Human nature is a giant puzzle. During the past thirty years I have been assembling descriptions of key pieces to this puzzle. In the Book of Existence and the Human Mind, I have outlined the key issues of human existence and collected the best descriptions of the innate features of the human mind. My strategy is to review diverse descriptions, to question their validity and finally to choose the best descriptions that everyone might share in future. The goal of philsophical inquiry is not to repeat what is commonly believed, but to find what is actually true.
In this blog, I will post some examples of my current " best descriptions" and invite comment
Philosophy means the love of knowledge. Until recently, philosophers viewed the mind as the vehicle for reasoning and argument and emphasized the importance of language and scholarly traditions in the study of mind. The goal here is to follow a path of clarity, choosing the best descriptions of mind and mental activities that are available. The view is prospective, looking to the future and not repeating the past. A philosopher avoids specifications that are likely to change and prefers to work at a meta level, developing an overview of the human experiences while considering the principles that determine specifics. At the same time, contemporary philosophers have to be interested in a more grounded, realistic understanding of human behavior. Fancy language and abstruse arguments are not helpful.
Language is prolific and for humans, there is no single truth. Instead, there are numerous variations on every common theme. Stories are told in every language to record and explain what is going on. There are abundant arguments and claims with no consensus. What is really going on lies outside of all stories, all languages, all symbols and all records of events.
Human nature involves the forces of good and evil, constantly at play. A deep, pervasive problem is the critically disputatious nature of humans and their tendency to kill each other. A close look at the human mind reveals old and persistent tendencies that make peace and prosperity elusive goals. Increasingly, the knowledge of who we are and how we operate is molding literature, philosophy and replacing old ideas with new possibilities.
Ted Turner of Time Warner fame, declared at the 1999 World Economic Forum in Davos Switzerland: [i] “…if the world’s population were only 10 % smarter and 10 % nicer, we wouldn’t have any problems.” Turner had become one of the planet’s generous individual philanthropists, giving $1-billion (US) to fund humanitarian projects of the United Nations. When asked about spending his money, Turner said “I hardly buy anything at all. I save my money and give it away. I think we all have too much stuff.”
Turner does, however, buy large ranches in the USA with the intention of preserving range and wilderness land from development. Turner's idea that we need smarter and nicer humans to smooth out future civilizations is attractive, but I doubt that a 10% percent increase in these traits is enough.
“Smart” and “nice” are not technical or philosophical terms, but they are commonly understood and are, therefore, valuable terms. The understanding of what “nice” and “smart” mean is crucial to understanding how to direct human destiny. The distribution of smart and nice is not homogeneous on the planet and is not stable. The ability to enhance smart and nice is probably crucial to the survival of advanced civilizations and benevolent ideals. The imbedded structures in the brain that create "smart and nice" are genetically determined and modified by learning. Poverty, malnutrition, disease and oppression occur together and all four forces rob people of their potential for intelligence and good nature. Unraveling the dialectic of healthy and nice humans interacting with unhealthy and belligerent humans is one of the urgent tasks of an emerging scientific and humane philosophy.
Stephen Gislason MD
See Book Description
In this blog, I will post some examples of my current " best descriptions" and invite comment
Philosophy means the love of knowledge. Until recently, philosophers viewed the mind as the vehicle for reasoning and argument and emphasized the importance of language and scholarly traditions in the study of mind. The goal here is to follow a path of clarity, choosing the best descriptions of mind and mental activities that are available. The view is prospective, looking to the future and not repeating the past. A philosopher avoids specifications that are likely to change and prefers to work at a meta level, developing an overview of the human experiences while considering the principles that determine specifics. At the same time, contemporary philosophers have to be interested in a more grounded, realistic understanding of human behavior. Fancy language and abstruse arguments are not helpful.
Language is prolific and for humans, there is no single truth. Instead, there are numerous variations on every common theme. Stories are told in every language to record and explain what is going on. There are abundant arguments and claims with no consensus. What is really going on lies outside of all stories, all languages, all symbols and all records of events.
Human nature involves the forces of good and evil, constantly at play. A deep, pervasive problem is the critically disputatious nature of humans and their tendency to kill each other. A close look at the human mind reveals old and persistent tendencies that make peace and prosperity elusive goals. Increasingly, the knowledge of who we are and how we operate is molding literature, philosophy and replacing old ideas with new possibilities.
Ted Turner of Time Warner fame, declared at the 1999 World Economic Forum in Davos Switzerland: [i] “…if the world’s population were only 10 % smarter and 10 % nicer, we wouldn’t have any problems.” Turner had become one of the planet’s generous individual philanthropists, giving $1-billion (US) to fund humanitarian projects of the United Nations. When asked about spending his money, Turner said “I hardly buy anything at all. I save my money and give it away. I think we all have too much stuff.”
Turner does, however, buy large ranches in the USA with the intention of preserving range and wilderness land from development. Turner's idea that we need smarter and nicer humans to smooth out future civilizations is attractive, but I doubt that a 10% percent increase in these traits is enough.
“Smart” and “nice” are not technical or philosophical terms, but they are commonly understood and are, therefore, valuable terms. The understanding of what “nice” and “smart” mean is crucial to understanding how to direct human destiny. The distribution of smart and nice is not homogeneous on the planet and is not stable. The ability to enhance smart and nice is probably crucial to the survival of advanced civilizations and benevolent ideals. The imbedded structures in the brain that create "smart and nice" are genetically determined and modified by learning. Poverty, malnutrition, disease and oppression occur together and all four forces rob people of their potential for intelligence and good nature. Unraveling the dialectic of healthy and nice humans interacting with unhealthy and belligerent humans is one of the urgent tasks of an emerging scientific and humane philosophy.
Stephen Gislason MD
See Book Description
Comments