Template:Nietzsche zwei

Choose from the Philosophy Menu Bar ▼ HOME INDEX Justice 6.v.25 The Good Life 20.v.25 Hume & Testimony 3.vi.25 1H25 Reflections 17.vi.25 Nietzsche 1 24.ii.25 Nietzsche 2 11.iii.25 Universal Basic Income 25.iii.25 Hegel 22.iv.25 2024 Wrap-Up 10.x.24 Democracy 14.i.25 Civilisation? 28.i.25 Compulsory Voting? 11.ii.25 Berlin and Freedom 15.x.24 Nussbaum, Sen and Capability 29.x.24 Slavery Reparations 12.xi.24 Rawls 26.xi.24 Assisted Suicide 11.vi.24 Popper and Evolution 20.viii.24 Popper continued 17.ix.24 Berlin and Romanticism 1.x.24 Marx 19.iii.24 Kant and Knowledge 16.iv.24 Kant and Morality 30.iv.24 Education and Religion 14.v.24 Hobbes & Security 23.i.24 From Locke to Mill 6.ii.24 Rousseau: Social Contract 20.ii.24 Rousseau and Education 5.iii.24 AI and Ethics 31.x.23 Aristotle and AI 14.xi.23 Autumn 2023 Review 28.xi.23 Democracy 9.i.24 Private Education 5.ix.23 The Very Elderly 19.ix.23 Justifiable Law-breaking 3.x.23 Moral Authority 17.x.23 The Wells School of Philosophy Roll Call 11th March 2024, Hare Lane, 1000-1200 hrs: Tutors: Linda (L), Steve (S) Pupils: Alexis (A), Howard (H), Patricia (P), Ray (R), Viki (V), Scribe: Gavin (G) Apologies: Colin (C), David (D), John (J), Margie (M), The homework set File:Leviathan.jpg Following on from the Reith lectures, we will be looking at security and liberty, the tension between these in society, and the resultant political stances, decisions and divisions. Until now we have not explored Hobbes, whose political philosophy is pertinent to this topic, so I have looked through some links. The In Our Time episode on Hobbes[1] is a good starting point. The Wikipedia entry[3] on Hobbes is not well-written; it is better to look at the Internet Encyclopaedia[2]. And the recent article by LSE law lecturer Gearty[4] is interesting. The listening and reading set by Linda are both fascinating and somewhat challenging. Certainly thought-provoking, with lots of philosophical issues to get your teeth into. We're very much looking forward to hearing what you made of it, in particular about the way freedom and security interact in today's fragmented and dangerous world. If Hobbes were around now and could reflect on the evolution of democracy over the last 200 years, and the rise of technology and mass communications, would he come to the same conclusions about the need for an omnipotent sovereign to maintain peace amongst a selfish, individualistic citizenry? With whom or what does the security buck stop? Does altruism have any role in Hobbes's philosophy? And relatedly, can egoists have genuine friendships? If Hobbes's mechanical bodies are programmed to pursue self-interest, is there any scope for what could be called morals? Is Hobbes a Platonist? … mirroring Plato's knowledge vs. belief, with science vs. opinion? Is Hobbes desirably hard-headed, realistic, in his judgement of how political issues can be resolved, based on the realities of human conduct — self-interest being the prime motivator of behaviour. But … is there another dimension to his view of self-interest... an enlightened self-interest, the notion that what's good for society will probably be good for me as well, rather than "We want all we can get" and to avoid death? Can we really know for sure what and where our ultimate interests lie? What might Hobbes think about the notion of trust? What role does it, can it, have? For example in the contracts that we inevitably enter into … Hobbes suggests that we have a right to self-preservation, and to how to ensure this? Is he right? Introduction(S) Hobbes was a materialist, impatient of those who over-theorised, and wary of orators. He was both pro-monarchy and pro-Cromwell in his stance against some forms of religion. He pre-dated both Locke and Hume. Discussion He provided an important step in the evolution of modern philosophy.(C) Bentham: the idea of the rights of Man is 'nonsense on stilts'.(S) Hobbes seemed not to rely on other people.(V) Hobbes didn't address the underlying problems behind the English Civil war.(V) Hobbes sidelined rationality; he believed we are driven by appetites rather than the will.(L) Hobbes seemed to reduce people to machines. He was dismissive of many of our emotions.(V) We need to check our understanding of the definitions of liberty and security.(L) The dictatorships of China and Russia seem Hobbesian, frightening their people into submission.(A) Hobbes was an early empiricist, who believed in the iron fist of the law to ensure our security. Did this actually confer greater freedom upon us?(S) If our contract is with the current sovereign, what happens when he or she dies? And do my children automatically inherit that contract with the sovereign?(J) Planning Some people seem determined not to change their minds, no matter what arises.(V) But the future is always trumpet-shaped.(C) Bayes' Theorem provides the justification for changing one's mind in the light of subsequent events.(S) Many organisations use scenario planning to examine possible futures and identify common occurrences across those scenarios.(J) Brainstorming seems a less common technique today; perhaps because totalitarian regimes don't like creativity.(L) The basic four questions recommended to analyse any situation in Getting to Yes[6] are: What happened? How do we feel about it? What are the things we could do? What should we do?(S) Lack of Progress Today Do we need a shared enemy to bring us together?(V) Today the driving force seems to be whom you're hating, not whom you're loving.(S) This attitude seems to have spread from Parliament.(V) Too many of our systems are adversarial. Very few people are aware of what goes on in Parliament. The big driver of hatred is anonymity on the Internet.(G) There should be much more emphasis on face-to-face communications.(L) Times are different today. So often both parents are working full-time: no wonder there has been a shift to social media. The right solutions to many problems seem obvious today. So why aren't they being implemented?(L) The Southern US states seem determinedly anti-intellectual.(C) This attitude can be found everywhere—e.g. in anti-vax thinking.(L) Other topics touched on Alcoholic parents as a driver of ambition.(L) The working day in Norway.(S) References [1] In Our Time: Hobbes. https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p003k9l1 [2] Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Thomas Hobbes: Moral and Political Philosophy https://iep.utm.edu/hobmoral/#:~:text=His [3]: Wikipedia: Thomas Hobbes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Hobbes [4]: Gearty, Conor. Escaping Hobbes: Liberty and Security for Our Democratic (Not Anti-Terrorist) Age https://eprints.lse.ac.uk/32906/1/WPS2010-03_Gearty.pdf [5]: Rachel Cooke (7th January 2024). Liam Byrne: ‘I’d say about a quarter to a third of MPs are the children of alcoholics’ https://www.theguardian.com/books/2024/jan/07/liam-byrne-inequality-wealth-interview-labour-note-no-money-treasury Books Suggested: [6]: Roger Fisher and William Ury (1981). Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In. Houghton Mifflin. [7]: Richard Dawkins (1976). The Selfish Gene. Oxford University Press.