Life is an art project

Friedrich Nietzsche was a German philosopher. In the 19th century he predicted that over the next two centuries, the philosophy of nihilism - purposelessness and despair - would take over the western world, leading to an unprecedented level of violence and worldwide war. Obviously, he was correct.

However, Nietzsche only made this prediction so that he could also put forward a way of defeating nihilism…ART.

To be more specific, Nietzsche recommended that the way of defeating nihilism was for each individual to treat his or her life as an ongoing and unfinished work of art. The simple work of “giving style” to ourselves, expressing to the world our “overflowing creativity,” would give us a way to “Say Yes to Life”. This, argued Nietzsche, would stifle nihilistic pessimism.

I like that idea… or at least the idea of that idea.

I’ve created a little piece of Nietzschean/Sartrean art myself… check it out and let me know what you think

The Algebraic god

To early man, the sun rises from its hollow in the ground, processes over his head before submerging into the earth in the other direction. The wind randomly gathers and calms to power his fishing boat to feed his children. Flowers and vegetables emerge magically from the soil every spring bringing with it nurturing life and sustenance. All tempered by the random terror of earthquakes, volcanoes and hurricanes.

Not only where there unknown unknowns like nuclear physics, but there were lots of known unknowns such as basic anatomy, circulation and respiratory as well as the ins and outs of animal and human reproduction - the miracle of life itself.

How did we as a species, summon the courage to even leave the cave never mind to survive and thrive? I read a book some years ago now, by the anthropologist Pascal Boyer - I don’t think it would be too much hyperbole to say that it was a turning point. It is called ‘Religion Explained’ and I read it to learn more about how ‘other’ religions emerged. The can of worms was probably open before I read it, but this book spilled them out all over the floor.

He riffs on the idea that ‘Blind Faith’ is a healthy and natural human phenomenon. It’s perfectly acceptable and desirable that before Galileo worked out how earth isn’t the centre of things, and in fact the earth rotates around the sun… that people had to just have faith that the sun would rise every day (some still did a morning dance just in case). They had no tools or knowledge to rationally determine how or why it would. They had to make some assumptions just to get on with the business of living. It’s completely helpful and normal to see it as a mystically defined ‘black box’ or even personify it as a deity.

The point is I suppose that this is blind faith, and it’s ok, and in fact helpful. The Greeks gave names to the black boxes (Aphrodite, Apollo, Thor, and Zeus). The problem surely comes when after a few generations people start to take these gods too literally, develop dogmas and then when a bright mind inquires how the stars fit in the sky - people call him a heretic for daring to deny the authority of Apollo.

Likewise Adam and Eve is a perfectly helpful algebraic black box until it causes people to
limit their investigations into the origins of man. The ‘universe instigator’ god is helpfully algebraic until it colours our investigations into universal origins.

Perhaps the unhelpful kind of faith is that which allows for acceptance of supernatural claims based on less than convincing evidence rather than the kind that helped Newton explain the natural world. It’s the kind of faith which a makes a suicide bomber believe that he communicates intimately with a loving Allah or for a Christian who lives his life in the light the resurrection and virgin birth of Jesus, not because he is necessarily convinced by the evidence but because he has faith in the dogma.

I don’t see this kind of faith as a virtue; it’s not blind faith, its blinding faith.

Derren Brown can make you rich

This is at serious risk of becoming a TV review blog - which says worrying things about the content of my evenings. In saying that… on Wednesday afternoon I did manage to pretty much erase and destroy the main people/clients contact database at work… meaning I had to stay in late to get it sorted… then I celebrated my success by heading out with my bro in law and got really drunk… arriving in work late the next morning looking like Shane McGowan to confess my sins. A couple of quiet nights in front of the TV was necessary.

I love Derren Brown, he puts on a good show and his recent offering ‘The System’ was no let down. The essence is that he created a horse race gambling system which couldn’t fail taking a random member of the public on an emotional roller coaster as she bet her own money and won a fortune - but there was a sting in the tale. It turns out to be a bit of a comment on belief systems and world views - engaging, enlightening and very entertaining. I’d recommend watching it if it’s on again - or on C4 on demand.

I might have found myself an Existential Dilemma

I’ve been dying to get one of these for ages… and I’ve eventually found myself one - not offa eBay or anything, just lying in bed thinking - flip, this whole existence stuff is a bit weird.

I must admit this may be fueled by the fact that my learn-ed brother in law lent me a book of esseys by John-Paul Sartre, which I’m loving. 

In modern civilisation, lets say from the end of the last ice age 10,000 years ago, people have been born, lived for an average of lets say 50 adult years then died.

So I am born, try my best to learn the history of all those 200 or so generations that have gone before me, do my little bit to be involved in the process of moving humanity on a little further, get together with another person to create another generation of people who grow up and learn the history of human kind (including the addition made (and being made) by my generation), I then shuffle off the mortal coil, having done my little bit.

I suppose this is Nietzschean ‘death of god’ thing… the thought that there is no overarching ‘watcher’ of the whole of history happening, the players just nip in for a while, do their bit, then pass the baton to someone else. A very few make a mark which reverberates through history, I wonder if will, probably not, oh dear that’s a bit depressing

A prize for anyone who guesses the amount of commas

Blessed with faith

Last week I was walking down High Street minding my own business, when I was stopped by David Blaine and his ‘Street Magician’ camera crew (not really). He did his trick, the one he does on his TV show, he levitated before my very eyes. Like everyone I had the ‘whoa, that’s amazing’ reaction. Blaine walked on down the road, leaving in his wake his mesmerised audience.

I thought about it later in the day and for a moment thought - did he actually do that? Is he actually magic? Only for a moment though, because I know it’s impossible, and even though I’d seen it with my own eyes, I knew it was more than likely a trick, not a phenomenon. Not to say that impossible things don’t become possible, but Joe Normal tends to need a lot more evidence than one performance, under the circumstances of the performers choosing.

So, I don’t believe, or have faith that he really levitated, because it’s impossible according to the laws of physics. Yet I have friends and family who believe that a guy known as Jesus of Nazareth was born of a virgin, walked on water, raised people from the dead including himself. Why do they believe this? Because its written in an the Bible. In Gospels written decades after the reported events by guys who were trying, lets say for altruistic reasons, to get their religion up and running.

I recently met a lady on a couple of occasions, a friend of my wife’s, who literally believes EVERYTHING. You name it, she’s into it. Acupuncture, Reiki, homeopathy, astrology, cupping, Feng Shuiand that’s only the ones she mentioned in the 2-3 hours approximately I’ve been in her company. I’ve no doubt that she’d have no problem accepting the Jesus miracles as a positive probability. However, most people I think are open minded but heavily sceptical about miracles and physics defying events unless they are proven beyond reasonable doubt. For me, it’s really the only way to get on with your life - we can’t assume every claim of magic to be probably correct - the world would completely unpredictable - I wouldn’t want to get out of bed never mind get on a plane, in case aerodynamics suddenly changed its nature.

So why do intelligent people believe the Jesus stories? Let’s make no bones about it, smarter and more thought intensive people than me have decided in their heads that Jesus walked on water, turned water to wine and in some cases they believe that he guides them in their day to day life! (though obviously Gabriel only appeared to Mary, not Mohammad - THAT would be ridiculous). The answer is faith. I think it’s the same with most religions, but in my culture, Christianity is the major force, and a lot of my family and friends would describe themselves as having a faith in the god of the bible. I have recently had some interesting debates with them, and when it comes down to it, they don’t usually focus their argument on trying to convince me that the bible is reliable when it talks of physics-defying events, they say its at this point in your journey you need faith, and faith is the key.  An intellectual discussion usually turns into a theological discussion, and sometimes I get the feeling they are dancing and gloating in the space between that which we know and that which we don’t yet know. It goes… we don’t know everything, therefore anything is possible, therefore my position is intellectually sound - all i need is to declare my faith!! As soon as they proclaim that it comes down to faith, they admit that they can’t convince me that its true with evidence based enquiry alone - I need faith. In fact if it could be shown to me in an convincing manor, then it would no longer BE a faith.

The problem is I don’t have faith. I could pretend that I do, I could try to talk myself into it, but deep down I don’t have faith and I can’t help it. You can’t make a decision to have faith, I can’t decide in my head that I believe that David Blaine levitated in front of me - even though THAT happened before my eyes! So how can I believe the heavily processed story of a man 2000 years ago who apparently did some physics defying stuff. You can talk someone into believing facts through evidence based inquiry but whether I’m Joe Bloggs or Pope Benedict, faith is something you have or you don’t.

Debating the probabilities and possibilities of various iconic events and the evidence thereof, is destined to lead nowhere. Because depending on what religion you’re talking to, your faith has to be different. It’s not ok when talking to a Christian to say you have faith that you will be re-incarnated when you die, or to a Muslim that you have faith that Jesus was the son of god. To be a Christian you have to have been blessed with the ‘Christian’ faith - I wonder how many little children in Surrey wake up one morning and say mummy, I’ve just been given the faith to believe that Mohammad was a prophet of god.

So either you’re A) lucky and were brought up as a Christian and pretty much taught the bible as fact, so the need for faith is minimal, or you are B) someone who believes absolutely every extra-physical hoodoo, without extended inquiry, or C) god decides to bless you with faith in later life.

This is a dilemma, because it’s not my fault that I don’t have faith. If you believe in the god of the bible then the only outworking of this is that some are blessed with faith, faith is god given. If it is something that some are given and some aren’t then why do Christians try to convert people and tell them the ‘good news’, they might have some success with the lady I know who believes everything from astrology to Reiki, and obviously a child will believe pretty much everything a trusted adult tells them, but as for the likes of me, according to John 3:16 I’m doomed to a fiery eternity because I don’t have faith, which is a smidge unfair I think.

There are of course valid attempts to explain the quandry, but the logic seems quite circular - usualy about ‘letting god do the work’… but there’s a big assumption which has been breezed past - which is of course his/it’s ultimate existance and involvement. Most times when i hear people stuggling with these questions - i fear they have missed the elephant in the room, that it might just all be in their heads.

The comfort and alure of the subculture

All I’ve got so far is a title…  I’m awaiting inspiration

Premise: Most times it seems people are more comfortable being in a majority, group experiments have shown (as in, I saw it on a documentary once!) that people will say they the most ridiculous things which they know to be untrue, just because everyone else in the group says it. Other times though people seem to strive to be considered ‘different’. I think its rare that people strive to be in a minority of one, but as far as music, culture and society go the smaller the subculture the better, and when a music group or cultural totam becomes too popular and ‘mainstream’ people abandon it for this very reason (although they rarely admit it). Why?

The gardener of good and evil

What is evil? Don’t worry im not going to pretend that I have any sort of philosophical insight, I know that many have addressed this question and come up with smart and involved answers. But someone said to me recently that we shouldn’t defer our debates to others clever than us, it’s up to everyone to discuss the big ideas, no mater how inadequate we feel.

[jeepers! you know what I've just realised? I sometimes write this blog, with the voice of her offa sex in the city in my head. Very worrying]

People talk about things being evil, even non-religious people. It’s a given. But is it helpful to our common progress and that of our planet and our children. For such an important and basic element I think it is ill defined.

Maybe it helps to think about good things and bad things that happen and analyse what the causes are, and maybe the cause of that good thing, is ‘good’ and the cause of that bad things is ‘evil’. Is that too simplistic? Yes. But I like simple things, there lies beauty.

Here’s some good stuff. I think people could agree that things which help people live a healthy, happy, more comfortable and longer life are generally good. Also, I don’t think it’s promoting a hippy agenda to say that things which achieve harmony and common human agreement and respect are, in general, regarded as good.

So specifically, some examples; the ability to make fire; forging of basic tools; The Enlightenment; establishment of laws and social discipline; identification of germs (germ theory), invention of antibiotics; mass communications; industrialisation and efficiency of labour; economic theory and progress (the likes of Adam Smith); eradication of diseases; construction of housing; shelter and roads; generation and harnessing of electricity,

You know what… I’ve gone and got bored of this post already… so I’ll leave it at that, if anyone wants to add any comments and add to the list of good things/bad things then maybe I’ll come back with a post script to analyse the causes. And we can put the world to rights.

Happy for your friends?

Gore Vidal suggests that with every new success of a friend, another little bit of him dies. I’ve always thought that this is, if nothing else, a stunningly honest quote. Are we always genuinely happy for our friends or is there part of us that thinks, oh dear now that so-n-so is married/happy/rich it means I am less so in comparison. I think I have to admit that there are times when I feel that. It can’t say anything good about me - at least im in decent company, with Mr Vidal.

People who died on the same day

I was reading something in Wikipedia (as is my occasional want) about Mother Teresa, and found out that she died within a week of Princess Diana, I’ve no hard feelings about Diana, but perhaps she was handier to mourn than Teresa. (Incidentally my own mother died a few months before Diana - so it did seem a bit strange to see grown people weeping in the streets for someone they never met).

Another one of these occurrences is CS Lewis, the eminent British scholar and writer, who died the same day as JFK. And talking of Presidents, Jefferson and the first Adams went to that great rose garden in the sky within hours of each other in 1826. It is still unclear whether it was Frankie Howard or Benny Hill who had the last laugh as they died within hours of each other in 1992: Benny’s publicist issued a statement in his client’s name regretting the other’s death - ‘We were great, great friends’ - not realising that Benny was, in the deepest sense, unavailable for comment.

What business is it of mine?

I have a friend, who is shall we say, a “glass half empty” person. I think its quite an extreme case - since I’ve known him/her, her/his life has gone pretty well, they live a very comfortable middle class family life, and he/she doesn’t exactly have to work a 10 hour day down ‘pit to afford to buy bread for the family. Recently her/his moaning has started to annoying me - to the point were I have to stop myself saying ‘come on, it can’t be that bad! you lead a pretty easy and fulfilling life! It could be so much worse!’

Conversations sometimes don’t stray far from this template.  How was your week? sh1t. What will you be up to this week? sh1t stuff. you’re doing something nice the week after that though arn’t you? yeah, but it will be sh1t because of a,b,c.

The aim of this post is two fold (three if you count - QMonkey is struggling to find interesting things to talk about) - is this person actualy unhappy, or does he/she just enjoy a good moan? Will they ever wake up one day and think - oh, things aren’t so bad. My life is probably in the top 10% of ‘comfortable/happy’ in the country! Today is a new day woohoo!

Secondly, it’s none of my darn business in the slightest, why do I think it would ‘help’ for me to tell them what I think?… actually, I don’t for a minute think that it would - I just think it would make me feel better - maybe superior - maybe its me who has insecurities and I want to put her/him down to make me feel big. I will continue to fight the urge, and as the bard, Micheal Jackson said… start with the man in the mirror! Jamone!

Homeopathy - what’s all that about then?

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=3Z1QFZcnAi4&NR=1

Saw this on BBC 4 recently - fascinating.

I think my own view is (blogs are opinion forms after all!) if it works it works… it doesn’t mater if we don’t know why or how it works. There are many things we don’t know how or why they work.

But at the basic level, we have to find out IF it works. I think I always just assumed Homeopathy was based on some form of medical science. Maybe it needs to win Randi’s million dollars, before I give it a whirl next time im ill.

Too much intellectual energy applied to the untestable?

(the fact that ‘untestable’ isn’t even really a word, lets you know what im not talking about myself in this post)

It’s a little known secret that Question Monkey’s alter ego’s Daily Planet is actually a public body that funds histograpers, archaeologists, philosophers, and theologians. (I’m reasonably sure that all those quotation marks and apostrophes are in the right place, but no promises)

Defence in early… It’s worth noting, that I consider the work of the professions of most of those listed above to be extremely important to the fabric of our community. I value their role in understanding ourselves, our society, our past and our future, and the world in which we live. There we go.

As P Diddy said to J Lo, here comes the but… My ire is focused on the Theologers among you (possibly because I know at least two of my readers are semi-pros themselves and might rise to the bait!)… should public money really be given to people who want to study the nature of something which is untestable - i.e. spirituality, belief and faith? (outside of the field of psychology)

I sometimes see it as a waste, that such intelligent people, expend such effort into deciphering and expounding books like the Bible, writing at length about every nuance should be interpreted, and how it is applicable today. Don’t get me wrong, I’ve no problem with a church minister or a priest doing this - but I’m not sure how it adds to the wider community, outside of their specific faith group.

Only investigate the nature of that which is first, demonstrable  (to slightly misquote Russell).

Maybe there should be one, heavily funded study, to decide whether it’s reasonable to assume that the bible is indeed, a book which is worthily of its own branch in the humanities. Then we can decide if the study of it should get any more funding than the study of Lord of the rings, Harry Potter or the effect of the button fastener on 18th century urban culture (you think I joke?)

revision: of course, things like art and literature are untestable… in fact pretty much all of the humanities are… so what the heck im i going on about!

Big Brother - trash?

Its a confession i don’t make lightly, but whilst i don’t actually watch it very much, i think Big Brother (UK) is excellent television! My favorite spin off is Big Brother on the couch where a number of psychologists and sociologists are invited on to comment and analyze the contestants behavior. Its great stuff! I also love the how ethics and morals usually play out in the house and what housemates decide are important traits in each other (after the initial week or two of shadow boxing), and ultimately what the public votes for.Without fail the people who win Big Brother are the ones who have seen to have been the most genuine, honest and least vain in their time in the house.

It’s possibly taking it too far, but i think it really can be an aid to break down prejudice and bigotry. It doesn’t mater if you are white, black, Muslim, transvestite, gay, clever, dumb etc if you are honest and considerate to others you’ve a good chance of winning, if you aren’t you’ll get booed!