PHILOSOPHY

2012.10.10.

- „What is XY?” „What is proper XY?”

-The examination of ideas and concepts in science,
politics, society
„The problems are solved, not by giving new
information, but by arranging what we have known
since long.” (Ludwig Wittgenstein)
What does philosophy have to do
with me???
BUT: most presentations so far in
this class can be understood as
relevant as a problem of
philosophy!
(N.B.: sorry for my potential
mistakes in details )
 Ken

• Topic: diversity and „schools kill creativity”

• Relevance for philosophy: presumption 
„human nature/human beings are basically
GOOD”…
• …it’s only social institutions and power
which corrupt them/make them BAD/EVIL
 Ivan & Ken

• Topic: nuclear power

• (Beyond the empirical question whether
nuclear power or coal is more effective)
• Relevance for philosophy: it is possible to
create justice/equality between
generations?
 Peter

• Topic: playing music and doing art

• Relevance for philosophy: what is art and
beauty and why it is important in our life?
• Aesthetics ( 美学 ) – does beauty have
something to do with other values like
truth?
 Ro-kun

• Topic: visualization of data

• Relevance for philosophy: the most basic
question of analitical philosophy ( 分析哲
学 ): „what is language?” and „what do we
do when we think?” (For ex. using images
and pictures in thinking / communication)
 Erika

• Topic: treatment of animals

• Relevance for philosophy: (environmental)
ethics, utilitarianism ( 功利主義 ), what is the
difference between human beings and animals?
• „It does not matter whether they can speak, what
matters is that they can feel pain.” (Jeremy
Bentham)
• Human nature is…? GOOD or BAD? (Because
of or without institutions?)
 Luo

• Topic: „What is the meaning of life for a person?”

• Relevance for philosophy: the question as it is, but
besides:
• Irregular state and regular state (see Karl Schmitt)
• Natural state and social contract (see Hobbes)
• The contract is illegitimate, so society/state should be
destroyed? (Anarchism)
• Human nature is… basically BAD/EVIL? (Regardless to
institutions? DIE BASTARDS!!!  BUT: If humans are
basically bad, why would we think that they would be
better without limits and rules?)
 A provocative topic for discussion
- „Human beings are basically good, it’s just
institutions which make them bad/evil”
VS
- „Human beings are not good or bad, BUT
they have incentives to act good or bad
from interactions with other people
- and since human actions create
institutions, usually we can not blame
social institutions for human actions”
 An example from the video
„Schools Kill Creativity” (?)
„A maths teacher saw that one high school
student solved a problem by using the
methods of higher mathematics. He
scolded him because of this.”

IS IT REALLY THE FAULT OF THE

INSTITUTION OF SCHOOL AND NOT
THIS F*CKING STUPID TEACHER???
An example from Ivan’s debate with
Peter on the same topic
„But not eveyone is creative”

„Oh, you can’t say that!!!”

„…REALLY? Look out there, what can you see?”

- You think every person who you meet (shopkeepers,
cleaners etc) would have the capacity to write one? I
don’t think so…
- And I don’t know WHAT’S WRONG WITH THIS???
 Discussion topic: further questions
„If hierarchy at school and society would not make them
bad, children would be creative and the society would be
better”
 Presumption: everyone is talented, good, creative, great
 Consequently: if we change intsitutions (to more fair,
less hierachical etc), people will be good/happy
 Deeper presumption: people are „born free”, and just
made into „prisonsers” by family, school, common
morality, traditions etc
• Can we „blame society” or institutons for our problems?
If you think human nature is good
and only society make people
bad, consider about the following:
 Counter-arguments
1. Evil and responsibility for evil
2. Social rules and the conditions of
freedom („people are NOT born free”)
3. Restriction of egoism: how?
4. The problem of equality: people are not
equal and never will be
 1. Responsibility for evil
• See: some with terrible childhood become
criminals…
• …but some not
• „If I had the same experience, I would have
become like him”
 REALLY? I think not necessarily…
• If institutions are to blame, no one is
responsible for anything
…very convenient…
 2. „People are born as free”?
What happens to those children who do not learn a mother
tongue in very young age?
„A prince could do a beautiful experiment. Raise three or
four children like animals, with goats or with deaf-mute
nurses. They would make a language for themselves.
Examine this language. See nature in itself, and freed
from the prejudices of education; learn from them,
after they are instructed, what they had thought; exercise
their mind by giving them all the things necessary to
invent; finally, write the history of the experiment.”
(Montesquieu)
 Results of this kind of experiment are…?
 Obedience: makes you a servant,
or makes you free?
• Learning a language, learning social rules and
basic knowledge at school: you are forced to do
it, so it is violence
HOWEVER…
• it makes you able to live within a society, which
is different from natural state and gives more
opportunities in life
• Can we say that obedience to rules is not
serfdom, but actually, the other side of freedom
– the price we pay for freedom???
 3. A possible reason of egoism:
appetite  how to restrict it?
„The free market, private enterprise,
and the profit motive are not
corrupting in themselves; they become
so, however, as soon as people lose all
consciousness of the generations
stretching before and after them and
treat society as a means of present
plunder. ” (Roger Scruton)
Common morality, law and authority can restrict
egoism??? Or not…???
Difference between people creates
envy  one source of evil
• Imagine a world without private property and differences
in wealth 
• Since people can not made equal, even if wealth is
equal, there will be difference in other qualities  always
a reason for envy
• So, even if institutions like property is made fair and
equal chances are given, people will not be necessarily
good or happy
 Why do we think that people would accept the
unfavorable result of competition if they got equal
opportunities and they lost in the end?
So: there is a need for inner and outer limits?
Conclusion: never stop thinking and
reflexion!
• But please always be aware of that …

• …if you blame something in society you have to

show a better alternative than the existing
reality, AND know how to reach there…
• …because it is very easy to criticize but it is very
hard to solve the concrete problems (see:
communism, social justice etc)
THANK YOU FOR YOUR
ATTENTION !