stressed the importance of education and knowledge in order to effect the improvement of the human race noting that knowledge of the universals leads to a clear perception of the nature of the particulars. He preached justice, genuine affection, the importance of listening, devotion to contemplation as well as the importance of a well-developed memory. The three evils that glide into houses are luxury followed by insolence and finally destruction, therefore great care should be taken to keep these at bay; including but not limited to, living modestly from birth and not using bad language. He believed that we should realize God’s existence and the fact that he inspects our lives frequently. He opposed slaughtering animals feeling that it led to war, legalizing it, increasing it and strengthening it. “Natural man is an animal, naturally insolent and changeable in impulse, desire and passions.”
13. Do you think science and religion are compatible? Be sure toexplain your answer by GIVINGTHE EXPLANATIONS given by philosophers who side with your positionfrom the Socratic Universe (cite and quote whenappropriate).
I believe they are two separate subjects, not compatible but not necessarily conflicting in nature. Both serve an important role in society; science as a means of describing the way the universe is, based on methodical observation and testing, and religion attempting to “engage in moral questions; to find basic principles on which answers can be given to new moral problems” (Churchland). I agree with Woodruff and Churchland in their view that religion attempted to explain things before science was available to do so. I think the conflict came into play when science started disproving a lot of things that religions claimed to already have the answers to. If we are speaking of religion in terms of God, the after life and the way we should live our lives then there should be no conflict as these topics are generally not discussed in scientific matters. If we are discussing creation versus evolution then opposing theories of course, come into play.
14. Why was Socrates put on trial? How did Socrates defend hisposition?
Socrates was accused of being a corruptor of the youth and not believing in the Gods of the state. His defense was of course to question the nature of the charges. As for being a corruptor of the youth, he wondered whether he was being accused of intentionally corrupting them or unintentionally. He asked Meletus, who instructed and improved the youth and who was capable of such (apparently every Athenian but Socrates!) and then posed the same question regarding horses, to which Meletus had no response. Socrates asserts that if he does not care enough about the Athenian youth to have given thought to who might improve them then he does not have the right to accuse him of being their corruptor.
As for the charge of not believing in the gods of the state, Socrates questioned Meletus as to whether he felt he believed in false gods or in no god and Meletus positively stated Socrates was an atheist. Socrates does not specifically deny the charge of atheism but instead attacks Meletus for his inconsistency, stating that the charge against him was believing in other gods, not believing in no gods.
15. Give a brief history of philosophy using just 300 words (nomore). You may use an outline format, but be sure tocram as many "factoids" (facts) as possible (key names, ideas,dates, etc.). Remember, it must beyour own words and not merely a series of quotes.
Ancient philosophy (600 b.c.e – 400 c.e.) covered themes such as understanding the causes and principles of the universe; numbers, elements, universals and gods; the analysis of reasoning and argument; the role that understanding and knowledge play in the pursuit of a good life; justice and politics. Recognizable philosophers were Socrates, Plato, Aristotle and post Aristotlian (Hellenistic) ideas.
The Hellinistic thinking continued developing through the beginnings of Medieval Philosophy (c.400 – c.1400) or The Middle Ages. This time period was defined by a need to “address theological problems and integrate sacred doctrine with secular learning” (Wikipedia) – the involvement of the church in state affairs. Issues discussed by philosophers of this era included faith and reason, God and theology, metaphysics, knowledge, universals and individuation. Known thinkers of this time period included Thomas Aquinas, William of Ockham, Anselm, and Abelard.
Early Modern Philosophy (c.1600-c.1800) brought about the revival of skepticism and the rise of modern physical science. Themes included experience vs. reality, the origin of knowledge, the mind’s relationship to the body, free will and God, and the beginning of secular morals and philosophy. Philosophers of this time included Bacon, Hobbes, Locke, Descartes, Spinoza and Kant.
The nineteenth century brought Pierce and James’ pragmatism, Husserl’s phenomenology, Kierkegaard and Nietzsche’s existentialism and early analytic philosophy thanks to Frege and Sidwick’s work. During this time, philosophers viewed the world as a rational, mind-like process that could be known in its entirety.
Today’s philosophers tend to spend more time explaining the relationship between natural science theories and common sense, psychology, cognitive science and analytic philosophy- the notion that philosophical problems should be solved through logic and language. Contemporary Philosophy spans from the turn of the 20th century to present day.
16. Explain the big bang and the inflationary universe. Why is itimportant to know astronomy in order to dophilosophy?
Inflation answers several questions or problems with The Big Bang theory. The Big Bang is the idea that the universe had a definite initial condition that was hot and dense and then a ‘big bang’ caused it to begin expanding, possibly infinitely. The continuing expansion is known as inflation. The problems in the big bang theory come from the way the universe looks today, decidedly homogenous and isotropic. In order for the universe to have ended up this way, it would have had to start from very special initial conditions at the time of the bang. Inflation attempts to resolve these problems by providing the model of how the world would have had to be then in order for it to look how it does now.
Why is the study of nature on the grand scale important to the study of philosophy? Astronomy is a belief system based in knowledge that attempts to answer philosophical questions in a scientific context. Philosophers study the universe through contemplation and reasoning. Astronomy gives them the Reason behind the reasoning. Both sides can work together asking and attempting to substantiate questions regarding the infinite, existence of anything before the bang; why did it bang? How did the universe come into existence in the first place, and essentially, attempt to eventually discover why we are the product of that universal environment and what could our purpose be and is it possible that if we are not as unique as we thought we were could there be other similar life forms somewhere in the universe since we are all basically made up of the same stuff? The questions and the possibilities are almost as infinite as the universe itself.
17. How do Heisenberg's views on philosophy and science DIFFER fromEinstein's? How are they similar?
Heisenberg formulated the Uncertainty Principle based on the idea that uncertainty is actually a property of the world. He stated that it is not possible to measure the position and the momentum of a particle more precisely than through quantum mechanics. He believed that there were limits to what we could know about subatomic particles and that this was a deep surprising aspect of the universe. In contrast, Einstein was bothered by the fact that atoms seemed to emit photons at random when their electrons changed orbits. He believed that the randomness was a reflection of our ignorance and was unhappy with Heisenberg’s Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Theory. Their views were similar regarding the new model of the atom and Einstein’s principles of quantum theory, that light behaves as if it is composed of photons. However, Einstein concluded that quantum theory (his own discovery) was an intrinsically incomplete description of nature. He resisted the philosophical implications of quantum theory because it put man’s current understanding before the world itself. He could not accept that quantum mechanics presented the limits of what could ever be known.
18. What is meme theory and do you find it plausible? Explain your reasoning.
Meme theory is Dawkins theory that the brain consists of memes or units of information that are analogous to genes as mutating replicators in human cultural evolution. Language, fashion, diet, ceremonies and customs, art and architecture, engineering and technology, are all memes within the brain evolving in a rapid, non-genetic sense. Dawkins theorizes that all life evolves by the “differential survival of replicating entities” and that currently the replicator of choice is the gene but it is not necessarily the only replicator. In fact, the “old” gene selected evolution, according to Dawkins, made the brains what they are today, providing the “soup” in which the first memes arose. By contributing to the worlds culture we create memes that could outlast our genes, thus making us somewhat immortal.
I believe the idea is plausible, I would not necessarily call it evolution, as I tend to (closed-mindedly) regard evolution as biological changes, I would consider it to be more of a sociological observation of culture and the effect it has on the human species.
19. Why is understanding biological evolution so important inunderstanding human thought and behavior. Be sureto cite Wilson and Dawkins and Darwin when appropriate.
Scientists are struggling to find the relationship between biological and cultural evolution but by examining biological evolution we are given the potential framework for understanding human behavior. If we can understand biological evolution we can begin to see the ways that we evolve as adaptive to our environment. Edward O. Wilson applies evolutionary theory to social behavior through sociobiology, asserting that “many social behaviors have been shaped by natural selection for reproductive success.” Wilson and Dawkins both claim that evolution does not regard just genes and bodies but also psychological, social and cultural features. Sociobiologists attempt to trace evolutionary histories of certain behavior in terms of their functional roles in a society.
20. In one of the films you were required to see, the narratorargued that fundamentalism was a mental disease. Why?Do you agree or disagree and please detail your rejoinder.
Jeffrey Cooper argues that fundamentalism is a mental disease because a knowledge of the true age of the earth and the fossil record makes it impossible for any balanced intellect to believe the literal truth or every part of the Bible in the way that fundamentalists do. The idea of intelligent design is Christianity’s attempt at sticking God back into science because evolution is such a devastating critique of Genesis. I agree that it takes a great leap of faith and blind acceptance of stories not backed by any factual evidence to believe in Creationism. Even if one cannot accept the scientific data that supports evolution, to completely deny the irrationality of the Creation story is silly. One can believe in God and Evolution simultaneously.
21. Where do you think Owen Gingerich "parts company" (fundamentallydisagrees with) Edward O. Wilson? Who do youthink is more persuasive in their reasoning about religion, Owen orEdward? Explain.
Unfortunately I could not decipher what the term “parts company” referred to in watching (and re-watching!) Owen Gingerich’s interview or in either of E.O. Wilson’s interviews. Therefore, I will merely attempt to discuss the fundamental differences between the two scientists and their beliefs. Wilson believes that there is only matter and energy, however he feels that we must attempt to find a common ground between conservative Christianity and science. All of us, Christians and otherwise, need to bring our focus back to nature in the interest of saving the earth from disastrous ecological changes. He urges a new kind of morality, a universal “cooperation” that is necessary to save the earth. Gingerich focuses on attempting to outline a necessary inherent compatibility between science and religion. He hopes that increased scientific understanding will reveal more about God, the Creator. Gingerich’s proposal seems to require time to reach a level of scientific evidence supporting God’s existence while Wilson purports that there is No time and we need to stop worrying about whether or not God is involved in this business at all and focus on the return to stewardship of the earth, an ideal that we should all be able to agree is important for the propagation of the species and the salvation of the world as we know it.
I love E.O. Wilson’s approach to religion and the fact that he urges us to set aside our trivial differences, the distractions that keep us from focusing on the compelling issues that affect all of us, and form an alliance in order to actually devise solutions and bring attention to matters that are not religious in nature, but human in nature. There are a number of issues that should not be avoided merely because of different beliefs, they are issues that the human race as a whole, is hoping to find resolutions to, and if we team up we may be able to make changes happen in ways that we are unable to do independently. I think Owen Gingerich bases a lot of his religious arguments on ‘gut reaction’ (as most of religion does) and avoids giving specific answers to troubling religious questions in scientific terms, opting instead to “leave that to the theologians.” 22. What does Francis Fukuyama mean by the "end of history." Do youagree or disagree? Explain.
Francis Fukuyama claims that due to the evolution of institutions highly compatible with human nature and the existence of super powers that would not dare to compromise their positions, history appears to be reaching its end. Upon reaching the end of history, Fukuyama says life would be sedate and stable, continuing to progress toward morality. He later seems to contradict himself when he revises his idea, theorizing that two things would come into play regarding an end of history; human nature as well as the end of science (since science is constantly changing the environment that people have to adapt to). Fukuyama says an end of science would mean the end of history but that we are nowhere near the end of science, especially with the recent advancements of biotechnology. I agree in the sense that the world seems to be nearing a period of calm comparative to recent (and not so recent) history but I disagree that we are nearing an end. I can appreciate Fukuyama’s analysis that if there was a definite beginning to history, there must also be a definite end but as long as there is life on this planet, I believe there will always be some history. There seems to be somewhat of a lull in advancement, maybe Fukuyama feels, in some sense that we have come as far as we can and progress will forever be slowed to this snails pace if there is nothing new and exciting to discover. But all it would take is one revolutionary breakthrough to open a whole new chapter in the realm of science and consequently, in the realm of history.
23. Explain Nicholas of Cusa's philosophy of "unknowingness."
Nicholas of Cusa’s philosophy speaks about “learned ignorance” or learning to accept the fact that we do not know. Even a highly educated man will at his highest see himself as the most educated in his specific field of ignorance. The more he is unknowing, the more learned he will be. This is partly because things are difficult and unexplainable in words and that the wisdom and the seat of understanding are hidden from the eyes of the living. Nicholas tells us the most obvious things in nature are as difficult for us to see as an owl trying to look at the sun.
24. According to Nietzsche, how did we actually "kill" God? Thinkbefore you leap on this one.
In the film, God’s Funeral, Nietzsche offers the idea that God is dead, that we have killed him. Under our knives (possibly the dissection of ideas relating to religion and God) we have killed Him; We are no longer able to believe in the idea of religion and God as a source for our moral code and higher purpose. It no longer serves as a satisfactory belief system and therefore poses a threat to our existing morals and values. Before reaching “critical mass” morality had not been considered on its own without the basis of Christianity and God and eternal damnation. Upon accepting the news that God is Dead we are challenged to develop and maintain a system of values even without divine order.
25. In the movie, Little Things that Jiggle, physics is explained bya series of slogans. Why, then, is physicsimportant in the study of philosophy? Substantiate your answer.
Physics is important in the study of philosophy because it asks many of the questions that scientists and philosophers alike have pondered since the beginning of time. Sir Isaac Newton answered one great riddle of the world by discovering what holds the worlds in their places. Other questions, such as the nature of time and space and the state of the universe have been assessed from a philosophical standpoint for centuries and now, breakthroughs is physics can begin to provide new answers and new levels of understanding in both the scientific and philosophical communities.
26. How do you explain the following line, "To have freedom OFreligion one must also have freedom FROM religion."
Freedom of Religion is our right, outlined in the Constitution of the United States, as the freedom of an individual or community to manifest religious beliefs in teaching, practice, worship and observance. However, freedom of religion has to protect both, the right to be religious and the right to not be religious at all. Freedom from religion enforces the idea that church and state should be separate entities and that religion should never be endorsed or sponsored by the government. It means being free from following the rules and dogmas of other people’s religions and beliefs and having the ability to follow the beliefs of our own conscience, whether or not those beliefs are religious.
27. Why does Dawkins believe that believing in God is delusional?
Dawkins believes that the idea of God is very old in nature and provides people with a “superficially plausible answer to deep troubling questions about existence.” Acting as a placebo (and just as effective!), otherwise intelligent people will cast aside common sense in the name of blind faith. A delusion, by definition is a fixed, false belief that is resistant to reason or confrontation with actual fact. Dawkins, like Nietzsche, believes that religion is not necessary for a person to live a good, moral life. He concludes that God exists, “if only in the form of a meme with high survival value or infective power in human culture.”
28. Can science offer a sense of mystery comparable to what certainreligions offer?
Definitely. The unanswered questions in the universe involving physics, cosmology and the biological relationship to human consciousness provide ample mystery for the mind to contemplate. As posed in The Hitchhiker’s Guide To The Galaxy, “isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?" In early history, religion provided the only means of answering the mysteries of the universe, but through scientific discovery and speculation, religion and the idea of God merely inject mythology and mysticism into otherwise scientifically plausible grounds for explanation. The questions left unanswered by science are still mysterious in nature but do not require the fundamentalist blind faith of religion to create an explanation, rather, educated contemplation and experimentation is more likely to bring us closer to the truth.
29. How does an understanding of celluar automata suggest a "newkind of science".... according to Stephen Wolfram.
Cellular automata can be related to seemingly random occurrences in nature such as in patterns on mollusk shells, snowflakes and the shapes of leaves. Wolfram uses simple computations to generate complex computer models. This “new kind of science” urges people to abandon traditional mathematical rules and embrace the fact that some things are neither completely random nor completely repetitive. Incredibly simple rules can bring about incredibly complicated behavior. However, complex behavior can still be simplified by following certain rules. Wolfram has added to the knowledge of how patterns create the world which we experience. This new science might provide alternatives to evolution by explaining how different forms of life came about. Wolfram believes his work is transforming the study of physics and biology, and science in general.
30. What were the key turning points in Darwin's life?
Darwin’s friendship with Professor Henslow influenced his career more than any other circumstance. He knew every branch of science and introduced him to other academic superiors who fueled his love for science.
Reading Humboldt’s “Personal Narrative” and Sir J. Herschel’s “Introduction to the Study Of Natural Science” during his last year at Cambridge stirred up Darwin’s desire to add even a small contribution to the structure of Natural Science.
By far the most important event in Darwin’s life, and one which determined his whole career, was The Voyage of The Beagle. He believes he owes to the voyage the first real training or education of his mind, being that he was led to attend closely to several branches of natural history and able to develop and improve his powers of observation.
Darwin considers all the books which he published to be the milestones in his life.
EXTRA CREDIT: make your own 3 minute movie on meme theory and postit on google.com VIDEO. Be sure to provide me with a link. I would have but I couldn’t learn how to make the video in time!
DOUBLE EXTRA CREDIT: Take your favorite movie that you saw listed onthe syllabus and give your own interpretation of its meaning (200words minimum).
The Truth Lies to us because it is necessary for our survival. We are incapable of handling the truth; that the universe is ultimately devoid of purpose. We cannot live without a purpose, so we created a purpose, an adaptive fiction evolved over time - because believing nonsense is easier than coming to grips with the randomness of the universe. Any meaning is better than no meaning at all. The notion of god had to come about in order for us to survive. We did not evolve to understand the universe, instead we evolved to survive the world around us – the weather, the land, the food; long enough to reproduce.
Religion itself has evolved over time to suit the needs of an orderly society. Assigning purpose to a chaotic state. Existence precedes essence. First we are here, and then we make our purpose. The stars have been arranged in such a way that we envisioned the constellations and their surrounding stories, from which came mythology and then religion, giving us a direction and a purpose where there wasn’t one before. The constellations, the sun, the moon… Stories created around each one designed to assign a purpose to man. Man will always invent a purpose and go to all lengths to reinforce that purpose in his mind and in his life.