591: What's the Continent doing?...

Let’s make a list of names:

.

Thomas Hobbes (1588 – 1679) - John Locke (1632–1704) - -David Hume       (1711 –  1776)

.

René Descartes (1596 – 1650)  - Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz (1646 – 1716) - Baruch Spinoza (1632 – 1677) 

.

Great names that dominated  the philosophical landscape of the period between 1600 and 1790, but from two different worlds.

.

As we have seen, England became the country of the free political individual with natural rights, among which the right to overthrow a government if necessary.

.

It  also became the cradle of empiricism, as we know it today, while the Continent was in the grip of Cartesian dualism and rationalism.

.

There may be an explanation for the developments of the philosophical ideas about the individual in relation to society in England.

.

During his reign Henry VIII broke with Rome to secure an annulment from Catherine of Aragon in the 1530s.

.

This was the beginning of the  end of the domination and control of the pope in matters of the church.

.

The end is that Locke is able to say that the individual is guided by natural law and that any coercion by churches is unacceptable with regard to the freedom of the individual.

.

The Continent however was still under control of the Church, either protestant or catholic. And we see this in the philosophical ideas about the individual.

.

Instead of the social and political ideas like we saw emerge in England, on the Continent they are seriously related to theological considerations.

.

For Descartes it was most important that, although he only discovered his mind as his only certainty, he kept a connection with god..

.

When we look at Leibniz, according to his ideas this connection goes much further.

.

On the question of freedom, Leibniz is a determinist. He sees no incompatibility between freedom and a certain special kind of determinism.

.

According to him it is mistaken to object to determinism as such: what matters is the nature of the ultimate and active powers that do the determining. 

.

On his view, these ultimate and active powers are the wisdom and moral perfections of God, joined with God’s greatness (power and omniscience).

.

Ideas about the individual like those of Locke are totally wasted on Leibniz. Although he is known as a philosopher, I regard his ideas about the individual as theology.

.

But this is the philosophical picture of the Continent in those days. Take this idea of Leibniz about god in relation to the individual.

.

If the complete concept of any being, such as a human being, is known for all time by god, and was chosen by god for existence, then is such a being free?

.

And another thing troubled Leibniz. Suppose this human being committed evil. If god is supremely good, 

.

and the creator of the best possible universe, then why is there so much pain and sin in the world?

.

We could spend hours on discussing Leibniz problem, which he created himself by admitting a divine creator into his philosophy,

.

but what we can conclude at least is, that in those days the individual on the Continent was still subordinated to religion.

.

Thank you…if you have remarks or questions, feel free…the floor is yours…

Main Sources:

MacMillan The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2nd edition

Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 1995

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page

http://www.iep.utm.edu/

http://plato.stanford.edu/contents.html

The Discussion

[13:15] herman Bergson: oops....was it too fast?

[13:15] Dag (daggash.bayn): yes lol

[13:15] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): well if he had faith it would be in his philosophy

[13:16] herman Bergson: open your chat window and reread...:-)

[13:16] Daruma Boa: ja, thats better^^

[13:16] CB Axel: Did Leibniz ever reconcile his problem with evil coming from a good god?

[13:16] Bejiita Imako: basically England was before rest of europe to break free from church control if I get this right

[13:16] herman Bergson: If you have soem faith and derive soem truths form it, you are a theologian, Gemma :-)

[13:17] herman Bergson: No CB.....

[13:17] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): not a philosopher theologian??

[13:17] herman Bergson: That is a contradiction, in my view gemma

[13:17] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): philosopher -theologian

[13:17] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): in your view :-)

[13:18] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): not in theirs

[13:18] herman Bergson: The philosopher begins with wondering and questions.

[13:18] herman Bergson: A theologian begins with answers...

[13:18] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): well i think so do the theoplgians

[13:18] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): oops

[13:18] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): theologians

[13:19] herman Bergson: A philosopher asks what is the meaning of life...

[13:19] herman Bergson: a theologian tells you what is the meaning of life

[13:19] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): ok

[13:19] Daruma Boa: *GIGGLES* :)~~~~

[13:19] herman Bergson: well...according to his religion

[13:19] Daruma Boa: and his experiences.

[13:19] herman Bergson: God or Allah for instance

[13:20] herman Bergson: And a man like Leibniz didn’t make this clear distinction....

[13:21] herman Bergson: The existence of a creator, a god, was not  in debate...it was an axiom

[13:21] Bejiita Imako: ok

[13:21] CB Axel: Richard Feynman once said, I'd rather have questions that can't be answered than answers that can't be questioned. °͜°

[13:21] herman Bergson: which  of course created his ohter philosophical problems...especially related to evil

[13:21] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): great quote

[13:21] herman Bergson: nice one CB :-))

[13:21] Bejiita Imako: yes

[13:22] Bejiita Imako: I agreee with that

[13:22] CB Axel: God is a spanner in the old philosophy machine. That's for sure.

[13:22] herman Bergson: What is a spanner, CB?

[13:22] CB Axel: Wrench.

[13:22] herman Bergson: ok :-)

[13:22] CB Axel: Sorry. I've been speaking English rather than American a lot lately.

[13:22] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate) GIGGLES!!

[13:22] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): ...LOL...

[13:22] Bejiita Imako: throw a wrench in the gearbox sort of

[13:23] CB Axel: Yes.

[13:23] herman Bergson: The interesting thing is that men like Locke and Hume  didnt pay much attention to god in their philosophy

[13:23] CB Axel: Not paying attention to God helps a lot of things.

[13:24] herman Bergson: Yes...produced the basic ideas of democracy to begin with

[13:24] Daruma Boa: there is and was no god as a lot scientist say. so.

[13:24] herman Bergson: As Locke said...no power on earth is derived from god...it is based on a social contract

[13:24] bijoux Lefevre is offline.

[13:25] Bejiita Imako: I take my knowledge not from god but from CERN and their LHC machine plus NASA

[13:25] herman Bergson: Well Daruma...click on that map behind me....

[13:25] Bejiita Imako: seems much better since they try figure out how things REALLY work

[13:25] Daruma Boa: and i find godß

[13:25] Bejiita Imako: if LHC or NASA see god i finally will believe in it

[13:25] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): ah yes the report

[13:25] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): is very interesting

[13:26] Bejiita Imako: but i doubt they will, its not logical

[13:26] Bejiita Imako: supernatural stuff and beings

[[13:26] herman Bergson: Then you'll learn that on this globe at least 90% of the people subordinate their person to a god

[13:26] herman Bergson: The report is horrifying....

[13:27] Bejiita Imako: people need really to wake up then

[13:27] herman Bergson: Yes Bejiita....

[13:27] Daruma Boa: i think everyone of us is a kind of god. we all have more power than we can imagine, cos until now we did not find it out.

[13:27] Bejiita Imako: THERE IS NO GOD! only science

[13:27] Bejiita Imako: only science can tell how the world really works and why we exist

[13:27] herman Bergson: I disagree Daruma...:-)

[13:27] Daruma Boa: mh but science has also his problems

[13:28] Daruma Boa: and that not to less...

[13:28] Bejiita Imako: science is tricky business indeed

[13:28] Daruma Boa: why herman?

[13:28] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): lots of questions in science too

[13:28] herman Bergson: Locke was already quite clear about the power of the individual:-)

[13:28] Daruma Boa: are humans already at their limits?

[13:28] herman Bergson: no no...

[13:28] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): i thinkk not

[13:28] herman Bergson: Because we know of darwin and evolution doesnt mean we ar ethe end of evolution:-)

[13:29] herman Bergson: But Locke already showed us where we were gods...

[13:29] Daruma Boa: isn’t darwin already old stuff and not up to date?

[13:30] herman Bergson: the right  to life, liberty health and possessions alse meant the duty not to steal, kill take care of the other and share...

[13:30] Bejiita Imako: ah

[13:30] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): well darwin started teh discussion well

[13:30] Daruma Boa: ja true herman

[13:30] herman Bergson: In what sense is Darwin old stuff, Daruma?

[13:31] Daruma Boa: i sent u a few months ago a you tube video about that. must have a look at it to find it.

[13:31] herman Bergson: ahh...ok

[13:32] herman Bergson: I missed it or forgot..:-(

[13:32] herman Bergson: So if you find it again...:-)

[13:32] herman Bergson: Anyway...what I wanted to make clear today ....

[13:33] herman Bergson: is the difference in development of philosophical ideas

[13:33] herman Bergson: in England and on the Continent

[13:33] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): interesting

[13:33] herman Bergson: Yes...

[13:34] herman Bergson: where England showed signs of liberal thinking, the continental philosophers were still burdened by theological issues

[13:34] herman Bergson: I think it is interesting....

[13:35] Bejiita Imako: yes

[13:35] herman Bergson: Guess you could write a book on explaining this phenomenon

[13:35] Bejiita Imako: England was way before it seems

[13:35] Dag (daggash.bayn): now the question is , was it a coincidence or was there some other ground for that

[13:35] herman Bergson: what, Dag?

[13:35] herman Bergson: This difference?

[13:35] Dag (daggash.bayn): yes

[13:36] herman Bergson: Well..I already suggested some explanation...

[13:36] Dag (daggash.bayn): you said it was because of the detachement from the church

[13:36] herman Bergson: The church of England was a matter of internal government...

[13:36] herman Bergson: yes

[13:36] CB Axel: It seems to me, although I may be wrong, that it's the opposite today and that England is clinging to theology more than the continent.

[13:36] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): hmmm

[13:36] herman Bergson: I don't know, CB...

[13:37] herman Bergson: What makes you think that?

[13:37] Bejiita Imako: aaaa they are just busy playing golf

[13:37] Bejiita Imako: hehe

[13:37] Daruma Boa: I found it, the video about darwin

[13:37] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): :-)

[13:37] CB Axel: I seem to recall a study that shows that England is more religious than Europe.

[13:37] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): there are a bunch of them daruma

[13:37] Bejiita Imako: ok

[13:38] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): which one?

[13:38] herman Bergson: ah ok Daruma

[13:38] Daruma Boa: na but from an german scientist

[13:38] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): in german?

[13:38] herman Bergson: no problem

[13:38] bijoux Lefevre is offline.

[13:38] herman Bergson: Ich verstehe auch Deutsch :-))

[13:38] Daruma Boa: https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=4&v=ZH9ZTq6FAyY

[13:38] Daruma Boa: ;-)

[13:38] herman Bergson: cool

[13:38] herman Bergson: But back to business :-)

[13:39] Daruma Boa: ok;-)

[13:39] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): oh dear

[13:39] herman Bergson: England more religious than the continent...

[13:39] Bejiita Imako: hmm interesting

[13:39] herman Bergson: I think that doesn’t say a thing....

[13:39] herman Bergson: If I ask you...are you religious and you say yes...I still don't know a thing

[13:40] CB Axel: I think they asked about belief in God.

[13:40] herman Bergson: all these researches...how were terms defined....explained....and so on...

[13:40] herman Bergson: even that...

[13:40] herman Bergson: ok..belief in god...

[13:41] herman Bergson: but what kind of god...

[13:41] herman Bergson: one who interferes with individual lives?

[13:41] herman Bergson: or one who just created us and said ...you're on your own now?

[13:42] herman Bergson: or a god who just does what pleases him/her? :-)

[13:42] CB Axel: I'm not sure. Many, like in the US, said they believed in God but didn't necessarily attend church services.

[13:42] Dag (daggash.bayn): its only in our time that we came to the separation of church and state...in the west at least

[13:42] CB Axel: So maybe more spiritual than religious.

[13:42] Bejiita Imako: maybe

[13:42] herman Bergson: Yes an important issue Dag....

[13:43] herman Bergson: This idea was established in the days of Locke...

[13:43] CB Axel: We still don't have separation between church and state here in the US as much as I feel we should. :(

[13:43] herman Bergson: in England....

[13:44] herman Bergson: but not on the continent...

[13:44] herman Bergson: However...head of the church in England was the king/queen....yet

[13:44] Dag (daggash.bayn): I mean its established by law CB, not that everyone accepts it

[13:44] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate) whispers: head of the church

[13:44] herman Bergson: That is the big difference with the Islamic world, Dag....

[13:45] Dag (daggash.bayn): I know

[13:45] Bejiita Imako: indeed US is way too religious, they are as religious as they are in middle east, only different religion

[13:45] herman Bergson: that is why they don't understand liberal democracy as we do understand it

[13:45] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): not necessarily

[13:45] Bejiita Imako: and how they let law and religion mix in both cases

[13:45] CB Axel: I agree, Bejiita. Although we still have fewer beheadings.

[13:45] Bejiita Imako: thats where problems always starts

[13:45] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate) GIGGLES!!

[13:45] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): ...LOL...

[13:45] Bejiita Imako: thats true hehe

[13:45] Daruma Boa: ah bejita i guess they only think they are;-) its only a way to keep everyone under control

[13:46] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): more shootings

[13:46] Daruma Boa: has not really something to do with beeing a believer

[13:46] herman Bergson: yes...when beheaded you'll have difficulty to think indeed

[13:46] Bejiita Imako: its not that horrifying indeed but still letting religion and power mix is never good

[13:46] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): no it is not good

[13:46] Bejiita Imako: main mantra in USA is In god we trust

[13:46] Bejiita Imako: that tells everything

[13:46] Daruma Boa: ja but only written

[13:47] herman Bergson: indeed Daruma...

[13:47] CB Axel: Which only became a motto in the US during the cold war.

[13:47] herman Bergson: The real mantra is...In Money we trust

[13:47] Daruma Boa: yea herman^^^

[13:47] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): very true at this point!

[13:47] Bejiita Imako: well i guess u could say that

[13:47] CB Axel: Exactly, Herman.

[13:47] Bejiita Imako: or in greed we trust

[13:47] Daruma Boa: we follow the wrong gods these days

[13:47] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): money is running  all thought here

[13:47] Bejiita Imako: very true

[13:47] Bejiita Imako: big problem

[13:47] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): big money

[13:48] Daruma Boa: and money has no power. as we / they think

[13:48] herman Bergson: ok...far away enough from  our subject now :-))

[13:48] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): true yes

[13:48] Bejiita Imako: hehe

[13:48] herman Bergson: so time to end our discussion :-))

[13:48] Daruma Boa: och herman^^

[13:48] Bejiita Imako: so then I push BEAM DUMP button and ramp down

[13:48] Bejiita Imako: hehe

[13:48] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): hope i can make it on tuesday but they are a problem again this year

[13:48] herman Bergson: Thank you all again for your participation.....

[13:48] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): ♥ Thank Youuuuuuuuuu!! ♥

[13:48] Daruma Boa claps

[13:48] Bejiita Imako: this was nice

[13:49] herman Bergson: Class dismissed :-)

[13:49] Bejiita Imako: cu tuesday then

[[13:49] Dag (daggash.bayn): thank you herman

[13:49] Guestboook van tipjar stand: CB Axel donated L$100. Thank you very much, it is much appreciated!

[13:49] Daruma Boa: ja thank u also

[13:49] CB Axel: Thank you, Herman.

[13:49] Bejiita Imako: YAY! (yay!)

[13:49] bergfrau Apfelbaum: good night Daruma

[13:49] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): ok bye for now

[13:49] herman Bergson: It was a pleasure....:-)

[13:49] Bejiita Imako: bye

[13:49] Bejiita Imako: ㋡

[13:49] Daruma Boa: see u tuesday

[13:49] bergfrau Apfelbaum: and Gemma:-)

[[13:49] CB Axel: I love your sweater, bergfrau.

[13:49] Daruma Boa waves

[13:49] CB Axel: I had one similar to that when I was a child.

[13:49] CB Axel: It was my favorite.

[13:49] bergfrau Apfelbaum: hehe :-) it is warm

[13:50] Dag (daggash.bayn): goodbye all

[13:50] bergfrau Apfelbaum: byebye Dag:-)

[13:50] herman Bergson: Bye dag :-)

[13:50] CB Axel: Good bye until Tuesday.

[13:50] bergfrau Apfelbaum: yes :-) @ tuesday

590: Locke on individuality

What we are discussing here is the cultural fact that we take the human individual as a central unit of analysis.

.

This focus on the individual is not at all an obvious matter. It is often rejected by collectivist, Islamic, or confucian societies in Asia or the Middle East.

.

The American Declaration of Independence includes the words, which echo Locke, "all men are created equal; 

.

that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; 

.

that to insure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."

.

However, our situation is now maybe this: like Bush declared war on terrorism, thus declared collectivist and Islamic societies war on individualism.

.

In our discussion of last Tuesday Max remarked, that it was a pity that health was not included in the Declaration of Independence.

.

The Declaration echos Lockes words, although his words were, that “no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty or possessions…”

.

Maybe the founding Fathers believed that they enclosed that subject in the expression “the pursuit of happiness”.

.

However, it is my belief, that nowadays what is meant by “the pursuit of happiness” is something quite different. Today it seems to mean  “the accumulation of wealth and property”.

.

So, Locke defined the individual as a person with these natural rights, like the Declaration does. But this can not be the whole story about the individual.

.

CB hit on this issue already in our previous discussion with here question: “What if my right to health interferes with someone else's right to property.”

.

The news item that in the US a pharmaceutical company just increased the cost of a medication - production costs $1.00 - from  $13.50 to over $750 a pill, has also reached my news-programs.

.

Is this what Locke must have had in mind, when he described the natural rights for the individual: life, health, liberty or possessions?

.

People, who emphasize their right on property, tend to overlook the fact that rights exist in a moral, social and political context.

.

You can interpret Locke’s ideas also from a different angle. Then it is natural law, not natural rights, that is primary. 

.

This would mean that when Locke emphasized the right to life, liberty, and property he was primarily making a point about the duties we have toward other people: duties not to kill, enslave, or steal. 

.

Most scholars also argue that Locke recognized a general duty to assist with the preservation of mankind, including a duty of charity to those who have no other way to procure their subsistence.

.

One important observation is that Locke explicitly freed the individual of claims that God had made all people naturally subject to a monarch. 

.

Locke used the claim that men are naturally free and equal as part of the justification for understanding legitimate political government as the result of a social contract 

.

where people in the state of nature conditionally transfer some of their rights to the government in order to better ensure the stable, comfortable enjoyment of their lives, liberty, and property. 

.

Since governments exist by the consent of the people in order to protect the rights of the people and promote the public good, governments that fail to do so can be resisted and replaced with new governments.

.

This right to revolution shows clearly how Locke liberated the individual and his rights from the coercive powers churches try to have over their members.

.

Thank you....Feel free to ask questions or add your remarks. The floor is yours...

Main Sources:

MacMillan The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2nd edition

Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 1995

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page

http://www.iep.utm.edu/

http://plato.stanford.edu/contents.html

The Discussion

 [13:18] Daruma Hermine Boa (daruma): thank you herman

[13:19] Mariella Diesel (mariella.deezul) is online.

[13:20] herman Bergson: Locke was  one of the first writers, who was so openly for the freedom of the individual

[13:20] herman Bergson: The british philosophers took a completley different route than those on the continent

[13:21] bombadail: As far as health is concerned I think about smoking and the exhaust fumes of passing cars....some laws are in place now regarding smoking....but not much concern to cars when in truth we could have clean non-polluting transport if there was a will to protect health

[13:21] herman Bergson: Leibniz was still pondering about the problem of evil...:-)

[13:21] CB Axel: And Locke was writing in what era again? 18th century?

[13:21] Daruma Hermine Boa (daruma): true bombadail

[13:22] herman Bergson: True...

[13:22] CB Axel: bombadail, we can't pass those laws if the CEO's of car manufactures just cheat to get around them for the sake of profit.

[13:22] bombadail: Awareness then of what influences well being matters

[13:22] CB Axel: Well, I guess we can pass the laws. The just get ignored.

[13:22] Max Chatnoir: We made our campus nonsmoking a couple of years ago.

[13:23] Max Chatnoir: I have to say it is a lot more pleasant.

[13:23] CB Axel: I got our ambulances non-smoking about 20 years ago or more.

[13:23] bombadail: You tell somebody driving by you that they don't have the right to pollute your air and see what kind of nut you are accused of being

[13:23] Max Chatnoir: I remember how nasty the air used to get by the end of the afternoon.

[13:23] Maya Phoenix (140726): England recently banned smoking in cars, which is great for protecing children from second hand smoke.

[13:23] Max Chatnoir: Good idea around sick people especially.

[13:24] CB Axel: The patient compartment was always smoke-free (oxygen and flame don't mix), but the cabs were filthy and smelled aweful.

[13:24] herman Bergson: I think we have to keep in mind that the definition of health has changed over the years

[13:24] Maya Phoenix (140726): CB Axel, to pass laws that cut the profit of businesses, we would need governments who care and who do not get the share of the profit themselves.

[13:25] Max Chatnoir: I think the whole idea of common spaces has also changed.

[13:25] CB Axel: I agree, Maya. Hence my backing of Bernie Sanders. °͜°

[13:25] herman Bergson: That is the pursuit of happiness....which is equivaltn to gathering as much money as you can

[13:26] herman Bergson: Just look around you....

[13:26] herman Bergson: how is the individual defined today?

[13:26] herman Bergson: As HOMO ECONOMICUS

[13:26] herman Bergson: as a source of profits and costs

[13:26] herman Bergson: not as a goal

[13:26] Max Chatnoir: Well, money isn't happiness, and I don't care what the republicans say, money isn't speech.  So buying stuff isn't defensible as free speech.

[13:27] CB Axel: Studies have shown that wealth buys happiness only to a certain extent and that the super wealthy are no more happy than the well-to-do.

[13:27] Max Chatnoir: Including buying influence.

[13:27] herman Bergson: So true CB

[13:27] CB Axel: We just can't seem to convince the super wealthy that they are not happier.

[13:27] herman Bergson: No, but they have power....

[13:27] herman Bergson: that is the addictive drug

[13:27] Max Chatnoir: Yes, they do, but who gives it to them?

[13:28] herman Bergson: the money, Max

[13:28] CB Axel: Yes. They buy the power.

[13:28] herman Bergson: A simple example...

[13:28] Max Chatnoir: Well, Donald Trump put it pretty clearly.

[13:28] Maya Phoenix (140726): CB, don't know much about Sanders, but I hope what wikipedia states about him, he'll be able to own up to when it comes to decision making

[13:28] herman Bergson: When a government does something unpleasant for a multinational...like Shell...

[13:28] Max Chatnoir: He gives somebody a lot of money and they have to be nice to him.

[13:29] CB Axel: He has so far, Maya.

[13:29] herman Bergson: I still believe there is just one phonecall.....watch out...we'll increase the price for gazoline...!

[13:29] CB Axel: Even if Trump gave me money, I couldn't be nice to such an a**hole.

[13:30] Max Chatnoir: But what if they just said, oh, thanks so much, and just went on as they thought best?

[13:30] Max Chatnoir: Of course you wouldn't get that money again, but you might get somebody else’s.

[13:30] herman Bergson: They cant, Max....

[13:30] bombadail whispers: There is also confusion in our economic system about merit being tied to money and the acceptance of you get the amount of money you deserve which is not true and so governments are failing the contract Locke Speaks about

[13:30] herman Bergson: rising prizes cause social upheaval....

[13:30] CB Axel: Herman, that hasn't worked for Shell recently. They had to give up exploring in the Arctic because the price of petrol is too low to justify the cost of drilling.

[13:31] herman Bergson: Indeed , CB :-)

[13:32] herman Bergson: Anyway Locke, born in 1632, put the individual as a political being  on the map

[13:32] Max Chatnoir: Yes, that was interesting, CB.

[13:33] herman Bergson: Maybe he even is the father of the French revolution :-)

[13:33] Maya Phoenix (140726): I would say that I can see a trend of rising disengagement with politics

[13:33] Max Chatnoir: Two revolutions, maybe.

[13:34] herman Bergson: At least he was at the craddle of US Independance

[13:34] CB Axel: Was he a protestant? I imagine he was, since the Catholic church is good at suppressing new ideas and always has been.

[13:34] Maya Phoenix (140726): which could be due to both the powerlessness of the voters in finding individuals who do trully represent them and are held accountable for their decisssions

[13:34] herman Bergson: England had no catholic church anymore in his days...

[13:34] CB Axel: Right

[13:34] herman Bergson: There was a Church of England...

[13:35] herman Bergson: Most interesting aspect of this is that England freed itself from the Pope

[13:35] Maya Phoenix (140726): and also, media focusing on materialism and gain, reinforcing the public disengagement

[13:35] herman Bergson: In fact the church became individualized in a way

[13:36] herman Bergson: that is...in England

[13:36] Maya Phoenix (140726): Yes, it's interesting. But since money is the new God, no country is trully emancipated in religious sense.

[13:37] CB Axel: I remember a TV show called Connections. In it, the presenter James Burke showed how innovation in science came from protestant countries.

[13:37] herman Bergson: The ne w religion of today is called ECONOMICS

[13:37] herman Bergson: The basic belief is the belief in unlimited grows of material wealth

[13:37] CB Axel: Economics, yes, but personal economics. Not necessarily the economics of the general population.

[13:37] bombadail: Did you guys get my comment....money is necessary for securing the individual in today's society...but money although can be attained through merit is not always, and many that merit it don't have it, and the government is not doing a great job....they end up legislating and acting in ways that are preferring special interests

[13:38] CB Axel: Yes. Personal economics. Not the common good.

[13:38] bombadail: instead of legislating to support the individual in the "contract"

[13:39] herman Bergson: Yes Bombadail..the individual as Locke so it, has almost left the stage

[13:40] herman Bergson: Life , liberty, health and possesions aren't the goals for th eindividual in genaral today

[13:40] Anna Adamant Albion (anna.adamant) is offline.

[13:40] Daruma Hermine Boa (daruma): too dangerous for the power of the government... °°

[13:41] herman Bergson: I sometimes get the feeling as an individual that they only ask me "How much do you cost"

[13:41] Daruma Hermine Boa (daruma): true herman and very sad

[13:42] herman Bergson: What expenses do you create...

[13:42] Daruma Hermine Boa (daruma): we lost the true things in life.

[13:42] Maya Phoenix (140726): Yes, that's true.

[13:42] CB Axel: Yes. I often said that in my job, we were all just expensive pieces of equipment that complain.

[13:42] Maya Phoenix (140726): Even education has turned to a business.

[13:42] Max Chatnoir: sadly.

[13:42] herman Bergson: Well...maybe not in my small private life, but in our society in general....

[13:42] CB Axel: Sad but true, Maya.

[13:43] Daruma Hermine Boa (daruma): but there will be one day... where all will cry about what went wrong.

[13:43] herman Bergson: Just look how we are dealing with all these refugees to Europe....

[13:43] herman Bergson: A lot of people only think of the costs....

[13:44] Max Chatnoir: We had Naomi Tutu on campus yesterday -- Desmond Tutu's daughter.  She was talking about reconciliation.

[13:44] Daruma Hermine Boa (daruma): ja thats true. and they are afraid.

[13:44] herman Bergson: they  gonna steal our jobs and houses!

[13:44] Max Chatnoir: And she said "wise people build bridges.  foolish people build walls."

[13:44] Daruma Hermine Boa (daruma): thats also a problem. mostly humans are afraid of things, which are in the future and not sure

[13:45] herman Bergson: So we have to believe in the further evolution of the individual...the homo sapiens :-)

[13:45] Max Chatnoir: You can't deal with the world's problems by isolating yourself from them.

[13:45] Maya Phoenix (140726): Churches didn't own the media or the police. How does anyone rebel if any signs of opposition to the government are not shown in the mass media. I mean you need collective action for any revolution.

[13:45] Daruma Hermine Boa (daruma): not only believe, we must train to be the best human ever lived on earth;-))

[13:45] Max Chatnoir: individuals have to deal with one another somehow without one of them killing the other.

[13:45] Daruma Hermine Boa (daruma): and not only shop shoes and watch tv

[13:46] herman Bergson: Welll...as I said in the lecture....it seems today to be a war agains individualism...

[13:46] herman Bergson: on an international cultural level

[13:46] CB Axel: I can't help but think we'd have another revolution if we all weren't being sedated by cheap TV shows and restrained by a fear of God.

[13:46] herman Bergson: In that sense Huntington was right, I think

[13:46] Daruma Hermine Boa (daruma): yes cb

[13:47] Kai Mundo (kaimundo): CB, and a fear of being shot.

[13:47] Maya Phoenix (140726): Hmm... very good point. All the events are actually turning people against each other, the stress making us selfish and apathetic

[13:47] herman Bergson: And the hedonistic inclinations of the organism :-)

[13:47] Daruma Hermine Boa (daruma): ja maya, thats the point

[13:48] herman Bergson: The fear is also related to the possible loss of our comforable life

[13:48] Maya Phoenix (140726): CB, what you said.

[13:49] Daruma Hermine Boa (daruma): they think they have a comfort life. but i think real comfort is giving to others and share. you feel comftable in yourself and not only around you

[13:49] CB Axel: It's hard to feel completely comfortable when you see the suffering of others around you.

[13:50] Max Chatnoir: Yes.

[13:50] herman Bergson: yes...

[13:50] Daruma Hermine Boa (daruma): yes and for that you must do something to feel better. helping and sharing

[13:50] CB Axel: But if all you see is the Kardashians, it's easier to feel good about the world.

[13:50] Maya Phoenix (140726): Daruma, comfortable it may be, but can't see consumerist life particularly fulfilling.

[13:50] Daruma Hermine Boa (daruma): so perhaps you have then less for living but more in your heart

[13:50] herman Bergson: Or building walls around you!

[13:50] CB Axel: Although, all I see is stupidity.

[13:51] Daruma Hermine Boa (daruma): true maya. its only to fill holes in your soul.

[13:52] Maya Phoenix (140726) nods at Daruma

[13:52] herman Bergson: Where has that crispy idea anbout life. liberty, health and possesions of John Locke gone????:-)

[13:53] herman Bergson: I think by now you have enough to think about

[13:53] Daruma Hermine Boa (daruma): john wuold love this conversation. i am sure...°°

[13:53] herman Bergson: So, may I thank you all for this great discussion....

[13:53] Daruma Hermine Boa (daruma): ja same from my side

[13:53] CB Axel: This was good. This has been a good topic.

[13:53] herman Bergson smiles

[13:54] CB Axel: Thank you, Herman.

[13:54] herman Bergson: Class dismissed...

[13:54] Kai Mundo (kaimundo): thank you , herman, sorry I was late but what a great place youhave here!

[13:54] Maya Phoenix (140726): The real individual never gives up all his power to circumstance. So I believe these are to be found, but with great difficulty

[13:54] herman Bergson: Thank you Kai

[13:54] Maya Phoenix (140726): rather than given or granted by the government

[13:54] herman Bergson: You're always welcome here

589: A more friendly view of the individual....

The individual is not some well defined reality in this world. He is a person, who can be defined from different perspectives.

.

Therefor individualism can refer to a lifestyle, a psychology, a moral stance, political philosophy, ideology, or social outlook that emphasizes the moral worth of the individual.

.

Individualists promote the exercise of one's goals and desires and so value independence and self-reliance

. 

and advocate that interests of the individual should achieve precedence over the state or a social group,

.

while opposing external interference upon one's own interests by society or institutions such as the government.

.

We met Thomas Hobbes, who kicked off the debate by elaborating on his rather cynical view of the human condition.

.

Fortunately homo sapiens had at least the ability to come to a mutual understand, a social contract, so that survival was ensured.

.

This all happens at an interesting crossroad in our culture. The period between 1600 and 1700 has been crucial to our development.

.

On the Continent philosophers like Descartes, Leibniz and Spinoza were struggling with god and the individual mind, more or les dominated by theological considerations.

.

In England, however, Hobbes and after him philosophers like John Locke (1632 -1704), David Hume (1711 - 1776) focused on the individual and his socio-political setting.

.

Furthermore Locke and Hume zoomed in on the phenomenon of human understanding. When you have only your senses, then, how do you relate to the world around you?

.

For the individual, Locke wants each of us to use reason to search after truth rather than simply accept the opinion of authorities or be subject to superstition. He wants us to ask first of all for the evidence for them. 

.

On the level of institutions it becomes important to distinguish the legitimate from the illegitimate functions of institutions 

.

and to make the corresponding distinction for the uses of force by these institutions. 

.

Locke believes that using reason to try to grasp the truth, and determine the legitimate functions of institutions will optimize human flourishing for the individual and society both in respect to its material and spiritual welfare. 

.

This in turn, amounts to following natural law and the fulfilment of the divine purpose for humanity.

.

If god had an active role then it was at the moment of creation, at which he installed this natural law in man.

.

Thus Locke writes: “The state of nature has a law of nature to govern it, which obliges everyone: and reason which is that law, 

.

teaches all mankind who will but consult it, that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty or possessions…” 

.

According to Locke, God created man and we are, in effect, God's property. The chief end, which is set us by our creator, as a species and as individuals, is survival. But in a much more friendlier way than Hobbes imagined it.

.

If one takes survival as the end, then we may ask what are the means necessary to that end. On Locke's account, these turn out to be life, liberty, health and property. 

.

Since the end is set by God, on Locke's view we have a right to the means to that end. So we have rights to life, liberty, health and property. 

.

These are natural rights, that is they are rights that we have in a state of nature before the introduction of civil government, and all people have these rights equally.

.

Thus John Locke can be seen as the father of liberal individual, like he was an inspiration to the founding Fathers of the USA.

.

Thank you…if you have any questions or remarks, feel free. The floor is yours.

.

Main Sources:

MacMillan The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2nd edition

Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 1995

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page

http://www.iep.utm.edu/

http://plato.stanford.edu/contents.html

The Discussion

[13:20] Max Chatnoir: Too bad we didn't put health into the Declaration of Independence.

[13:21] herman Bergson: indeed

[13:21] Max Chatnoir: WB Gemma

[13:21] CB Axel: What if my right to health interferes with someone else's right to property.

[13:22] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): crash

[13:22] CB Axel: wb, Gemma. I though you had left.

[13:22] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): big crash

[13:22] herman Bergson: awww...what a pitty...Gemma

[13:22] Max Chatnoir: Want the chat?

[13:22] CB Axel: Gemma, would you like me to put Herman's lecture on a notecard for you?

[13:23] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): i can get it on teh blog ty.

[13:23] Mikki Louise (mikkilouise): but 'the end' of survival is for the species, not the individual

[13:23] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): imay have to run off anyway waiting for a workman

[13:23] herman Bergson: central point of today is the idea of John Locke: If one takes survival as the end, then we may ask what are the means necessary to that end. On Locke's account, these turn out to be life, liberty, health and property.

[13:24] herman Bergson: What if my right to health interferes with someone else's right to property.....what would be an example of this, CB?

[13:24] CB Axel: I think so.

[13:24] Chantal (nymf.hathaway) is offline.

[13:25] CB Axel: We have a situation here in the states where a pharmaceutical company just increased the cost of a medication from about $13 per pill to over $700 per pill.

[13:25] herman Bergson: How can my health interfere withthe right on property of someone else?

[13:25] Max Chatnoir: Seems more likely to go the other way.

[13:26] CB Axel: Is the company's right to property more important than people's health?

[13:26] herman Bergson: Interesting  point there...

[13:27] Max Chatnoir: I guess the argument is that if they give it away, they can't stay in business and nobody gets the pills.

[13:27] herman Bergson: What is missing in this issue of rights is a discussion on ethics...

[13:27] CB Axel: Do those rights: life, liberty, health and property have different priorities?

[13:27] CB Axel: Hello, bombadail.

[13:27] herman Bergson: That is an often heard story Max....but can we believe it?

[13:28] Max Chatnoir: Oh, what a good question, Axel.

[13:28] bombadail: hello

[13:28] CB Axel: But, Max, the company was making a profit before the cost was increased.

[13:28] CB Axel: But they want more.

[13:28] Max Chatnoir: I think we can believe it up to a point.  The problem is identifying the point.

[13:28] herman Bergson: Difficult question CB....and again...we need to add ethics to this discourse here...

[13:29] CB Axel: I would add ethics if the business community would. But they don't seem interested in ethics.

[13:29] Max Chatnoir: I guess you heard the VW story?

[13:29] CB Axel: Yes.

[13:29] Max Chatnoir: Nice collision of health and property.

[13:29] herman Bergson: For instance  you claim the right on liberty and life...but what when you are asked to defend your country...your liberty?

[13:29] CB Axel: Yet another example.

[13:30] herman Bergson: One thing becomes clear here....

[13:30] herman Bergson: a society is not the sum of all individuals with their private rights

[13:31] herman Bergson: It means that we have to add more to this collection of individuals to create a society

[13:31] herman Bergson: And in Locke's days the social contract theory was prevailing...

[13:33] CB Axel: Mr. Spock in Star Trek says, "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few." °͜°

[13:33] CB Axel: That's where I get my philosophy. lol

[13:33] herman Bergson: So claiming the absolute right to your natural right on health, liberty or property isn't going to work

[13:34] herman Bergson: Locke wrote a number of essays on this question, in fact....

[13:34] herman Bergson: how can institutions have rights over individual rights

[13:35] Max Chatnoir: consent of the governed.

[13:35] CB Axel: Because the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

[13:35] herman Bergson: Maybe that is where extreme republicans make a mistake...

[13:36] Max Chatnoir: say some more, Herman.

[13:37] herman Bergson: So asserting that we have a natural right to life, freedom, health an property as Locke suggests is only a part of the story

[13:37] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate) is online.

[13:38] herman Bergson: If every single person in a society would do that and ignore the option of shared interests, or sharing in general....there would not be a society, but a Hobbesian world probably

[13:39] CB Axel: But many of our shared interests are also in the interest of each individual.

[13:39] herman Bergson: yes CB

[13:40] herman Bergson: But the first step is to recognise the individual interests as "shareable"

[13:40] CB Axel nods

[13:40] herman Bergson: which protects the individual interests more than when you do not share

[13:41] herman Bergson: so we have to add this ability to share to this individualism

[13:41] herman Bergson: and this as in the works of Locke leads to political philosophy and ethics

[13:42] herman Bergson: the main theme there will be the justification of our sharing and its consequences

[13:43] herman Bergson: But that is beyond our topic of this project.....

[13:43] CB Axel: Like forming an army for mutual protection but taking away rights of individuals in the army.

[13:43] herman Bergson: our  main question here is how the individual defined himself through history....

[13:44] herman Bergson: his willingness to subordinate himself to the values of religion, tribe , nation, family....or to plain rationality

[13:45] herman Bergson: Yes CB....within that context you organise an army for instance and you justify the subordination to the general command based on such aspects like religion etc.

[13:46] herman Bergson: Wel...I guess plenty enough to think about here

[13:47] herman Bergson: so ...if you have no further questions or remarks....?

[13:47] Max Chatnoir: Interesting can of worms, Herman.  :-)

[13:47] herman Bergson: Class dismissed and thank you all for your attention....^_^

[13:47] CB Axel: Thank you, Herman.

[13:48] CB Axel: It is quite the can of worms, Max.

[13:48] Max Chatnoir: Thanks, Herman.

[13:48] herman Bergson: yes it is CB.. :-)

[13:48] Max Chatnoir: That's the experiment of democratic societies.

[13:48] Max Chatnoir: and why they fight so much.

[13:49] herman Bergson: Yes..and eventually we try to justify our choices there by rational argument...

[13:49] CB Axel: I was just thinking this morning about how communism failed, but democracy is in the process of failing in the US.

[13:49] Max Chatnoir: One hopes.

[13:49] CB Axel: At least, that's how it seems to me.

[13:49] Max Chatnoir: You might have a point, Axel.  We've certainly been at an impasse for decades.

[13:49] herman Bergson: Because of a lot of irrationality to begin with

[13:50] Max Chatnoir: the "one hopes" was about rationality, not about democracy failing.

[13:50] CB Axel: I assumed that, Max. °͜°

[13:50] CB Axel: And please, call me CB.

[13:50] Max Chatnoir: Oh, I'm sorry.

[13:51] CB Axel: No problem.

[13:51] CB Axel: Well, I guess I'll fly away home.

[13:51] Max Chatnoir: I have a student named Axelrod.  I think it made that part of your name pop up in my head.

[13:52] CB Axel: Thank you all for the good discussion.

[13:52] Mikki Louise (mikkilouise): thank you Herman, bye everyone

[13:52] herman Bergson: Bye Mikki :-)

[13:52] Max Chatnoir: Very good discussion.  I'll hope to hear more on Thursday.

[13:52] Max Chatnoir: Bye, all.

[13:52] CB Axel: My "cousin" in sl, RF Axel gets people calling her Axel, too. °͜°

[13:52] herman Bergson: Yes Max...we'll go on...

[13:52] CB Axel: See you all on Thursday.

[13:53] Max Chatnoir: Bye.

588: A cynical view on the individual...

The discovery of the individual, that is, man realising that he is only subordinated to the laws of nature, must have begun in the Renaissance.

.

The Renaissance is a period in Europe, from the 14th to the 17th century. Its intellectual basis was humanism,

.

derived from the rediscovery of classical Greek philosophy, such as that of Protagoras (c. 490 – c. 420 BC), who said, that "Man is the measure of all things”, 

.

By this, Protagoras meant that each individual is the measure of how things are perceived by that individual,

.

interpreted by Plato (c. 425 - 348 BC.) to mean that there is no absolute truth, but that which individuals deem to be the truth. That concept of individual relativity was revolutionary for the time 

.

and contrasted with other philosophical doctrines that claimed the universe was based on something objective, outside of human influence or perceptions.

.

You can imagine, that combined with the dramatic discovery of our real place in the universe and the new empirical science, as it developed in the 17th century,

.

this must have influenced profoundly the way man defined himself in relation to the world around him, a world, that could be described by mathematics.

.

Maybe the first philosopher, who seriously wondered, what kind of individual homo sapiens was, was Thomas Hobbes (1588 - 1679) in his Leviathan (1651).

.

Chapter 13 is “Of the Natural Condition of Mankind as Concerning Their Felicity and Misery?” and in misery we live, according to Hobbes.

.

“Nature has made men so equal in their physical and mental capacities that, although sometimes we may find one man who is obviously stronger in body or quicker of mind than another (…)

.

As for .the faculties of the mind: I find that men are even more equal in these than they are in bodily strength. (…)

.

This equality of ability produces equality of hope for the attaining of our goals. So if any two men want a single thing which they can’t both enjoy, they become enemies; 

.

and each of them on the way to his goal (which is principally his own survival, though sometimes merely his delight) tries to destroy or subdue the other.

.

…it [is] obvious that for as long as men live without a common power to keep them all in awe, they are in the condition known as ‘war’; and it is a war of every man against every man.”

.

What a feast to be an individual and last but not least, if we may believe Hobbes there is “…no society; and - worst of all - continual fear and danger of violent death, and the life of man solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.”

.

But fortunately there is a way out. According to Hobbes, society is a population beneath a sovereign authority, to whom all individuals in that society cede some rights for the sake of protection. 

.

Any power exercised by this authority can not be resisted because the protector's sovereign power derives from individuals' surrendering their own sovereign power for protection. 

.

The individuals are thereby the authors of all decisions made by the sovereign. Thus, in a way, the individual is subordinated only to himself.

.

Most important here is, that it is the individual himself who determines his world, based on his personal powers and abilities.

.

Thank you….if you have any questions or remarks…feel free…the floor is yours :-)

The Discussion

[13:19] CB Axel is thinking....

[13:20] herman Bergson: Well..I guess Hobbes was the frist one to realize what we are

[13:20] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): is tempted to respond but doesn't want to stir the topic in another way...so doesn't for now

[13:20] CB Axel: I guess I agree with Hobbes, but it depends on how the sovereign is given his or her power.

[13:21] herman Bergson: are you teasing us philosophically, Chantal?? :-))

[13:21] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): let me ponder about it ㋡

[13:21] herman Bergson: Indeed CB..that was my thought too...

[13:21] Areyn Laurasia: now I'm curious :)

[13:22] CB Axel: I don't believe in "divine right," for instance.

[13:22] herman Bergson: Yes  indeed CB..that is what I was wondering too

[13:22] herman Bergson: bu tin his times..it still was the church..god,,and so on

[13:23] CB Axel: My god, supposing I have one, might want someone in charge who believes in individual rights, whereas another person's god my want someone who thinks women should have fewer rights than men.

[13:24] CB Axel: Or the poor. Or those of a different race...

[13:24] CB Axel: whatever.

[13:24] janette Klaar Nowles (janette.shim) is offline.

[13:24] CB Axel: Or who believes that it's man's right and destiny to plunder the planet for it's resources without regard for others or for the future.

[13:25] CB Axel: In other words, the US government. °͜°

[13:25] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): and many others ㋡

[13:25] herman Bergson: the subject here is that in our culture..sometime we just saw ourselves as individuals...

[13:25] herman Bergson: just s single lonely being standing on a planet

[13:26] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): Then I do agree

[13:26] CB Axel: So was this the time when the nation became important? So the individual wasn't quite so alone?

[13:26] herman Bergson: and then you cry..HELLO...and then there appears rot be a fellowman

[13:28] Areyn Laurasia: One can still be lonely in a crowd. How is that related to individuality?

[13:28] herman Bergson: I guess..the first thing was that the homo siens discovered that h ewas just an individual

[13:28] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): but the world was still an unknown and dangerous place for the individual

[13:28] herman Bergson: Important observation Aryen !!!!

[13:29] CB Axel: Wasn't that obvious from back in the time when a caveman stepped outside and was confronted by a sabre toothed tiger and realized that he had no one to help him fight it?

[13:29] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): absolutely CB

[13:29] herman Bergson: You have to make a clear difference between psycholgy and philosophy

[13:29] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): ㋡

[13:30] herman Bergson: Felling lonely in a crowd is a psychological issu..not a philosophical one

[13:30] CB Axel: So to be philosophically alone is to realize that you have your own ideas and beliefs?

[13:31] herman Bergson: yes CB..something like that

[13:31] CB Axel: And that you have the right to hold and express those ideas?

[13:32] herman Bergson: To  know you are philosophically alone means  that you intellectually stand in a desert...and wonder where to go

[13:32] Areyn Laurasia: like Spinoza? :)

[13:32] CB Axel: I feel that way all the time.

[13:32] herman Bergson: me too CB :-))

[13:33] herman Bergson: so..so many roads to go :

[13:33] herman Bergson: I have to ask Spinoza Aryen...

[13:33] herman Bergson: I don’t know

[13:33] CB Axel: Good luck finding him. °͜°

[13:33] herman Bergson: But in a way...

[13:34] herman Bergson: Spinoza wasn’t in a desert...

[13:34] herman Bergson: he was in the All....

[13:35] herman Bergson: but to get back to our main guest of today..

[13:36] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): I really feel we have too little female philosophers... in history as well as present.

[13:36] herman Bergson: Hobbes had a really cynical view on the individual

[13:37] herman Bergson: Bu this view was mainly a social one....

[13:37] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): Hobbes spoke mainly about "Men"... his view on individuality is solely based on men

[13:37] CB Axel: Yes. Hobbes seemed to think that the individual was a egoist, thinking only of his own survival and happiness.

[13:37] herman Bergson: far away from what existentialism meant...

[13:38] herman Bergson: Yes CB....and some people today like this to call neo-liberalism :-))

[13:39] CONNIE Eichel: :)

[13:40] herman Bergson: Well..next lecture might bring you a friendlier idea of individualism...:-)

[13:40] herman Bergson: If you have no further questions....

[13:40] herman Bergson: ???

[13:40] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): Looks forward ㋡

[13:40] herman Bergson: Class dismissed :-)

[13:40] Areyn Laurasia: Thank you

[13:41] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): Thank you Herman

[13:41] herman Bergson: Thank you all..

[13:41] CB Axel: I'll be looking forward to a friendlier view. I'm afraid that I take the cynical view.

[13:41] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): and others

[13:41] CB Axel: This was really good this week. I enjoyed it.

[13:41] CB Axel: Thank you, Herman.

[13:41] herman Bergson: You always can cry on my shoulder CB :-))

[13:42] CB Axel: Awww. Thanks. °͜°

[13:42] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): :)))

[13:42] herman Bergson smiles

[13:42] CONNIE Eichel: hehe

[13:42] CB Axel: I'll see you all, and I hope many others, on Tuesday.

[13:42] bergfrau Apfelbaum: ty professor herman & Class :o)

[13:42] Areyn Laurasia: hope so too

[13:42] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): Waves ㋡

[13:42] CONNIE Eichel: great class!

[13:42] herman Bergson: Take care, you all :-)

[13:43] CONNIE Eichel: u too, lovely seeing you :)

[13:43] herman Bergson: xxx CONNIE

[13:43] CONNIE Eichel: i will try to be here more often :)

[13:43] CONNIE Eichel: kiss herman

[13:43] CONNIE Eichel sends a volley of smooches to herman Bergson!

[13:43] herman Bergson: mmm

[13:44] Areyn Laurasia: goodnight, everybody.. rl's calling.

[13:44] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): Sleep well later on Bergie and Herman ㋡ see you both soon :)

[13:44] bergfrau Apfelbaum: good night :-) see you tuesday!

[13:44] herman Bergson: Bye Aryen :-)

[