Politics, Philosophy and Culture

Politics, Philosophy and Culture



Asian of the river presenters that are here and raring to go you all have it we'll have a program so you can tell what they're doing so all that they've introduced themselves Fred I'm Bradford CO and jr. by a psychology major and this paper I'm attempting to explore the intersection between velocity and science specifically biology we're going to look at Charles Darwin's work The Descent of Man in relation to sex in the context of a couple of that happened in his life in addition to his interest in Aristotelian Texas so Charles Darwin's deceptive man and selection in relation to sex seeks to provide answers to questions that were the forefront of scientific thought Victorian England some of the questions Darwin and his contemporaries attempt to answer particularly questions about human origins are shrouded and popular ignorance and religious doctrine to this day and at the time there was a spoon especially difficult to study these questions and really just sort of rounded off even in the scientific community a passage from the introduction to the scent of man captured our response to attitudes about the limits of scientific thought it reads it is often and confidently been asserted that man's origin can never beat them but ignorant more frequently to get against confidence that does knowledge it is those who know little and not those pretty much who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science as a man who knew much Darwin draws from myriad basis of knowledge including Aristotle's rhetoric on politics interactions with presidents of Tierra del Fuego in South America pre-decided in Edinburgh and the biological concept of men agreed to investigate questions some thought had no answer for most the origin of man Darwyn draws from Aristotle's rhetoric when he constructs fitness as a combination of traits that are both recognized as beautiful and fear-inspiring and when we talk about fitness I mean in the biological context so your evolutionary fitness in the rhetoric Aristotle says it's a matter of having a body a fit for the race course and ordeals of strength pleasant to look at for sheer delight because at the same time you're equipped by a nature that wouldn't one in the same time for acts of war acts of brawn and acts of speed and when someone isn't in his prime he should be adapted to the toils of war and should be thought of as beautiful and both inspiring dr. Jason Tipton a philosopher of science at st. John's University is correct note then that Darwin's construction and fitness particularly for males and the species is strikingly reminiscent of this passage of Arizona it should come as no surprise to us then that in 1882 a letter to a translator of aristotelian works named William ogle oddly enough darwin quips Linnaeus and Cuvier have been two of my gods though in very different ways but they were mere schoolboys to hold a Aristotle given Darwin's admiration of Aristotle's no strategists are that the above passage from rhetoric kind of direct influence on Darwin's ideas Darwin's foundation for sexual selection is based on two concepts the first one is females discriminating males based on particular qualities ie beauty and male competition which Darwin dubs the law of battle ie war and from these two mechanisms of sexual selection identified by Darwin the modern concepts of interest sexual and intersexual selection persist to this day the idea of sexual selection resulted from Darwin's own confusion as to why organisms such as peacock would develop plumage that seems to be more of a hindrance survival this is novel idea a descent of man that such adaptations might have a reproductive advantage provided a new lens through which to be you such apparently non adaptive features distinct from other scientists at the time such as Alfred Wallace we thought sexual selection was unnecessary for understanding the evolution of dimorphic for sexual dive market characters that is differences between males and females of a species Darwin was adamant that sexual selection is the principal basis of differential traits between men and women races isolated human populations he thought would have their own valued aesthetic traits and characteristics which would elicit distinct phenotypes over generations of made choice and result in distinct races of people one study by dr. Jay Burnham Davis in this data has kind of been refuted and since then but at the time it was kind of at the forefront of science this some of J dr. J Bernhard status his research influenced Darwin would have found that the internal Mane capacity of the skull in Europeans as 92 three cubic inches and in America Native Americans and Asians and Australians it was smaller down in the 80s of cubic inches and despite using such data to support the claim that in an intimate relationship exists between brain size and intelligence Darwin shop stopped short of his contemporaries and said in contemporary like Wallace and Hegel to argue that despite race is being very distinct in other ways mainly physical ways as it would appear there's no mental Dunda mental difference in their mental faculties so this assertion counters the polygenesis hypothesis about the emergence of races that permeate permeated scientific thought at the time so the polygenesis hypothesis is just that there are multiple ancestors from which two distinct races descended and Darwin is saying that's just not the case this assertion that he's making is heaven formed by a couple of experiences he had throughout his career and the first one is with three natives specifically who he interacted with when he was on the Beagle voyage in Tierra del Fuego in South America he said that he was constantly struck by the mental similarities between the Flavians and the Europeans in a later chapter he remarks that all races agreed so many unimportant details of structure and in so many mental peculiarities that they can only be accounted for only through inheritance from a common progenitor and it was a progenitor thus characterized that would have probably deserved a rank as man so to rank his man Darwin observes a requirement is speech again he's borrowing from Aristotle to build upon an idea that nature which he says does nothing in vain has equipped man with speech making man distinct from other animals he also notes so this definition is more complete that he he met with a freed slave who came from South America he wasn't actually the first people what it was like living in the tropics and living in South America it was actually one of the people who inspired Darwin to take the voyage on the Beagle which is something I didn't know so this this freed slave was a taxidermist in Edinburgh he actually taught Darwin how to do taxidermy so when he went on this expedition he had the skills he needed to bring back a specimens to Europe but this taxidermist was someone the Darwin was really close with and he was again sort of astounded that such interactions with non Europeans could be so similar to his interactions with Europeans so this made him think that there was a strong and probability of such resemblances and intellect being independently acquired by Aboriginal a distinct species or races accordingly he posits these common traits must have been inherited our genders who are thus characterized so these are sketches of some of the people he interacted with in Tierra del Fuego and while these images are problematic for obvious reasons I thought they would be useful for this presentation and then this is a drawing that was done by one of Darwin's contemporaries of him working in a taxidermy lab with John Edmund stone it was the great slave who taught him how to do taxidermy so accordingly he posits that these traits must come from the same progenitor and this line of logic supports his monogenesis hypothesis that everyone came from a common ancestor which is in accord with his ideas about evolution that he has previously positive so the the mono genesis of hypothesis began to take root around the time the published ascent of man and quickly gained scientific importance any attention core areas and despite Darwin's thought that symbolic language is something that distinguishes man from other animals he recognizes that language shows its origin the imitation and modification of various natural sounds so the voices of other animals man's own distinctive cries aided by science and gestures so these instinctive cries would be like out of fear or shock so he's not saying that we read because we have speech and we didn't learn it from anything else he's saying we imitated our environment and learned to make sounds that way so mimesis or mimicry then is the basis to which language as a human faculty owes it it was its derivation and this was a pretty radical idea time because at the time of application of dissident man mimicry was a fairly novel idea biology was only introduced about a decade earlier by Henry Walter Bates upon his publication of research on dysmorphia butterflies so it's interesting that only after a decade of mimicry being somewhat of a subject that's to the community that Darwin is willing to hinge basically his entire argument about the distinction of man on this idea that man's the majority of work done by man is not due to reason but is in fact due to imitation reason or perhaps lack thereof is the foundation of Darwin's critique of civilized society with savages he says the weakened body and mine are soon eliminated and those that survive commonly exhibited a vigorous state of health because they're the ones who've survived the checks of nature we civilized man on the other hand he says do our utmost to check the process of elimination here he's contributing to the doctrine of eugenics essentially and also the eventual social Darwinists thought that kind of stemmed from some of his ideas that he formulated in this text and others he's arguing that the weak members of civilized societies propagate their kind and he said no one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injury man obviously that statement is a loaded statement for a variety of reasons but I thought I would include it he attributed civilized societies treatment of the week to the noblest of sentiments which sympathy and he says this cannot be checked even at the urging of hard reason it's not making sure the policy is a mandatory sterilization no Darwin is suggesting that the weaker and inferior members of society should just not marry as freely as the sound and he said this isn't something we can force he says because there's something more to be hoped for than expected drawing from Aristotelian Texas personal interactions with people who are unlike him and novel biological ideas Darwin was able to synthesize a treatise on human kind geneq origin in accord with his ideas of sexual selection with respect to competition and made choice mimesis and a critique of social safety nets darwin develops his ideas then like a true student of the liberal arts he didn't see himself as just a scientist he saw himself as someone who was absorbing what was around him and trying to make something of it so in laying out his ideas he laid out the foundation for future animal behavior research phylogeny sexual selection and mimicry and he poses provocative questions and provides compelling explanations of them that hit at the very heart of human nature and origin [Applause] hi I'm Margaret Lake and I know that your program size Dostoevsky and divine command theory but unfortunately this paper kind of took on a life of its own and that's no longer what I'm speaking on although I am speaking on don't ask don't but this paper was born out of my age summation in my ethics class I have the supreme fascination with how to live the best life that is a philosophical question and I'm also taking out essentials in the same time so this is my take on existentialism to the ancient philosopher Aristotle happiness the whites goal the good life was one of happiness and virtue Western philosophy built itself around this idea of the pursuit of the good life and many a philosopher debated with Aristotle over happiness in virtue even among the existentialist the harsh critics of Western philosophy happiness and life essential I plan today to talk about two of those existentialist Albert Camus and Fyodor Dostoevsky in the work of a bear can move happiness plays a central role as Khemu States one does not discover the absurd without being tempted to write a manual of happiness kimu demands that the imagined is absurd hero Sisyphus is happy despite Sisyphus eternal suffering however Fyodor Dostoyevsky demands no such thing of our understanding of the underground man in notes from the underground this paper seeks to compare the happiness of Kenda's hero and unrelenting suffering of Dostoevsky protagonist this paper will examine and analyze Camus work the myth of Sisyphus as well as Dostoyevsky's go to the underground of noting the differences in each character's search for meaning and significance and its impact on their happiness on page 8 of notes from the underground the underground man States wasn't closely way to you the pleasure here late precisely in the two vivid consciousness of one's own humiliation in feeling that one have each reach the ultimate wall that that is that is bad as it is it cannot be otherwise that there is no way out for you that you will never change into a different person even if you had enough time and faith what to change yourself into something different you probably would not wish to change and even if you did which it you would still not do anything because in fact there is perhaps nothing to change it to and cheaply and finally all this occurs according to their normal and basic laws of heightened consciousness and the inertia that follows directly from these laws and consequently there is not only nothing you can do to change yourself but there are simply nothing to do at all so it turns out as a result of heightened consciousness right your schedule as if it were our consolation for the scheduled himself to tell that he is indeed as naturally this description that the UN gets is a description of the absurd and we see these same elements in cam news explanation of Sisyphus most you probably know the basics of the story of Sisyphus the Greek mythological character who would stand by the gods to rule a boulder up the hill up a hill only to have the boulder go back down again Camus interpret this abyss an absurd heroes they existed has possessed the sport of the gods hatred of death and passion for life which won him that unspeakable penalty which the old witch which one I'm going to speak in which the whole fee is exerted for its exerted toward accomplishing good kemu gives a detailed description of Sisyphus push of the rock up the hill making a clear point of system is input input of significant effort only to discover it in significance when the rock rolls back down the hill once again for Sisyphus there is no way out his situation will never change that as it is it cannot be otherwise Kim Yuna strives to save face of Sisyphus as he returns to the bottom of the hill as stoic and stone kendo highlights Sisyphus descent as the moment of saddam's consciousness the source of this contest is being Sisyphus acknowledgement and understanding utility since miss possesses the two bitches vivid consciousness of abomination Camille argues that in being conscious Sisyphus is superior to his fate and superior to the dots of Danton Kim who points out that the everyday man participates in task as similarly as futile and hopeless assists this task but can mistakes lucidity that was to constitute his torture at the same time Francis victory powder Kenya does not wish for his audience to view Sisyphus fate as solely a plant of strategy Khemu explains that while Sisyphus descent may first be a somber one the heartache and anguish eventually yields happiness as its weight it's too much to hold but camber elaborates the struggle itself for the heights is enough to fill a man's heart thus a teleological end is not the human fulfillment that the acceptance of the futility of any attempt to reach the to be illogical and is the human condition we as humans demands be felt by a universe that feels nothing but when we accept this fate as paradoxical reality we find ourselves happy because our heart recognizes the effort is simply an effort not an achievement the heart can finally want what it has and release the heartbreaking hope that Hartman says this is why of Sisyphus is happening accepting that there is no other faith grant Sisyphus to space Sisyphus wants what he has Khemu says the absurd man's as guests and his effort hints for to be unceasing since if it says yes to his fate and in doing some he does not change his fate but instead he owns his fate he owns the gods he is not tormented he is not that he is happy thus the underground man understands the absurdity which Sisyphus faces and genuine would in fact agree that Dostoevsky does in fact understand absurd in a section of the myth of Sisyphus entitled absurd creation Camus analyzes cure law a character from Dostoyevsky's the possessed and through his analysis came to construct our Dostoyevsky as an artist due to God's a speech recognition of the absurd however can news analysis focuses on Dostoyevsky's understanding of suicide rather than his understanding happiness but if Dostoyevsky is an understand artist who understands the absurdist camu does shouldn't be in kambou paint the same picture of happiness yet if you look at the underground man he does not express happiness notes from the underground is his conscious reflection it is it is his stone face stare as the builder rushes down the hill yet he does not arrive at happiness the underground man rolls his Boulder only rolls his boulder up his hills only so that it being crushed him on his way down what is the underground man missing however before we address this question we must further examine the LifeCam who believes much to leave as previously mentioned Khemu defines the absurd as the struggle between human need for satisfaction of the rational demand for meaning in the universe which remains devoid of such meaning important to understand is Kam news alignment of meaning and significance to Camus the two are one in the same in his explanation of absurd falls cam who discusses the moments after a man recognizes the absurd strange discrete set perceiving the world is done stick to what degree a stone is born and irreducible to us with what intensity nature or a landscape can negate us this creeping strangeness of which Kim who speaks as an element of the absurd and these foreign and irreducible stones are what we cannot possibly grasp but demand to hold in our hands the intensity of our negation by nature or landscape is due to our insignificance in in the face of the universe the world is dead we are just small K moving continues at the heart of all beauty lies something inhuman and these hills the softness of the sky the outline of these trees at this very minute it was the illusory meeting with which we had clothed them henceforth more remote than a lost paradise does not only are we small but we cannot be recognized by the universe nor can we recognize ourselves in the universe we have no significance thus one would think we lose the illusory significance we enclosed our world in but the kambou we lose meaning instead which would suggest that he aligns the two as one in the same so from this notion that the universe lacks meaning or significance yet the human experience demanded it's chemists rates the best life is one loop but yet they kept on painting the absurd mine not so much expect ethical rules at the end of its reasoning as rather illustrations and the breath of human lives Timo's ethic of quantity is one in which a person is first conscious of the absurd and the second accumulates human experience we see this in all three of the examples Camden gives the seducer the dramatist the Conqueror each one accepts that be is insignificant and instead of buying for significance each one simply tries to accumulate experience lives and people the three lives by the ethic of quantity and that's the only thing that matters is how many lives they can live we see the same in Sisyphus a system is effort to hold a boulder up the hill cannot be significant but he can accumulate numerous experiences of rolling a boulder about the hill therefore distinction here arises between dose cfc's underground man and cameo Sisyphus which is that the underground man tells his tip tells the tale of his numerous attempts to be significant within a group above the wet snow the second section of das tips work I don't know the wet snow Denver's race from the first section of notice we undergone simply entitled notes and that apropos is a narrative whereas notes is a rant and criticism of Western ideas and ideals the tailed hole of a Navajo of the wet snow begins with the underground man's pursuit of a bite the underground man attends to fight with an officer in a tavern after witnessing another fight in which a man is thrown in a window in order to do so the underground minute blocks the way of the officer but the officer wordlessly moves the underground man as if he were no more than a chair and then passes the underground man seeks a fight so that he might force so much music existence a significant amour B of reaction but instead the officer treats him as if he is inanimate the end of our man states I could be I could even have forgiven of beating but I simply could not forgive this moving me and in the end just not noticing me the underground man yearns for significance yet he is confronted with stones in his own insignificance he is confronted with the absurd rather than live within the absurd and accept the officers designation as in significance the underground man is consumed by plans of revenge on the officer he wishes to change the space the underground man commonly encountered this same officer on a bridge which both stroll through frequently and each time the underground man passes the officer the underground mints works out this way and actually which the underground man feels deeply ashamed as this action Museum Gurgaon man still feeling as if his existence is insignificant after these two years after two years of these interactions the underground man makes a plan not just for by the officers wait for the to walk by each other after a moment of cowardice the underground man finally bumps his shoulder into the officers shoulder to no avail no reaction no incident or recognition no significance later the underground man reunites with a former classmate at a seminar and invites himself to his dinner which seminar was planning for classmate in a circle hooman whom when in school together the underground man had loathed at Circo possess great popularity monetary wealth handsomeness and boasted about all three as a successful officer the army zurakov has ceased to greet the underground man encountering him in the street which unsurprisingly infuriates interrupt man as they're cops actions are another confrontation with his own insignificance while the man still demands significance the underground man invites himself that dinner to the dinner which to the dinner that sumo Simenon is planning further cop despite the man's patron permit which is another confrontation with the underground man's demand for skeptics despite eating super cop the underground man still wishes to have the same recognition super cop is given by his friends as well as our condition from surah kahf himself this notion becomes increasingly evident with the man a 10-7 off-center the underground man continuing in fronts of gnomes and insignificant throughout the centre with the situation culminating in the man's request the seminar give with six rubles so that he may go out put the mint to a brothel they decided to attend siminoff leaves the money as a man a final affront the man made remains behind at the restaurant arriving later at the brothel would none of the other matter president here the underground man encounters liza a prostitute the man sleeps with Liza and upon waking up the next morning he is filled with shame at the thought of sleeping with her he says but now all of a sudden there appeared before me the absurd Boustany spiders notion of debauchery which without love crudely and shamelessly began straight off with that which is the crowd of true love the mana hates the notion of loveless sex a relationship with no significance the man proceeds to make conversation with Liza which eventually becomes the man branching once again saying at one point now tell me where's the good in it here you and I came together tonight and we didn't say a word to each other all the while and only afterwards started pureeing at me like a wild thing and I at you is that any way to love is that any way for two who needs to come together it's it's simply an outrage that's what once again the underground man yearns for something significant specifically a significant love the underground man continues to converse and Liza the first conversation he describes in which he does not force someone to acknowledge his existence in order to have the conversation yes the conversation is a game to the man however in the process of conversing with Liza the underground man his impassioned speech to beliefs about love and marriage and he finds he is exposed to himself by God I had spoken the feeling what did she suddenly burst out laughing what will I do with myself then the idea infuriated me the manifest Liza did not burst into laughter does not burst into laughter but she does state it's as if you as if it's from a book a statement which the man interprets is mockery in hindsight was a mistaken interpretation instead a wicked feeling consumes the man and he punishes Liza for her mockery by making another speech but this time the man rails against her profession her morals and her dignity saying things like I know I just have to whistle and like it or not you but with me and it's no longer why you asked her will but you mine what is the value of your love now you're all bought bought outright you'll lay down everything here everything without stent health and youth and beauty and hopes and a.22 you'll look like 35 and you'll be lucky if you're not sick pray to God for that one would think your heart alone but simply pour itself out of tears and you've sold your soul you own money beside so you don't dare make a peep all these all these statements demonstrate the underground man's period if he's insignificant to Lysa due to her profession the underground man believes that he cannot mean anything to Liza unless he's significant Eliza after this all the wiser for some time the undergo man who seems to leave but before he can license him a letter from a medical student to prove to him that she has loved despite the profession the underground man says nothing that leaves the underground man waits extreme anxiety for the next three days fantasizing about Liza calling him and when she finally does the man finds himself in a bit of different emotions and he rails against her once again saying that all his suffering is her fault however Liza's reaction was quite unexpected the underground man states what occurred was this Liza who I consulted and crushed and underst understood far more than I imagined she understood from it all what a woman if she left sincerely always understands from it before anything else namely that I myself wasn't happy lies in that embraces the underground man and he soft into her arms together they lie on the sofa and the underground man states I don't know to this day I cannot decide and then of course I was even less able to understand it than now forth out power and tyranny over someone I really cannot live but but reasoning explains nothing and consequently there's no point in reasoning the undergone manic realizes that he does not understand a love which is not significant he cannot fathom that he means something to Liza without being significant to her as well thus when Liza leaves the next one in the underground man puts money into her hand paying the prostitute for her labor Liza leaves and out of shame the man rushes after her but she is long gone upon returning the underground man finds the money he gave to lie flat crumbled at the corner the man and his alignment of being in this confusion of the two has pushed away because one chance at meaning love he retreats into the underground where his students and suffering and unhappiness earlier I asked what is the undergone man missing and 10 Camus provided and the answer is that Kim who is the underground man Camus Alliance mediums defense and believes that because we cannot achieve significance and there is no meaning Dostoyevsky recognizes that we cannot achieve significance but we can achieve oh is it all right Thank You Brad and Maggie so I'm taking a little bit sort of an approach but I'll give you guys a little bit about my background before I begin I think you all of you guys were being here I think glass is a really cool opportunity for students to expand the reason why education and while some students choose to think this as a day off you guys are here you think this is a day of learning in Greek so the topic I'm presenting on an exploration of the concept of the necessary intention soul through jean-jacques rousseau and lots of digital fields words especially in relation to the corruption of the mark sciences central core 200 the human agents of reporter and a lot of this essay this is based on was inspired by dr. Christine battle does an adjunct professor during my sophomore year she is since then moved on to leave for a state university of in Kentucky and I'm sure she's doing anything um so the brief outline we're going to review arts and science we're going to review autentic art and science and we're going to review bad artists science the presumption at this talk is that I do believe there is the art there's objectively good are good science and there is science that is kitsch there's a bad partners Kitsch part then we're going to do a quick review of John Jacques Rousseau and let's build some of their background who they were then we're going to look at the philosophies how they relate what do they teach us especially in being housed under the idea of common soul common soul and how that relates specifically to the corruption of arts and sciences so how do they really eat beaches and finally man's decision what's your decision to make as far as what has been and what is bad when persists and what must be so there's authentically good music on the table we have we have Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart and just below him Miles Davis a trumpeter so both of these individuals can have their music being characterized as objectively good whether it's your taste or not they are talented musicians that presented something new and creative to their meetings there were innovators and they were authentic on the right we have something a little bit different bad music we have Kenny G and clarinet player far from the savant and millennium Nickelback and I don't think I need to do all right then we're gonna move to science what is authentic sign to exalt any good science innovative science science it looks bored and clods ahead rather than running circles around so Albert Einstein's theory of relativity as well as his equation on mass energy equivalence equals MC squared just below I'm Stein the Apostle in Franklin known for her work on DNA and x-ray crystallography that proceeded to create image 52 that and then on the Left we have something a little bit different this is bad science so so at the top under allele lymphoid nodular hyperplasia I'm not going to try to pronounce it further that is an article published by Andrew Wakefield that named a ring bells for some of you he was the scientist who they generated the MMR vaccine an article that said that vaccines could be linked to autism that was then refuted or retracted from The Lancet magazine so that is an example of bad science I just below that as Ligurian greens 2014 publications very recently feels articles in 98 look we're in green there article was published in science which is the super high impact journal for my scientists out there and they had come up with a theory that gay canvasing tends to work better than straight people canvassing and they had little to no data and their experimental hypothesis was flawed from the get-go so it was then retracted from science magazine we're just super notable so bad science still exists even with attempts to kind of homogenized a great I guess exploration of scientific theory assignment method so these are kind of abstraction but moving to see how they relate those vocal interest ability my man jean-jacques rousseau so Rousseau was an 18th century philosopher who's known for his work on the social contract who's a romanticist and it was really interested in child education in the process of education especially associated with enlightenment business what I'm specifically gonna focus on is the first discourse which was the academic Academy of Dijon Prize winner and 1750 although his first and second discourses are often written together there it needs separate publications about six to eight years apart so the specific phrase that is associated with this versus force in fact it's it's written at the top of it is it's in Latin it's from Fortis a Roman philosopher in the first century BC the super Murphy rep D but translates to we are deceived by the appearances of right so let that remain we're gonna move on to our next gentlemen elicited Kotoko Satoko was a French diplomat named flipped scientist and historian he was a aristocrat he came from a family that lost a lot of its wealth and power the era following the French Revolution and he wrote democracy in America after travelling around America and reflecting on lessons that the French people could learn in the dangers of mock receive resents and one quote to remember from him is history as a gallery and pictures in which there are few originals and many comments so this is an original print of Rousseau's first discourse on the lefty of a really interesting image of the man in the middle on the left is supposed to be prometheus bringing fire and knowledge to man and on the right it is a satyr with warrants representing what is bad and base and so you have this man reflecting on deciding half of his body is shown in the dark and half is showing the light to see that it is his decision whether contain towards the maser to aim towards the good despite the factors that are surrounding him so at the beginning of this first discourse this question which is in French there that I had to in English fortunately asks this as a restoration and sciences and arts tended to purify this about this to establish this this pretent weather or this context he didn't want to be judged by common man but rather by he's the gayest man and something that Brad commented last year in court perhaps white hide itself he artists aerosols have been corrupted in proportion to the advancement of science and as a scientist myself while that isn't something that I've been fooled remit with I qualified as conditionally with what I'm going to the argues that true science is rare at his time bacon and Descartes we're doing some really interesting science I mean he says yes this is true science but it was also referring to the other scientists of the Enlightenment period pursuing what could be called Kitsch science science that is false and data that isn't true and presenting this perhaps with conclusions that are reaching above what the data actually suggest so here the curious thing actually about this discourse is he presents it to the prepared art thief deshone Academy of intellectuals and it is a argument of them to themselves which is really curious because he says the foundation upon which your thought is built in this integrity that you walk around with so representing and supporting your own work it is false you need to be cautious need to be wary and actually end up winning the prize so furthermore he says in the pursuit of Arts and Sciences led to a spread of luxury give me my period that was one of the first times that science could be directly interrelated with the rise of monetary gain or financial gain from it and he argues that this luxury led to a rise in laziness and corruption of morality he says that blood 300 might spirit which is a creative and authentic thing which life horizon he thinks that the pursuit of Arts and Sciences to gain luxury which ultimately leads to laziness leave done mentality is a wafer well let me hop into this science thing for I'm not in it for its true virtuous purpose but let me exploit it for my own gain in debasement he says he senescence the government of their time manipulates arts and sciences by making their actions appeared less despotic but perhaps more powerful and they knew this by spreading the Garland's of flowers over which deep over the iron chains with which men are burdened these masses have been have corrected the beauty of the Arts and the truth of science are made to love their slavery then at last they will become what's called civilized people's areas that were popular pursue Arts and Sciences has led to a degradation of the sacred and the significant and the only men that often pursuit the studies according to Rousseau of the sizes in the arts particularly are the courageous for it must only be those who feel the strength to walk alone in their footsteps and go beyond that you'd be perceiving arts and sciences the art is that we must be moved by define and not by compulsion and furthermore that unauthentic pursuits are better to be engraved on Corinthian capitals and the annals of history now here we have democracy in America so here are these that we haven't Seles passion for equality and something that in the third page of the text it refers to is the equality of conditions and later effectively first is the tyranny of the majority the concept is that in America we will all proceed to the idea to think that everyone better be equal as slaves than the unequally great and the fear that the some of the majority speaks at the so God and if you are outside of the realm of what is called to be regular or normal or accepted you're outside of the majority and it is the weight of God that we live that comes from the majority of pressure you need to stay within the norms and inherently you can see how this connection says concepts of authenticity total says is impossible whatever one does to raise the enlightenment of the people above a certain level well do know that it feels to facilitate approaches to human knowledge and will do no good to prove and prove the methods of teaching and make science of gene one will never make it so that men are instructed to develop their intelligence furthermore he says they do not fear recounts but have little taste for them his Americans find it's so difficult to remain completely themselves and to advance without first debating with themselves in America the majority draws from a formidable circle of thought inside those limits however the writer the artist and the scientist is free but unhappiness awaits them maybe dares to leave his balance so how do these things connect to the concept of authenticity and how its authenticity in art and science such an important thing well I argue that it's paramount to the intellectual progression of man we must be cautious of what is authentic and what may be directed by the quality of conditions and a tyranny of the majority you must be authentic and pursue excellence not for the masses not for the approval of others that accuses engagements peoples perhaps the time itself and representation of that is the email scientist who was credited not by the Nobel Prize unfortunately for the discovery the Christopher Cass 19 editing system just below that is a wonderful painting over these messenger and just bright is Kendrick Lamar and on the other side and an image from the employee wall movie of the hammers meetings suggesting that men are hammers any system propagating corrupt moral Arts and Sciences and a kitchen art and our friend Andrew Wakefield but they're attracted we will now entertain questions and answers I'm sorry thank you all for a great panel this very stimulative like teaching or we go to right now and I'm going to have my students write a paper and we're going to start with the premise by conversate contemporary ourselves and understate would very much disagree de Tocqueville believing that with science and progress which he equates with science that human beings the can achieve infinite happiness because technology will provide them ways that they don't have to worry about feeding themselves and so on and people very much a lot of Aristotle who pursue happiness for happiness say so if you put up an hour of bad science two things to say one is a little objection that not because I'm a Nickelback fan although Nickelback and are not necessarily bad musicians that are explained or competent unlike the science which is objectively managed to be bad because you think it's bad it's derivative and so on but they can play notes that forma so on and so on where your scientists specular lecture this morning my big news sources is bad news and so people who deliberately you make results seem to me in a different category as people whose hearts are kg and I know you don't like that because in some ways they're popular but they're not they're not going to break out of they don't then I'm not sure that that makes them man and so and I'll just end with this question that science art and I'm not sure where social science was in this because you science it seems to be a hypothesis you have the data you can make conclusions and you can repeat these conclusions these experiments the same way art seems to me again you know you think Mozart is good and it's good to look sorry but I'm not sure I'm not sure there's an objective definition of good without there is maybe science and they get wrong scientists even correct me but the social sciences people like Tocqueville and or so some extent kind of ever say dust AFC they are making conclusions that do outstrip their data and that's what social scientists do faculty this they consider themselves science scientists because they think they're doing exactly what you're doing yes my ologist others would say no they're not they're you they used to say methods with their conclusions are much different because they're not nearly can't repeat them and they're more predictive than anything else in other words some people might say Social Sciences is bad science I'm not going to say that I'm just saying I think it's it so that some of the the things that Rousseau seems to object to you know so himself I'm not sure whether to classify themselves in our society all three but as you probably know all the people that era works disciplinary base interest so I mean anything comment because I didn't throw it up down with two too long period there but that one or two is a scientist that making conclusions that are not what about science right so I think I think art is perhaps the most detestable but if you take this what pioneers are what drives our whether it be different movements Impressionism or night or whatever it may be whatever evolution art follows it follows a sense of authenticity and this is what makes good art different from that worked and the reason I think art can be viewed in an objective manner is because of the danger of applying the word impart to all things for example if I'm if I'm going to respond a person well that was a work of art that automatically implies important part is system associated with something high or something it drives the mind to the governess I believe that art is a way to free people and I would argue that both de Tocqueville and Rizzo saw art as a or true our brand art to be a way that people express authenticity of either themselves a movement a feeling but it's an authentic feeling and in that way it separates itself from kitchen or bad word another thing that relates art good art or non Kitsch art teacher Caravaggio its devotion is the time and effort and practice and skill that goes into it just as a good scientist exercises the scientific method an artist must exercise that to their still network and I think like a personal anecdote I the opportunity to present something in tonight's this year and previously regarded part of being on a level plane well someone comes in and they'll create these and I think well this is art yes that may be art for you but what is objectively artisan that takes time and I didn't realize what it to eat with art until I tried to create something myself and I gave me enough respect for it so I think devotion to something in time and still feels that some kids with important even created from strata of what is good what is it and I think this also connects to the science yes it was data manipulation yes it was something that was a I still think it's connected to the idea not being authentic action if someone is authentic in the pursuit of their science yes they will adhere to the rules which science prescribes but they will authenticate a love study what is great so it's a motive just as much as the out absolutely yeah so one thing that I would like to look at is specifically with our the aim of heart prior to I would say what we think I was modern art now it's basically anything after maybe Impressionism was a good common point really the name was to produce something that was beautiful in modernity we see art being sort of redirected a lot of the time to produce something that it's shocking or something that evokes some sort of disorder over in action and I think that in changing the name of art perhaps we also changed the goodness the Lord possibly and when we aren't striving for something that is beautiful which is I think the objective standard on which you should be measure or something like art maybe what we are producing is no longer art put some sort of other phenomena the hardest of the beauty of the person eats the artwork and then also with science I think the examples that are month gonna chose bad science they were come up with like more like that right like producing this science is a fundamentally like right but I think there can also be bad science in the sense that the science is not elegant the design isn't good and you still get data and significant but it's not good science because you aren't pushing the field boundaries and you more I guess doing something that has you want pioneering and actually producing something within the framework of the scientific method in that sense I don't think all science measures up partition Winship so I just gonna have that Kim who sort of has an obsession with artists he to him part of living in the absurd is also creating an artist and that's kind of leave all stops to ask you minute I wanted to propose a kind of queer so an answer to the question you asked and the protostar Kirkman ass and see if you want to follow about the critique of the scientists in particular in the first discourse I think Rousseau would also say there's good are in bad art although authenticity is certainly something he kind of invented and they're most about Rousseau with the word authenticity in the title I would say that in in the first discourse his critique of art is and I guess science to the extent to some extent as well but Letters Arts and Letters right would be that it's bad if it's sort of morally defacing right that's the criterion is does it make people scorn their fellow human beings more does it make them more violent doesn't make them more lewd like is it is it debauchee I think would be his criterion for good and bad art now people certainly would criticize that but I would say that that says is that that is more his standard in distinguishing good in bed Arts and Letters would be you know their moral outcome that seems to be the standard by what she's judging everything and he does provide death which is he says every people whom we know of in the history of the world who has cultivated the Arts and Sciences what's happened to them they they become weak and soft and they and other people conquer them right he says that there there is not yet an example in human history where that doesn't bear out right and with the sciences it seems like and I guess this would also apply to Arts and Letters is I guess maybe this is just a slightly different way of wordy inauthentic which is that he says they're not the problem with most people who call themselves philosophers present company excluded of course is that they're not fundamentally interested in the pursuit of truth but something motivates them more than that which is vanity right that it's not at the end of the day about truth it's about vanity so that's a kind of being inauthentic but it's sort of an authentically representing your true motives which is really the which is really what is his major criticism of those who cultivate the arts and science they're phonies right so I I felt compelled to go through so a resilient response to this question that I think I think one area of concern is like with Rousseau is I think yes the moral consequences are the high argument that is kind of proposing in the first discourse I think the concern that comes with the concept of authenticity is perhaps best illustrated when he describes Voltaire his work with the creation of the encyclopedia and he says this is nothing but grunt work that does nothing but repeat the past and perhaps I mean there will be ways of doing that right now you're creating this idea for a book of knowledge from other people coming referenced which may inspire new knowledge and Rousseau may even elitist it is you know if you have monetary over there making the Encyclopedia however could also be you're simply recording the words to pass and that does not do anything to push the moral boundaries of what is good further forward and maybe it doesn't push the boundaries of what is new learning forward so maybe that could be a response that he has to referential works things that try to tie the new things together a lot of secondary literature which curiously a lot of his work is secondary litter borrowing from Aristotle and Montesquieu and Montesquieu and asking questions but never providing an answer and I think that's the evening think about Rousseau is that a lot of you were motivated by his words Nate Lee Smith perhaps even Marx and it responds tow bill and even Robespierre in felicity a lot of activists in the front surely some of you have something to say about authenticity and they divided on authenticity I think our coffee talking about so this give you a weighted simpler push there's like that but what's the difference between him who just asked you both perhaps I'd said yeah if it's for me kind of like these these arguments of chasing after meeting and I really do come down to sort of battles what really what terms are using the first place rights what is what's the different treatment so I think significance in this sentence to kambou is so you've got the holder it's not the top of the hill okay so two potato originally there's like this idea of a to be level in which is like what you achieve at the end of your life and you aren't there and that's your goal and made it and world's greatest you made it Tyrion found it what we've done today a move like since those roles of older up the hill boulders there it's all that full sector you know there's no there's no significance to like the teenage parent expecting like that in a sense the bowler the top of the hill like that significance in this idea of like oh you know what I did need something what I did he's something in the face of the universe and it's like large or worldly I guess the sense and I think that meaning to Dostoyevsky I think is this it was sort of like this is so awkward sort of this me it's sort of this notion of like it's like the notion of love but more so the sense of like God's love and it's acted like you know God loves everyone and that means something but it's not significant because God loves everyone that kind of answer your question at all Oh pumpkin pie Barbie but Darwinian explanation of humans search for meaning and significance so I think you could go back to Darwin's idea that nature does nothing in vain so if humans are finding something significant that is for no that is not for no reason there is a purpose a biological purpose probably that self sort of greater reproductive or even just survival Fitness in believing that something is significant or meaningful in the sense that perhaps in finding something meaningful or significant in our lives we are more able to reproduce and live to the age where we can reproduce perhaps because we're not committing suicide out of despair or something like that or and also that maybe in trying to find things maybe and pursuing knowledge we are making our species more fit through technological innovation or just through education of our of our children our progeny so that they have a better chance of surviving that we have I think that's what you would say with Darwin everything basically goes back lucien and if you can't come up with an argument or why something is helping humans or any organism survive then you are probably maybe like that could be that if Darwin's that nature doesn't do anything in vain I think that throws all of the essentials of man's the better philosophy in better living there's the fender life overall into question because as philosophical kind of like the big ideas eaters change its that comporting of Reason which isn't that forward instead absent from reason and being away from reason as some philosophical schools are they reject reasons when they say recent type of philosophy is you know common you know in fact with the aero-subs work and whatnot but I want to reject that go in this direction is that an evolution or is that moving in a different direction so is there a horizontal plane to which we've reached and we can't cap so another and other things about evolution is that evolution has no man evolution is a means by which you survive with that survival is going to be contingent on a changing environment so just as our mom talked about how different ages have different aims perhaps our search for meaning and significance has to do less with some sort of thing that we're all striving for and more in reference to trying to reconcile our existence with our contemporary environment that could offer maybe a Darwinian approach to why humans think up things differently throughout the history may actually interact with the turning of the majority so the majority says the best aim of this time is X then if you don't believe in the current game at that time are you the best fitted for that current time are you going to be able to live your best life in that time of the few prescribe to different school but that's your living greatness exactly those right people listen to Nickelback and edgy but that's the journey there the only the only true musician or artist are people making out of Greece working our producing meaning south-south because they want to sound it's not commercial right and so read in 4/4 down when are we going back and forth evolution has been at hand but it does seem to be pushing in one direction unless it's going back and forth and singing so I wouldn't say the zigzag is actually for a representative of what Darwin says evolution is dude if humans get toddler it's not because they need to be taller in the end it's because in order to survive being taller to fare some sort of thickness benefit so if I hardly like the opposite case if your environment is one in which perhaps we live in caves with short ceilings and that's the environment that humans are disposed to being shorter and have the fitness right sort of the temporary aid would be right so what you guys have done so philosophically what you see so you get the Enlightenment let me be push back from the Enlightenment to improve by people like Voltaire simple-minded in some ways they're also national they're they're silly people can be national and equality is here so we're gonna push back this what they were really collecting is emotion and greatness and you need to have that suffering it needs to be a real person to do that and then there's pushback against them because you know they have these wars and people believe me terribly it's like no mass war and genocide so now this is kind of pushed back to stay you know a man to treat human rights are important and human rights should go for all so it seems that there is that zigzagging way – thinkers push back against one another English – suppose they're pushing things up you know we thought we had with kaboom if the move wasn't right after all now we got to start again with Aristotle and see where we go Margaret I liked your suggestion of connecting the underground man to but the qualification that I ask you to consider with the the existentialist focus on the present what we get in Dostoevsky very clearly and that text of the underground is this is 16 years in pork the memory is there we can't erase it but we've got these I think canoe and Sakharov would say you know I think that that maybe underground man riding in the first part in the 1860s is doing his best to get out of that and can't in some ways I don't know what have you thought about that how the present past was working in that text it just drives me so much as the present is so important for the existential you would like they would have checked the nurse for them yeah something like that okay so I think anyway yes of course camera would say I think so I need to some extent but yes Jimmy would have my criticism of the underground man dissolving in the present but I think part of the reason why the underground man left the present is because could not accept what life speak and I think that I think that that sort of in some sense is that or trapped underground and punishing himself because if I might sparrowmon I think that anyone else can so I'm not sure if you're aware of this but one of the central debates in philosophy and science over the last 50 75 years has been about the distinction between pseudoscience and science which seems like it's awfully close to your discussion them you know that sciency it's sort of culminated I think in Kunz work the structure of scientific revolutions and I think the point could mean quite strongly and most people seem to think he got it right was that well okay we have this revolutionary science people like Newton Einstein maybe that's pretty few and far between and the vast majority of Sciences would be both normal sciences which was this sort of steady plotting and accumulation of results which seems like it's almost like what you were calling inauthentic science it doesn't really push the boundaries it's not revolution it's not revolutionary it's baby steps I think most scientists would say our work is baby step and I would say most research that I do is science that is baby setting however I do think that concern this may be not the science of introducing because it is that taking a baby step but I think the concern comes from weigh this baby step is all this scientific man has to offer I think it's really dangerous when man approaches science as the only form of personal progress and rejects all other schools of thought because sizes of jet truthful superior that doesn't take the time to conceptualize there are truths to be found in other realms of learning in academia and that perhaps my platform in science is the greatest good which man can contribute and I won't have consideration projects that can bring so I think my my concern isn't against instead of the B step the science I think it's the conception of sold and baby science fulfills that perhaps man considers that little contribution not to be not to be a bad thing but is that contribution is very important to science it's a greater thing however if that constitutes the only good that man will do is in accepting my controls my treatments and business my results man is so much more than that and I think for the idea of soul and fulfillment that results on a paper should not mean all of it and I think that is the fear that is one of my fears I think with modern science and said these these steps were big or little it doesn't matter as long as it's authentic however is that going to answer to these questions of life and I think that we nearly drop a noble cord but I've heared some big research institutions that be able take the time to consider hey this is all that people are learning and they're not getting the opportunity to explore the core or other facets of learning that science is all there is so therefore my little step forward is all that I can think and I can't think about other things we're not giving people opportunity differently than that is an inauthentic thing that said the moral thing to give to people that are learning and instead people become cogs and machines rather than innovators so I think the real distinction you're drawing is not between science that's inauthentic and science that's authentic but the possibility of science to lead to an overall well ladies and gentlemen I believe it's Miller time [Applause]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *