Having explained our philosophical position on materialism in the previous lecture, I could continue with the question why this materialist view evokes so much opposition.
I am almost inclined to say: POWER. Some people in our society just want to be in power over the others.
Why? Beats me, personal interests or moral motivations? At least they say they are the ones who know what is good for us and society.
Most of the times such people are dogmatic or plain lairs driven by self-interest. We are witnessing this in real time these days.
Wait...there is one category of people that says: there has to be some order and organization in society, that is according to your wishes. Let me honestly do the job for you.
What is the position of the materialist in this situation? Materialists deny any objective grounding for morality and the notions of Good.
Typically, morality is viewed as the codified rules that facilitate social stability. These codified rules are no dogmas nor revelations from some other source of knowledge.
Materialism as such can only offer a critique to the suggestion that the code is grounded in an objective legitimacy, the source of which is often a supernatural figure or an authoritative sacred text.
Although materialism is an ontology and does not directly imply an ethical perspective, yet there is some close companion throughout history.
Until the twentieth century materialists were most of the time outcasts, even persecuted. They were at the margins of society and often barely tolerated.
The reason was clear. The adherents of materialism were seen as outsiders, opponents of established norms. Most of the time that is, dogmatic norms based on the bible.
With the Enlightenment materialism is gradually seen as an acceptable ontological position and here we see it clearly adopting an ethical stance of freedom of thought.
So it can be said that materialism's ethical companion is toleration. Allow any opinion as long it is based on logic and empirically testable evidence.
Materialist epistemology requires that the outline of the heart of materialism, as I described it in the previous lecture, is not read as a statement of dogmas.
The materialist asks for evidence for any statement about the nature of the world, but it should not, in true scientific spirit, claim 100% certainty about anything.
The theory, that there are no gods, is a theory about nature of which the materialist acknowledges the possibility, that this belief can be false.
However, materialists believe that there is neither credible evidence nor powerful argument for the existence of a god,
so that there is a negligible probability of theism being a true theory. And that is an unpleasant point of view for those in power, that control the masses by any kind of dogmatism.
Just let your thoughts wander through China, the Arabic World, India, Europe, the United States and test them on dogmatism and compare it with the materialist view.
Thank you for your attention...
Main Sources:
MacMillan The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2nd edition
TABLE OF CONTENT -----------------------------------------------------------------
1 - 100 Philosophers 9 May 2009 Start of
2 - 25+ Women Philosophers 10 May 2009 this blog
3 - 25 Adventures in Thinking 10 May 2009
4 - Modern Theories of Ethics 29 Oct 2009
5 - The Ideal State 24 Febr 2010 / 234
6 - The Mystery of the Brain 3 Sept 2010 / 266
7 - The Utopia of the Free Market 16 Febr 2012 / 383
8. - The Aftermath of Neo-liberalism 5 Sept 2012 / 413
9. - The Art Not to Be an Egoist 6 Nov 2012 / 426
10 - Non-Western Philosophy 29 May 2013 / 477
11 - Why Science is Right 2 Sept 2014 / 534
12 - A Philosopher looks at Atheism 1 Jan 2015 / 557
13 - EVIL, a philosophical investigation 17 Apr 2015 / 580
14 - Existentialism and Free Will 2 Sept 2015 / 586
15 - Spinoza 2 Sept 2016 / 615
16 - The Meaning of Life 13 Febr 2017 / 637
17 - In Search of my Self 6 Sept 2017 / 670
18 - The 20th Century Revisited 3 Apr 2018 / 706
19 - The Pessimist 11 Jan 2020 / 819
20 - The Optimist 9 Febr 2020 / 824
21 - Awakening from a Neoliberal Dream 8 Oct 2020 / 872
22 - A World Full of Patterns 1 Apr 2021 / 912
23 - The Concept of Freedom 8 Jan 2022 / 965
The Discussion
[13:24] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): Thank you Herman
[13:24] herman Bergson: I warned that it wouldn't be an easy lecture
[13:24] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): (still compiling)
[13:25] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): done
[13:25] herman Bergson: The point is that often one of the objections against materialism is, that it has no base for ethics
[13:25] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): seems so
[13:25] herman Bergson: Like religion has (in its dogmatic points of view)
[13:26] herman Bergson: But Idisagree
[13:26] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): how would you base it then
[13:27] herman Bergson: if you take freedom of thought and the obligation to prove with empirical testable evidence what you claim, then there is a social base for cooperation among humans
[13:28] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): ah ok
[13:28] herman Bergson: You claim power over others based on what others can't verify....what is that?????
[13:28] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): voluntary cooperation
[13:28] herman Bergson: Take that silly abortion debate in the US
[13:28] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): poor woman
[13:29] herman Bergson: When does human life in the sense of, being a person begin?
[13:29] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): i just wish they would call it freedom of choice
[13:29] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): that is the problem
[13:29] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): when does it
[13:30] herman Bergson: simple...it is us that define the beginning of e person.....
[13:30] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): the religious consider it at conception
[13:30] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): ah oola
[13:30] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): hihi
[13:30] herman Bergson: yes, but that is biologically nonsense
[13:31] herman Bergson: Hi oola :-)
[13:31] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): it is
[13:31] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): but then when
[13:31] herman Bergson: so, from a materialist point of view....you need to find a biological treshold.....
[13:32] herman Bergson: The first one I can think of is...the moment a foetus can survive independent of the mother
[13:32] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): well
[13:32] herman Bergson: But then the medics kick in....we can save too early born babies
[13:32] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): many really really early births take place
[13:32] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): yes
[13:33] herman Bergson: in fact it doesn't change the standard
[13:33] herman Bergson: it only changes the circumstances of the possibility of survival of the newborn
[13:34] herman Bergson: Anyway..this is in my opinion a realistic way of dealing with the question.....
[13:34] CONNIE Eichel is online.
[13:34] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ah
[13:34] herman Bergson: while the dogmatic way is unjust
[13:35] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): the question remains
[13:35] herman Bergson: The biggest problem for materialists is dogmatism
[13:35] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): when
[13:36] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): and vice versa i guess
[13:36] herman Bergson: yes Gemma and we don't escape the fact that we have to choose
[13:36] herman Bergson: In many situation we can choose based on scientific evidence....but in a lot of cases we can't
[13:37] herman Bergson: and then the question is...if not oon scientifivc evidence...on what then?
[13:37] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): and the materialist view of war?
[13:37] herman Bergson: Well...to begin with human rights
[13:38] herman Bergson: the autonomy of a country and its borders
[13:38] herman Bergson: we have to respect those, to begin with
[13:39] herman Bergson: all things homo sapiens invented to organize his existence
[13:39] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): i guess that would all come under cooperation
[13:39] herman Bergson: but of course the situation is a zillion times more complex....
[13:40] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): well it often is
[13:40] herman Bergson: there is greed, personal interests , national interests, etc.....
[13:40] herman Bergson: there are not just simply human rights
[13:41] herman Bergson: Take that christian dogma: Thou shall not kill....
[13:41] herman Bergson: ok..big deal....but we invented the word UNLESS
[13:41] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): which came out of the Hebrew
[13:41] herman Bergson: like the Crusaders did too in the Middle Ages
[13:41] herman Bergson: for instance
[13:41] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): aaa yes
[13:42] herman Bergson: so...all is not simply black or white...that is the human condition
[13:42] herman Bergson: and we have to deal with that
[13:42] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): true
[13:42] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): hmm yes
[13:43] herman Bergson: and the way we deal with is how the world looks like today, for instance
[13:43] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): a mess
[13:43] herman Bergson: Well...half full or half empty :-)
[13:43] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): true
[13:43] herman Bergson: take your pick :-)
[13:44] herman Bergson: If you look at medic care and education worldwide...you see an enormous improvement since a 100 years ago
[13:45] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): definitely
[13:45] herman Bergson: and there are other subjects....access to knowledge for instance, transportation....
[13:45] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): now does the materialist believe all are basically good?
[13:45] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): I wonder
[13:46] herman Bergson: hmmm...
[13:46] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate) GIGGLES!!
[13:46] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): ...LOL...
[13:46] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): right
[13:46] herman Bergson: I'd say the basic good of homo sapiens is survival
[13:46] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): not very good
[13:47] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): after all the time we spent deciding that all are basically good
[13:47] herman Bergson: our chance of survival you mean Gemma?
[13:47] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): no
[13:47] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): the basic goodness of persons
[13:47] herman Bergson: you mean...yes?
[13:47] herman Bergson: ohh
[13:48] herman Bergson: the basic goodness of the person is his capability to live in peace and pleasure and cooperation together with his fellowmen
[13:48] herman Bergson: which enhances the survival of all
[13:48] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): ah ok
[13:49] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): makes sense then
[13:49] herman Bergson: this is completely independent of his material circumstances
[13:49] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): yes
[13:50] herman Bergson: it applies to the Neanderthaler as much as to homo sapiens or modern man
[13:50] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): makes sense
[13:51] herman Bergson: Thank you, Gemma :-)
[13:51] herman Bergson: Did it make sense today at least , this class :-)
[13:51] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate) GIGGLES!!
[13:51] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): ...LOL...
[13:51] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): so far
[13:52] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ㋡
[13:52] herman Bergson: indeed
[13:52] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ah
[13:52] herman Bergson: Then it makes sense to give our brains some rest and digest all of this the coming days :-)
[13:52] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): ♥ Thank Youuuuuuuuuu!! ♥
[13:52] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ㋡
[13:53] herman Bergson: In other words...thank you all again...you were inspirational again...
[13:53] herman Bergson: inspiring is the word, I guess
[13:53] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): hmm interesting. complex indeed but interesting
[13:53] herman Bergson: Class dismissed.....
[13:53] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): hope to make it Tuesday
[13:53] herman Bergson: We'll wait for you Gemma :-))
[13:53] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate) GIGGLES!!
[13:53] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): ...LOL...
[13:54] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): bye for now
[13:54] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): Thank you Herman
No comments:
Post a Comment