Post by Vanessa Dewong on Jun 11, 2015 21:32:51 GMT
WEEK 1and 2
Question 1:
Socrates was sentenced to death due to two accusations brought upon him. The first accusation against him was that he did not believe in the gods recognized by the State. The second accusation being that he has corrupted the youth with his teachings. Socrates did not have help during his trial, and preferred to stand alone, using his integrity to prove his innocence. Although he was allowed to defend for himself among the judges, his arguments proved futile and fatal. He neither denies nor confesses his first accusation, but rather provides a statement that was left to be interpreted as either extremely sarcastic or sincere. This statement being: “ believe in God more than fear man”. For his second charge, he was allowed a cross-examination with his accuser, in which he states that the accusation was absurd, and even if he did so, it was unintentional and therefore he could not be held liable.
Question 2:
Some people believe science and religion cannot coexist, because one disputes the other. As stated in The Great Mystery, A is A, and A cannot be not A. The natural cannot be supernatural, thus those who have no conflict between science and religion have separated the supernatural from the natural. Those who are in conflict may see that science has revealed that sunlight, soil, and water help create roses which are made up of cells ,which are made up of elements, which are made up of atoms and so on; and therefore, science has disputed roses as a creation of God. Yet, they have reduced the definition of matter to be flat in order to better understand what “matter” is, and thereby have also reduced the wonder and mystery of matter. “God”, or the supernatural, can coexist with science (or the natural), as long as they are understood in separate realms. However, science is considered scientific because it based on proven theories and has the ability to be falsified and claims so, while religion is based off pure faith and those who are faithful may refuse for their religion to be anything but fact. Although some have found peace between science and religion, others have not because the laws of faith will not allow them to do so.
WEEK 3:
Question 1:
Eliminative materialism is a process used to help explain certain phenomena by eliminating prospective yet incomplete reasonings. For example, if a phenomenon cannot be explained using mathematics, then we turn to physics, and if that does not completely explain it, then we go to chemistry, and so on and so forth. If no sciences or studies can prove or explain the phenomenon, then we can officially say that, well, God did it. Another example of eliminative materialism is called intertheoretic reduction, in which older concepts are replaced by new and more accurate terminology. For example, the God of Thunder, Thor, was killed when science was able to explain that thunder through electromagnetic currents. The last example of eliminative materialism is called intelligent reductionism, in which we use to explain certain occurrences in our minds and to better understand our consciousness.
Question 2:
Philosophy is the rational investigation of truths and principles of being, conduct, and knowledge. However, one cannot begin to dwell into philosophy without having a certain level of understanding in physics. Physics is the study of matter, energy, motion, and force. Because physics helps to explain the nature of the universe, it is an essential division of philosophical studies. In plain words, understanding physics and the laws of the universe is necessary to help prove the theories produced by philosophers. Philosophy cannot be without knowing and understanding the general rules of the universe. These rules are what help create philosophical theories. Also, the opposite could be true as well—the general rules of the universe were created by philosophers, and so they would not exist without one another.
WEEK 4
Question 1:
Evolution is important in understanding how humans behave, because it explains our biological history and structure. Because evolution is the revolutionary process of biological and genetic mutation and elimination, understanding this process helps us to better understand why certain humans have certain traits and why we look and act the way we do. For example, evolution and natural selection helps us to understand that some Asians have smaller eyes, because they originated in the deserts and those with smaller eyes were able to keep sand from getting into their eyes, therefore the trait for bigger eyes was naturally eliminated, not selected, because it served a lesser purpose than the trait for smaller eyes. Evolution also helps explain the human brain and brings awareness to human consciousness. If we can learn about why we look the way we do by studying evolution, then we can also learn about why we think and act the way we do through evolution. The book “The DNA of Consciousness” explained that natural selection are the architectures and designers of our brains, and asked the question why did nature select for us to have a consciousness? Physically and individually, humans are weak. Yet, we are not solitary animals, we are social animals, and so we gain strength in our numbers. Thus, I believe nature has designed and built our consciousnesses, because our interpersonal communication and interaction is imperative to our survival. In conclusion, studying the process of evolution fundamentally helps us to better understand ourselves, both physically and psychologically.
Question 2:
Evolution has unveiled many windows looking onto the world; however, it also leaves us blind to several other aspects of the universe. First, evolution may explain how life has changed, but it cannot explain how life began. If the first form of life on earth was bacteria, where did the bacteria originate from or how was it created? Evolution can only explain the change in life, but not the beginning of it. And, why must everything evolve to survive? What is the purpose of survival? What is the purpose of life? Evolution cannot answer these question, yet it has helped produce creatures, us, that have the ability to ask these questions. Why? In “The DNA of Consciousness”, Dr. Diem-Lane poses the question, “…how does philosophy help in our global struggle for existence?” Why did evolution create beings that ask these questions, and does asking questions like these help in our instinct to survive?
WEEK 5 and 6
Question 1:
Our brain transforms our interactions with “reality” into something we want to believe or see. Using the Disney animatronics example, we may see a mixture of sculpture and robotics as a human, because our brain must show us something that we understand. This is done unconsciously, so when we realize that the characters on the Pirates of the Caribbean ride and Mr. Lincoln are not real, we are amazed. Same goes for movie-goers and watchers. We enter the theater ready to suspend our disbelief and immerse ourselves in these films, because our brain simulates the movie as reality. Even after we exit the theater, we remain amazed because we believed we had just experienced a truth, yet we are also conscious that it was not real. The virtual simulation theory of consciousness essentially explains that the brain alters reality so that we see what we want to see or see what we can understand; but, we are also conscious of the alteration of these “realities”.
Question 2:
Because our brain is a virtual simulator, we are at a Darwinian advantage. Having the ability to self-reflect and also be aware of this self-reflectiveness helps us survive globally. Having a consciousness helps us to play out different chances of life and allows us to pick the scenario in which we must act in order to survive. For example, we know placing a glass bottle at the edge of a table or counter presents potential danger, because our consciousness has imaginatively played out the scenario of its falling and shattering. So, we know to place a glass bottle in a less dangerous position. We are able to react to certain chance contingencies, because our brain has simulated different options of reaction. As stated in the film, “Brain Burn: Consciousness as a Virtual Simulator”, in order to survive chance contingencies, we must develop a “statistically deep understanding of what varying options portend”. Human consciousness is a biological advantage, because it allows us to recognize the different outcomes of our choices and decisions.
WEEK 7
Question 1:
Artificial intelligence already exists today, and its name is Siri. Siri, though helpful and sometimes quite efficient, has certainly made us lazier. Thus, I think the biggest problem that a more developed and evolved A.I. will pose onto humans is that it will take away our need to do anything, literally. We will no longer need to cook for ourselves, build, create, think. I fear advanced artificial intelligence will turn us into a stagnant and lazy bunch. There will be no need to learn, because the answer can be found through asking the artificial intelligence. People will cease to progress. I do not believe that creating artificial intelligence is necessary, even with the advancement in technology now. It is a luxury—a luxury that we may regret creating. There have been countless movies demonstrating the negative effects of advanced artificial intelligence. Examples being “I, Robot”, all the “Terminator” movies, “Metropolis”, and even “Avengers 2: Age of Ultron”. Annoyingly helpful as Siri is, I do think that if we continue to play around with technology in this way, it will be a problem in the future.
Question 2:
As noted in “History of Western Philosophy”, “The Industrial Revolution changed the way people worked and organized their lives”. I believe that whether or not I would like it to, the ongoing advancement of technology will continue to change and affect my life. I feel a sort of obligation to have to follow the internet trends and keep myself updated with the up and comings of the web, because otherwise I would be out of touch with the world. Everything we do now must me posted and submitted online, and if you choose not to, you will be left behind. Although I do indulge myself with posting vacation photos from time to time, I do understand that in order to remain sane, I must maintain a level of privacy. Technology now allows anyone with access to receive their 15 seconds of fame. For example, the infamous/famous Justin Bieber was brought to fame when Usher found videos of him singing on YouTube. Everyone wants to have their fame, so when you post something, you are opening yourself up to an audience of hungry wolves. Technology has definitely helped me in many ways: allowing me to find the nearest gas station when I am running low, communicate with my dad in Malaysia, find alternate research to help finish this essay question. However, in terms of social media, technology has made it too easy and too tempting to provide personal information to the enormous amount of spectators on the internet which may prove to be detrimental in the near future. As stated in Professor Lane’s “Digital Philosophy”, “humans were evolved to have secrets, to have privacy, to have hidden chambers”; so, although technology has definitely improved my quality of life, it also provokes a small fear inside of me that the future technology will be more dangerous than it will be helpful.
WEEK 8
Question 1:
Understanding Faqir Chand’s experiences is important to developing an understanding on religious views and opinions. After an enlightening experience, Chand states that “you see no Jesus Christ comes from without in anybody’s visions. No Rama, no Krishna, no Buddha, and no Baba Faqir comes from without to any body. The visions are only because of the impressions and suggestions that a disciple has already accepted in his mind. These impressions and suggestions appear before him like a dream. Nobody comes from without. This is the plain truth.” His experiences and his teaching explains, in terms of religion and belief, that something cannot come from nothing, and that everybody thinks and sees differently. So, my Buddha may not be the same as my mother’s Buddha, even though she brought me to the same temple and we were spoken to by the same monks, we have different ideals on what Buddha may be like. Chand also emphasizes on the truth that nobody is all knowing, and in fact refers to himself as unknowing. We are taught what a religious figure should be like, however everyone perfects their ideals and visions according to their personal needs.
Question 2:
The phrase “philosophy done well is science; philosophy done poorly remains philosophy” may mean to me something different that it will to others. Yet, I believe there to be a universal understanding of this phrase. That being, when studied and examined extensively, a philosophical idea or theory will become rational. As Georg Hegel poses, “what is rational is actual, and what is actual is rational”; therefore, when a philosophical idea is studied and examined to the extent that it can be proven rationally, it will be come actuality, and thus it can be called science. However, the opposite must be that when a philosophical idea or theory arrises irrationally, and cannot be proven through eliminative materialism, it is not exactly wrong, but shall remain a philosophical idea.
Question 1:
Socrates was sentenced to death due to two accusations brought upon him. The first accusation against him was that he did not believe in the gods recognized by the State. The second accusation being that he has corrupted the youth with his teachings. Socrates did not have help during his trial, and preferred to stand alone, using his integrity to prove his innocence. Although he was allowed to defend for himself among the judges, his arguments proved futile and fatal. He neither denies nor confesses his first accusation, but rather provides a statement that was left to be interpreted as either extremely sarcastic or sincere. This statement being: “ believe in God more than fear man”. For his second charge, he was allowed a cross-examination with his accuser, in which he states that the accusation was absurd, and even if he did so, it was unintentional and therefore he could not be held liable.
Question 2:
Some people believe science and religion cannot coexist, because one disputes the other. As stated in The Great Mystery, A is A, and A cannot be not A. The natural cannot be supernatural, thus those who have no conflict between science and religion have separated the supernatural from the natural. Those who are in conflict may see that science has revealed that sunlight, soil, and water help create roses which are made up of cells ,which are made up of elements, which are made up of atoms and so on; and therefore, science has disputed roses as a creation of God. Yet, they have reduced the definition of matter to be flat in order to better understand what “matter” is, and thereby have also reduced the wonder and mystery of matter. “God”, or the supernatural, can coexist with science (or the natural), as long as they are understood in separate realms. However, science is considered scientific because it based on proven theories and has the ability to be falsified and claims so, while religion is based off pure faith and those who are faithful may refuse for their religion to be anything but fact. Although some have found peace between science and religion, others have not because the laws of faith will not allow them to do so.
WEEK 3:
Question 1:
Eliminative materialism is a process used to help explain certain phenomena by eliminating prospective yet incomplete reasonings. For example, if a phenomenon cannot be explained using mathematics, then we turn to physics, and if that does not completely explain it, then we go to chemistry, and so on and so forth. If no sciences or studies can prove or explain the phenomenon, then we can officially say that, well, God did it. Another example of eliminative materialism is called intertheoretic reduction, in which older concepts are replaced by new and more accurate terminology. For example, the God of Thunder, Thor, was killed when science was able to explain that thunder through electromagnetic currents. The last example of eliminative materialism is called intelligent reductionism, in which we use to explain certain occurrences in our minds and to better understand our consciousness.
Question 2:
Philosophy is the rational investigation of truths and principles of being, conduct, and knowledge. However, one cannot begin to dwell into philosophy without having a certain level of understanding in physics. Physics is the study of matter, energy, motion, and force. Because physics helps to explain the nature of the universe, it is an essential division of philosophical studies. In plain words, understanding physics and the laws of the universe is necessary to help prove the theories produced by philosophers. Philosophy cannot be without knowing and understanding the general rules of the universe. These rules are what help create philosophical theories. Also, the opposite could be true as well—the general rules of the universe were created by philosophers, and so they would not exist without one another.
WEEK 4
Question 1:
Evolution is important in understanding how humans behave, because it explains our biological history and structure. Because evolution is the revolutionary process of biological and genetic mutation and elimination, understanding this process helps us to better understand why certain humans have certain traits and why we look and act the way we do. For example, evolution and natural selection helps us to understand that some Asians have smaller eyes, because they originated in the deserts and those with smaller eyes were able to keep sand from getting into their eyes, therefore the trait for bigger eyes was naturally eliminated, not selected, because it served a lesser purpose than the trait for smaller eyes. Evolution also helps explain the human brain and brings awareness to human consciousness. If we can learn about why we look the way we do by studying evolution, then we can also learn about why we think and act the way we do through evolution. The book “The DNA of Consciousness” explained that natural selection are the architectures and designers of our brains, and asked the question why did nature select for us to have a consciousness? Physically and individually, humans are weak. Yet, we are not solitary animals, we are social animals, and so we gain strength in our numbers. Thus, I believe nature has designed and built our consciousnesses, because our interpersonal communication and interaction is imperative to our survival. In conclusion, studying the process of evolution fundamentally helps us to better understand ourselves, both physically and psychologically.
Question 2:
Evolution has unveiled many windows looking onto the world; however, it also leaves us blind to several other aspects of the universe. First, evolution may explain how life has changed, but it cannot explain how life began. If the first form of life on earth was bacteria, where did the bacteria originate from or how was it created? Evolution can only explain the change in life, but not the beginning of it. And, why must everything evolve to survive? What is the purpose of survival? What is the purpose of life? Evolution cannot answer these question, yet it has helped produce creatures, us, that have the ability to ask these questions. Why? In “The DNA of Consciousness”, Dr. Diem-Lane poses the question, “…how does philosophy help in our global struggle for existence?” Why did evolution create beings that ask these questions, and does asking questions like these help in our instinct to survive?
WEEK 5 and 6
Question 1:
Our brain transforms our interactions with “reality” into something we want to believe or see. Using the Disney animatronics example, we may see a mixture of sculpture and robotics as a human, because our brain must show us something that we understand. This is done unconsciously, so when we realize that the characters on the Pirates of the Caribbean ride and Mr. Lincoln are not real, we are amazed. Same goes for movie-goers and watchers. We enter the theater ready to suspend our disbelief and immerse ourselves in these films, because our brain simulates the movie as reality. Even after we exit the theater, we remain amazed because we believed we had just experienced a truth, yet we are also conscious that it was not real. The virtual simulation theory of consciousness essentially explains that the brain alters reality so that we see what we want to see or see what we can understand; but, we are also conscious of the alteration of these “realities”.
Question 2:
Because our brain is a virtual simulator, we are at a Darwinian advantage. Having the ability to self-reflect and also be aware of this self-reflectiveness helps us survive globally. Having a consciousness helps us to play out different chances of life and allows us to pick the scenario in which we must act in order to survive. For example, we know placing a glass bottle at the edge of a table or counter presents potential danger, because our consciousness has imaginatively played out the scenario of its falling and shattering. So, we know to place a glass bottle in a less dangerous position. We are able to react to certain chance contingencies, because our brain has simulated different options of reaction. As stated in the film, “Brain Burn: Consciousness as a Virtual Simulator”, in order to survive chance contingencies, we must develop a “statistically deep understanding of what varying options portend”. Human consciousness is a biological advantage, because it allows us to recognize the different outcomes of our choices and decisions.
WEEK 7
Question 1:
Artificial intelligence already exists today, and its name is Siri. Siri, though helpful and sometimes quite efficient, has certainly made us lazier. Thus, I think the biggest problem that a more developed and evolved A.I. will pose onto humans is that it will take away our need to do anything, literally. We will no longer need to cook for ourselves, build, create, think. I fear advanced artificial intelligence will turn us into a stagnant and lazy bunch. There will be no need to learn, because the answer can be found through asking the artificial intelligence. People will cease to progress. I do not believe that creating artificial intelligence is necessary, even with the advancement in technology now. It is a luxury—a luxury that we may regret creating. There have been countless movies demonstrating the negative effects of advanced artificial intelligence. Examples being “I, Robot”, all the “Terminator” movies, “Metropolis”, and even “Avengers 2: Age of Ultron”. Annoyingly helpful as Siri is, I do think that if we continue to play around with technology in this way, it will be a problem in the future.
Question 2:
As noted in “History of Western Philosophy”, “The Industrial Revolution changed the way people worked and organized their lives”. I believe that whether or not I would like it to, the ongoing advancement of technology will continue to change and affect my life. I feel a sort of obligation to have to follow the internet trends and keep myself updated with the up and comings of the web, because otherwise I would be out of touch with the world. Everything we do now must me posted and submitted online, and if you choose not to, you will be left behind. Although I do indulge myself with posting vacation photos from time to time, I do understand that in order to remain sane, I must maintain a level of privacy. Technology now allows anyone with access to receive their 15 seconds of fame. For example, the infamous/famous Justin Bieber was brought to fame when Usher found videos of him singing on YouTube. Everyone wants to have their fame, so when you post something, you are opening yourself up to an audience of hungry wolves. Technology has definitely helped me in many ways: allowing me to find the nearest gas station when I am running low, communicate with my dad in Malaysia, find alternate research to help finish this essay question. However, in terms of social media, technology has made it too easy and too tempting to provide personal information to the enormous amount of spectators on the internet which may prove to be detrimental in the near future. As stated in Professor Lane’s “Digital Philosophy”, “humans were evolved to have secrets, to have privacy, to have hidden chambers”; so, although technology has definitely improved my quality of life, it also provokes a small fear inside of me that the future technology will be more dangerous than it will be helpful.
WEEK 8
Question 1:
Understanding Faqir Chand’s experiences is important to developing an understanding on religious views and opinions. After an enlightening experience, Chand states that “you see no Jesus Christ comes from without in anybody’s visions. No Rama, no Krishna, no Buddha, and no Baba Faqir comes from without to any body. The visions are only because of the impressions and suggestions that a disciple has already accepted in his mind. These impressions and suggestions appear before him like a dream. Nobody comes from without. This is the plain truth.” His experiences and his teaching explains, in terms of religion and belief, that something cannot come from nothing, and that everybody thinks and sees differently. So, my Buddha may not be the same as my mother’s Buddha, even though she brought me to the same temple and we were spoken to by the same monks, we have different ideals on what Buddha may be like. Chand also emphasizes on the truth that nobody is all knowing, and in fact refers to himself as unknowing. We are taught what a religious figure should be like, however everyone perfects their ideals and visions according to their personal needs.
Question 2:
The phrase “philosophy done well is science; philosophy done poorly remains philosophy” may mean to me something different that it will to others. Yet, I believe there to be a universal understanding of this phrase. That being, when studied and examined extensively, a philosophical idea or theory will become rational. As Georg Hegel poses, “what is rational is actual, and what is actual is rational”; therefore, when a philosophical idea is studied and examined to the extent that it can be proven rationally, it will be come actuality, and thus it can be called science. However, the opposite must be that when a philosophical idea or theory arrises irrationally, and cannot be proven through eliminative materialism, it is not exactly wrong, but shall remain a philosophical idea.