602: Challenging thoughts......

And here we are…. THE INDIVIDUAL, surrounded by his crown jewels, as collected in the course of history.

The individual has become  a person, conscious of the fact that he is just one single mind, not the master of the Universe,

but able to be a social being, living together in peace with his fellowmen and endowed with natural rights of life, freedom, health and property.

There are no predefined criteria to determine what to choose in life, but he is aware that there are conscious and subconscious forces that drive him.

Altogether, the individual creates and defines himself. Who and what he is, is not predetermined, but the result of his own choices.

In other words, he begins existence like a stone exists, but creates his essence by the choices he makes during his life.

I refer to the individual as a “he/him/his”, but do not worry, that is just a stylistic matter. Wherever you read “he/him/his”, she/her/hers” is meant equivalently.

That the female individual in a number of cultures is not described as I describe the individual here, IS a serious issue, but beyond the scope of this project.

This being said, let’s return to our main theme. Creating your essence by  your choices…..it sounds intelligible and we all know how choosing works.

You have for instance three options, A, B and C and you say, I choose B and I don’t care whatever anyone thinks of my choice: I want B.

You have the power to do so and others say…”Ahh, she WANTS B…fine”. So everything seems to be in perfect order…….

if it weren’t that there are philosophers and they ask questions. And they ask, what do you think you are doing?!

I guess you’ll answer, that you acts according to your personal preferences and according to your personal will. Thence you feel perfectly free to do so.

And then we have to discover, that our common sense perception of what we might call “our free will” is like Swish cheese: full of big holes.

Ok, free will, the philosopher says….tell me…are you religious? No… Ok, you chose B, was it out of politeness or any other preference?

You frown and think…. did I limit my freedom of choice perhaps….and if not what happened then, when I chose?

And you say….no ..no…nothing of the kind. I picked B completely free from any bias or limitation or whatever…

So, you say it was just at random? Yes!…. But when it was just at random, in what sense was it then your CHOICE?

And you say to the philosopher, “Plz would you excuse me, I need an aspirin and that is not a free choice but mandatory after this conversation…”

“I am so sorry”, the philosopher says. “Just wanted to bring to your attention, that we have some thoughts and questions about the free will issue.”

From its earliest beginnings, the problem of "free will" has been a subject of philosophical analysis and, of course, intimately connected with the question of moral responsibility. 

Most of the ancient thinkers on the problem were trying to show, that we humans have control over our decisions, that our actions "depend on us", 

and that they are not pre-determined by fate, by arbitrary gods, by logical necessity, or by a natural causal determinism.

So, I think, that we have to do some work on the question in what sense the individual, as we have described him, is indeed a free individual,  that is …with a free will and in what sense.

Thank you for your attention….the floor is yours…..^_^

The Discussion

[13:20] herman Bergson: You are free to make remarks or ask questions :-)

[13:20] CB Axel: Well, first...aspirin is not mandatory. Acetaminophen or ibuprofen can be just as affective for philosopher induced headaches. °͜°

[13:20] herman Bergson: No will at all here? :-)

[13:21] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): ::-)

[13:21] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): lol CB

[13:21] herman Bergson: I would NOT recommend Ibuprofen, CB...

[13:21] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): there are so many conflicting views on this

[13:21] herman Bergson: Oh yes Gemma and we are going enjoy them all :-))

[13:21] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): I feel like i am using free will

[13:22] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): when I decide something

[13:22]  Nιﮮк (nick.cassavetes): A pity I don't remember the 4 causes theory of Aristotle, but Plato also described the whole issue I believe when he was addressing the matter, we can say we sit here because our (pixel) bones are arranged so and so, or that we decided to ... the problem arrises when one view tries to be exclusive.

[13:22] herman Bergson: the fun is...we all think we do :-)

[13:22] CB Axel: Even if our will is influenced by religion, morals, habit, or custom we choose to be influenced by those.

[13:22] CB Axel: Don't we?

[13:23] Ciska Riverstone: jup

[13:23] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): true if we realize it

[13:23] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): some don’t i think

[13:23] CB Axel: Psychopaths choose not to be.

[13:23] herman Bergson: But when it is the result of education, CB?

[13:23] Ciska Riverstone: matter of consciousness

[13:23] Ciska Riverstone: ;)

[13:23]  Nιﮮк (nick.cassavetes): As for influences, I strongly believe we can emancipate from pretty much everything.

[13:23] herman Bergson: You are born is a religious family and raised that way

[13:24] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): true

[13:24] CB Axel: Yeah. We don't get to choose our education, do we? Hmmm.

[13:24] Ciska Riverstone: the question is if you question it ;)

[13:24] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): it takes a long time to get over that if ever

[13:24] CB Axel: I have veered far to the left of what my parents taught me.

[13:24] herman Bergson: But suppose someone  stimulates you to question it Csika....

[13:24] Velvet (velvet.braham): me too, CB

[13:25] Ciska Riverstone: then I decide if i'm stimulated by it or not - no?

[13:25] herman Bergson: REally?

[13:25] herman Bergson: Supppose you are in love with the person?

[13:25] CB Axel: That someone has probably stimulated someone else to question, too, but hasn't. But that's probably because they've been indoctrinated into not questioning.

[13:25] Ciska Riverstone: well as not everyone is responding to listening to a philosophy class  - I guess so ;)

[13:26]  Nιﮮк (nick.cassavetes): don't think of a red fox! ;)

[13:26] herman Bergson: Well...a nice bunch of questions already....

[13:26] Ciska Riverstone: being in love with someone makes the hormone system more active which might bring a temporary or long term taking over of the love

[13:27] herman Bergson: Ahh a nice one Nick!

[13:27]  Nιﮮк (nick.cassavetes): hehe

[13:27]  Nιﮮк (nick.cassavetes): :)

[13:27] CB Axel: I can't think of a red fox. I'm already thinking of an elephant someone told me not to think about earlier.

[13:27]  Nιﮮк (nick.cassavetes): lol

[13:27] Velvet (velvet.braham): lol

[13:27] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): CB is always ready

[13:27] Ciska Riverstone: heheh

[13:27] herman Bergson: I am color blind :-)

[13:27]  Nιﮮк (nick.cassavetes): we are all influenceable

[13:27] Ciska Riverstone: sure

[13:27] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): yes

[13:27]  Nιﮮк (nick.cassavetes): good one Herman :)

[13:27] Ciska Riverstone: but what sticks?

[13:27] Ciska Riverstone: don'T we pick and choose that?

[13:28] Velvet (velvet.braham): influence doesn't negate free will

[13:28] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): and later it may change in our minds anyway

[13:28] herman Bergson: Bu tthen we first need to define FREE WILL Velvet...

[13:28] Ciska Riverstone: yes gemma ;)

[13:28]  Nιﮮк (nick.cassavetes): I think choices build up in a way, like become a path ... Sartre wrote about that I believe

[13:28] Ciska Riverstone: (especially when u have two x chromosomes)

[13:28] Velvet (velvet.braham): getting ahead of myself again!

[13:29]  Nιﮮк (nick.cassavetes): existential inclination or something

[13:29] herman Bergson: I guess one thing is absolutely become clear here....

[13:29] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): and it is interesting to think that all those guys uttering their thoughts on the individual were mostly thinking male gender anyway

[13:29] herman Bergson: free will si not an easy piece at all....

[13:30] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): and most women around them never really had free will at that time

[13:30]  Nιﮮк (nick.cassavetes): it is not indeed :) but nothing is if you think of it in absolutes, and free will begs absolute terms a lot maybe?

[13:30] Ciska Riverstone: well they might have had some but they could not live it openly ;)

[13:30] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): or ever thought they did

[13:30] Velvet (velvet.braham): I was probably 15 when I realized I had choices

[13:31] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): I think i was about 40

[13:31] herman Bergson: We had 30+ female philosophers presented here...:-)

[13:31] Velvet (velvet.braham): before that, no free will at all

[13:31] CB Axel: lol

[13:31] herman Bergson: But I admit...they are a minority....

[13:32] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): right

[13:32] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): we studied them

[13:32] herman Bergson: while women are at least 50% of the world population :-)

[13:32] Velvet (velvet.braham): well, that's a sad state of affairs

[13:32] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): Sneaks out, enjoy ㋡

[13:32] herman Bergson: it is indeed Velvet......

[13:32] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): it was and still is in some places

[13:32] CB Axel: Good night, Chantal.

[13:33] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): bye chantal

[13:33] herman Bergson: We almost leave 50% of all intellectual talent in this world unused...

[13:33] Velvet (velvet.braham): Perhaps the women are too busy running things to stop and examine the philosophy of it.

[13:33] herman Bergson: There was a Madame de Curie....

[13:33] herman Bergson: Why not a female Einstein

[13:34] CB Axel: I was thinking along that same line, Velvet. °͜°

[13:34] herman Bergson: but this is another subject :-))

[13:34] Velvet (velvet.braham): Marie Curie was badass.

[13:34] herman Bergson: lol...was she?

[13:34] Velvet (velvet.braham): heck, yes.

[13:34] CB Axel: Pierre Curie was too, for recognizing that Marie could contribute.

[13:35] Velvet (velvet.braham): he was smart enough to recognize her

[13:35] herman Bergson: For those who love the gossip..check them out at Wikipedia or better sources :-)

[13:35] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): ok

[13:35] herman Bergson: Follow  your own free will here ^_^

[13:35] Velvet (velvet.braham): homework!

[13:35] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): i think i remember doing that

[13:36] CB Axel: I've never had gossip assigned as homework before. °͜°

[13:36] herman Bergson: Cool , isnt it, CB :-)

[13:36] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): sometimes it has to be the first time CB:)

[13:36] Velvet (velvet.braham): Philosophy keeps surprising me

[13:37] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): ( it was my free will to write this)

[13:37] herman Bergson: WEll, at least it has become clear that FREE WILL as such is not just a simple issue....

[13:37] herman Bergson: No Beertje...it was caused by the dialog here...:-)

[13:37] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): ㋡

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

[13:37] herman Bergson: so no free will in that :-)

[13:38] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): very involved as usual

[13:38] Ciska Riverstone: maybe free will is limited by reality ;)

[13:38] herman Bergson: this is reality..:-)

[13:38] Velvet (velvet.braham): hang on, it was influenced by the discussion

[13:38] CB Axel: Reality. Man I hate that stuff.

[13:38] Velvet (velvet.braham): but Beertje always had free will to participate

[13:38] Ciska Riverstone: so for us it looks free because there are so many possibilities that we cannot oversee the combinations

[13:39] herman Bergson: yes Ciska...the many options situation....

[13:39] Ciska Riverstone: hence it feels free

[13:39] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): ㋡

[13:39]  Nιﮮк (nick.cassavetes): I think we always have givens, total emancipation is impossible ... also no view from nowhere ... so our decisions are always based on both givens and partial views.

[13:39] herman Bergson: Just what you say...we FEEL free.....

[13:40] Ciska Riverstone: sure

[13:40] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): ok

[13:40] herman Bergson: That is the randomness situation or total indeterminism as it is called Nick....yes

[13:40] CB Axel: So we are not all individuals since each one of us influences, and therefore takes away, our free will.

[13:40] CB Axel: Each other's free will.

[13:40] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): hmmm

[13:41] Velvet (velvet.braham): no, I don't think influence is the same as taking away

[13:41] CB Axel: Alright, limits then?

[13:41] herman Bergson: Well..CB...your freedom limits mine and mutatis mutandis mine limits yours...

[13:41] Velvet (velvet.braham): well, limits yes, but even those are elf-imposed

[13:41] Velvet (velvet.braham): lol self-imposed

[13:42] Ciska Riverstone: I can say : polly wants a cookie

[13:42] CB Axel: LOL. Now elves are influencing me? That explains a lot!

[13:42] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): right

[13:42] Ciska Riverstone: does not make sense in the situation here

[13:42] herman Bergson: self imposed or not...is that a free choice Velvet?

[13:42] Ciska Riverstone: but i'm free to do so

[13:42] Velvet (velvet.braham): yes!

[13:42]  Nιﮮк (nick.cassavetes): I think to get to the core (ontologically) we are more social being then individuals anyway :)

[13:42] Ciska Riverstone: so of course I will follow an aim - discussing things here - the topic

[13:42] Ciska Riverstone: thats my choice

[13:43] Ciska Riverstone: otherwise I would have rezzed somewhere as a bird

[13:43] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): i have done that

[13:43] herman Bergson: I think you all feel what this is al about....

[13:43] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate) GIGGLES!!

[13:43] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): ...LOL...

[13:43] Ciska Riverstone: hahaha gemma

[13:44] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): been a toucan in class

[13:44] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): we had our own stand too

[13:44] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): that herman made

[13:44] herman Bergson: Picture is on the wall Gemma :-)

[13:44] herman Bergson: up there :-))

[13:44] CB Axel: Nice

[13:44] herman Bergson: to my right

[13:45] herman Bergson: I think it is time for a systematic analysis of this problem of free will....

[13:46] herman Bergson: not right now....we can spend some lectures on the subject :-)

[13:46] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): ok

[13:46] herman Bergson: philosophers quarreled about a 2300 years about it and still do

[13:47] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): right

[13:47] Guestboook van tipjar stand: CB Axel donated L$100. Thank you very much, it is much appreciated!

[13:47] CB Axel: So we are carrying on a fine tradition.

[13:47] herman Bergson: SO...for today...thank you all for your stimulating participation again.....

[13:47] herman Bergson: Class dismissed..^_^

[13:47] Ciska Riverstone: thank you herman

[13:47] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): ♥ Thank Youuuuuuuuuu!! ♥

[13:47] Ciska Riverstone: thanx folks

[13:48] Velvet (velvet.braham): Thank you Professor!

[13:48] CB Axel: Thank you, Herman.

[13:48] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): Thank you Herman ㋡

[13:48] CB Axel: And thanks to everyone for such a good discussion. °͜°

[13:48] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): bye for now

[13:48] Ciska Riverstone: have a great week everyone

[13:48] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): hope to make it thursday

[13:48] CB Axel: See you on Thursday.

[13:48] Velvet (velvet.braham): I'm totally going to research the Curies

[13:48] herman Bergson: Dont get too drunk Gemma :-)

[13:49]  Nιﮮк (nick.cassavetes): ty Herman, very cool that you still do these classes :)

[13:49] herman Bergson: yes...must have been a couple, Velvet ^_^

[13:49] Velvet (velvet.braham): well, that much I knew! Thank you again Professor!

[13:49] herman Bergson: My pleasure Velvet...

601: The Individual is born...

I thought it might be helpful to put all we have discussed so far in a diagram. 

It recapitulates nicely all we have said about the concept of the individual as it developed in Europe.

Just look at it closely….it is quite a picture….

In fact it is a rather unique picture. Nowhere in the world has developed such a view of man except in Europe.

The ultimate conclusion of this individual  could be, that he is all alone in the universe and has to discover why he exists all by himself.

So let’s turn our attention to Jean-Paul Sartre (1905 -1980). He argues that mankind is abandoned in the world. 

This is not to say mankind has been abandoned in the sense of 'left behind' or 'neglected' by something or someone.

For Sartre there is nothing "out there" that could have abandoned us in this way. Rather, mankind is abandoned because there is no God to give human life purpose or moral direction.

Sartre's adoption of the notion of abandonment is the clearest possible expression of his profound atheism, his view that mankind is a cosmic accident and not the product of some higher design on the part of God or gods.

This conclusion brings us to the quintessence of Sartre's existentialism. As the human being is uncreated the idea or essence of each person does not precede his existence. Thence existence precedes essence.

With this maxim Sartre wants to say that the human being first exists without goal or definition and finds himself in the world. As a reaction on this awareness he defines the meaning of his existence.

This is the very opposite of philosophical idealism which we already find with Plato and Aristoteles. For Sartre it is not ideas, essences or minds that are primary but pure existence in the form of Being-IN-itself.

Being-IN-itself, like a stone just IS, does not depend on anything else for its being, whereas Being-FOR-itself, the basis of consciousness and ideas, arises through the negation of Being-IN-itself.

Sartre places negation at the centre of his ontological theory of consciousness, his theory of Being-FOR-itself. 

In "Being and Nothingness" he argues that the only kind of being that can exist as a relation to reality or the world is a being that is, in itself, nothing, the negation of Being-IN-itself.

This may sound pretty abstract and you may wonder what he means by this. Let me try to explain. We are in the world in two ways. 

On the one hand we are a material object, a body and as such we exist in the same way a stone exists.

Consciousness, however, makes us aware of our Being and is as such the negation of our Being-IN-itself. We become without purpose or design a Being-FOR-itself. Impossible to be in the world like a stone is.

The designer of the meaning of our live are we ourselves. We create ourselves by making choices, groundless choices, but we have to choose for even not choosing is a choice.

Sartre's general claim is that ultimately choice is always and unavoidably based upon arbitrary decisions. 

His view is that if a choice could be guided and influenced in any way by beliefs, convictions or values, it would be a caused phenomenon rather than a genuinely free choice.

In the novels of Sartre we meet the ultimate individual, an unknown concept to many people on this earth. What to think of this situation ???

Thank you for your  attention…the floor is yours…

The Discussion

The Discussion

[13:21] herman Bergson smiles

[13:21] herman Bergson: not a easy one today I guess :-)

[13:22] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): a bit tricky but i think I get it some

[13:22] herman Bergson: Bsic idea is that you define yourself, design your own existence.....

[13:22] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): the idea that we have a purpose is our own idea sort of if i get his ideas right

[13:22] herman Bergson: there si no karma or fate or things like that for you...

[13:23] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): since we are not created for a specific purpose but just happen to be here

[13:23] herman Bergson: Indeed bejiita...you define your own purpose in life

[13:23] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ah

[13:24] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): Me myself decide my interests for ex, part of it might be genetic what you are interested in however

[13:24] herman Bergson: IN a way we are a being -IN - itself...we are just there...

[13:24] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): cause I’ve even since little been very technically interested for x

[13:24] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ex

[13:24] herman Bergson: But our ocnsciousness tells us THAT we are there....a next step which never happens to a stone...

[13:25] CB Axel: Lucky stone

[13:25] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): hehe

[13:25] Uli Helendale: Does Sartre discuss an existential crisis? Where we come to the understanding that we have no meaning?

[13:25] Areyn Laurasia: seems like such a cold detached sterile existence

[13:26] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): we have a meaning and that is to discover how everything else work, with machines like LHC and spaceships

[13:26] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ㋡

[13:26] herman Bergson: Yes CB..we would LOVE to be just a stone on this earth.....escaping our responsibility to choose

[13:26] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): I mean we have a built in curiosity drive

[13:26] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): the urge to discover

[13:26] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): at least most of us have

[13:26] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): least

[13:26] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): including me

[13:27] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): and to experiment

[13:27] herman Bergson: What is an existential crisis Uli?

[13:27] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): why Bejiita?

[13:27] Uli Helendale: The point at which we face the notion that there is nothing, no god or other force who can provide us with meaning.

[13:28] herman Bergson: Isn't is philosophical interesting that you call suhan observation a crisis?

[13:28] herman Bergson: isnt that begging the question?

[13:28] herman Bergson: But your remark is very interesting...

[13:29] Uli Helendale: I think I make the distinction because it is a crisis for some. Maybe not for all, anymore.

[13:29] Areyn Laurasia: like the look in the eyes of someone on their deathbed

[13:29] herman Bergson: Yes I agree Uli...

[13:29] Uli Helendale: (I see it as a wonderful opportunity)

[13:30] Areyn Laurasia: an empowering opportunity :)

[13:30] herman Bergson: Bu tit is a crisis for those who believe in  whatever ....which defines their lives

[13:30] Uli Helendale: Yes.

[13:31] herman Bergson: We defined the individual.....

[13:31] herman Bergson: I think it is an amazing fact...

[13:31] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ah

[13:32] herman Bergson: Sartre took everything away from the individual...reduced it to a Cartesian ERGO SUM...

[13:32] herman Bergson: Just look arounfd in this world....

[13:32] herman Bergson: this kind of thinking is a Western product only....

[13:33] herman Bergson: bu tthe consequence of this "product" is that we have medicines, physics, psychology, and whatever sciences there are to understand our existence

[13:34] Areyn Laurasia: which level of the individual are we looking at? who you think you are? who you are based on how you appear? or who others think you are?

[13:34] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): all of it I guess

[13:34] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): but we define ourselves, no one else, no god or whatever

[13:34] herman Bergson: I think that is a psychological question Areyn....

[13:34] Uli Helendale: Are you contrasting the Western individual to an idea of the individual as in relation to others, to nature, etc.?

[13:34] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): there is thus nothing as fate

[13:35] Uli Helendale: A more communal individual?

[13:35] herman Bergson: yes yes Uli...I am contrasting our concept of  "the individual" to any other culture on this earth

[13:36] herman Bergson: and this from a Darwinian point of view...where is our chance of survival...

[13:36] herman Bergson: for instance...in Islam????

[13:36] herman Bergson: just to name a popular subject :-)

[13:37] Uli Helendale: hmmm, that makes me wonder about your conclusion that the Western individual is a scientific individual. More communal cultures may not focus on science as much but certainly have meaningful ways of thinking about things that don't align with our Western understanding.

[13:38] herman Bergson: that doesn’t answer the question of survival...

[13:38] herman Bergson: better medicines offer better chances....

[13:38] herman Bergson: not better meaningful ways of thinking

[13:39] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): and u need science to make medicine

[13:39] herman Bergson: my point bejiita...

[13:39] herman Bergson: so you need a scientific analysis of reality

[13:39] Uli Helendale: Communal cultures, or those that come from "developing" countries, often have medicinal treatments that work for them. Also, their way of living harmoniously with nature provides for a sustainable approach to living on this planet.

[13:39] Uli Helendale: But yes, I understand what you're saying. :)

[13:40] Areyn Laurasia: if the western individual is a scientific individual, why then the illogical choice?

[13:40] herman Bergson: which illogical choice Areyn?

[13:42] herman Bergson: which illogical....:-)

[13:42] Areyn Laurasia: a few years back, the west did nothing with Syria, today, they are throwing billions and helpless under the deluge of refugees and more fearful and hateful sentiments in the western society

[13:42] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): (sneaks out to turn in, too tired, enjoy everyone)

[13:42] herman Bergson: ahh...

[13:42] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): welterusten Chantal

[13:42] herman Bergson: keep in mind one thing....

[13:43] herman Bergson: it is common practice to compare the human brain to a computer....

[13:43] herman Bergson: there is no greater nonsense than that...

[13:43] Uli Helendale: I have to go as well, but thank you. I'll come to another of these discussions. :)

[13:43] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): bye Uli

[13:43] herman Bergson: a computer is a completely predictable determinate machine..our brain isn’t at all..

[13:43] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): A computer can not feel, its just switches dumbly following whatever is fed to it

[13:44] herman Bergson: our brain is a mass of conflicting processes...

[13:44] herman Bergson: one process we call rationality...the prefrontal lobe at work....

[13:44] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): all a computer can sense is voltage or no voltage 1 and 0 no matter what it is doing

[13:45] herman Bergson: bu tthat is just a part of our brain....we are much more complex...

[13:45] herman Bergson: so we are able to create chaos

[13:45] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): isn't the whole universe chaos?

[13:46] Areyn Laurasia: entropy? :)

[13:46] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): a computer can't create chaos as even a random number generator have to be based on definite math for a computer to be able to process

[13:46] herman Bergson: I donn't know Beertje :-)

[13:46] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): true chaos cant be described wit a formula, its just everything messed up

[13:46] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): divided evenly

[13:46] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): all over

[13:47] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): blended

[13:47] herman Bergson: And if it was...I dont mind ...all here seems pretty  organised :-)

[13:47] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): I like controlled chaos and that i guess you could use a computer for

[13:47] herman Bergson: Bejiita's particles are in chaos now Beertje!

[13:47] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): smiles

[13:47] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): indeed they are since the machines are still off

[13:48] herman Bergson: The it i better to end this chaos for today, dear friends :-)

[13:48] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): but lot of data to go through still

[13:48] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): hehe

[13:48] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): this was something to think about anyway

[13:48] Areyn Laurasia: that's one way to put it into order :)

[13:48] herman Bergson: So thank you all for your participation again....Class dismissed....

[13:49] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): cu next time ㋡

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

[[13:49] herman Bergson: My pleasure CB :-)

[13:49] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): ㋡ great lecture Herman, thank you

[13:49] CB Axel: Much to think about.

[13:49] Areyn Laurasia: indeed

600; The Individual, CB and evolution

In the debate after the previous lecture CB made some remarks which unfortunately passed unnoticed due to the racist and discriminating remarks of one of the participants.

Unfortunately we first had to deal with that. However, I’d like to discuss CB’s remarks, for they suggest a real issue.

CB said: “As soon as the individual feels threatened, it seeks to band together with others who think the same. I don't know if we can completely pull ourselves away from tribal thinking.”

This morning there was an article in my newspaper, an interview with the authors of the book “Mismatch. Hoe we dagelijks worden misleid door ons oeroud brain.” (2016)

It is a Dutch publication. Translated the title of the book is “Mismatch.How we are day-by-day are mislead by our age-old brain.”

The point here is, that humans have most recently evolved to life as hunter-gatherers, where food resources were scarce. 

In the 10,000 years the advent of agriculture, the environment and lifestyle that humans live in have changed considerably, 

so much so that evolution has not been able to keep up with the rapid changes in environment. This leads to the notion of a mismatch theory in humans.

The essence of mismatch theory is that organisms possess traits, including behavioural, emotional, and biological,

that have been passed down through generations, preserved by natural selection because of their adaptive function in a given environment. 

However, the given environment of the evolutionary period can be quite unlike the current environment. 

Therefore, traits that were at one time adaptive in a certain environment, are now "mismatched" to the environment that the trait is currently present in. (from Wikipedia)

Maybe within this context CB’s observation regarding inclinations to tribal behaviour could be explained. An explanation by Evolutionary Psychology.

Our present cultural situation shows, that we have adopted the stand that ideally conflicts have to be resolved in peaceful and democratic ways,

based on the respect for every individual and for instance on Human Right. Our ability to use our ratio should be the leading principle and not primitive US versus THEM reflexes.

The later could be regarded as an example of a Mismatch, demonstrating that our brain is not adequate in dealing with enmities.

Another beloved example of mismatch is our current tendency to obesity. In Pleistocene environments sugars were relatively uncommon in the human diet since 200.000 year ago. (assumption)

In the modern Western diet, however, food with such properties is relatively easy to acquire. This can be problematic since an abundance of sugars

combined with the human adaptation to prefer them can, and often does, contribute to obesity and chronic metabolic syndrome.

However, the mismatch hypothesis is based upon assumptions regarding our ancestor’s environment, how we interacted with it, 

and how we evolved as a result.  There are many assumptions and guesses based upon few direct observational data. 

All nature loves sweets, from bee to bear and none of them suffer of obesity. And that we do, should be caused 

by the fact that our evolution of the brain didn’t keep pace with the changes in our environment? I have my serious doubts about that theory.

Being an individual doesn’t mean that our brain is like a compute,where you have input and output. Our brain is much more complicated.

You have input and how it is dealt with just depends on who you are as an individual.

Thank you…the floor is yours….

The discussion

[13:21] herman Bergson: To introduce you to evolutionary psychology...:-)

[13:21] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): I would love to see you discuss with one

[13:21] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): or with an anthropologist

[13:21] herman Bergson: I don't think it leads to understanding the individual..

[13:22] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): ah more in general you mean

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

[13:22] CB Axel: I still feel that when stressed, our cerebral cortex gets overwhelmed and lets the more primitive part of our brains take over.

[13:22] herman Bergson: yes CB..to some extend this is true, I think

[13:23] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): maybe is stress situations we need shelter near other individuals

[13:23] herman Bergson: Yet, you can ask the question...to what extend.....is this extend decreasing for instance?

[13:24] herman Bergson: Last week there was a column in my newspaper...

[13:24] herman Bergson: the auther discussed those prehistoric findings in Kenya of this massacre...

[13:24] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): when in stress, anxiety or fear... seek other like minded... tribe, religion etc.... sounds plausible Beertje

[13:24] herman Bergson: and he said...yes there we go...

[13:25] herman Bergson: remove the thin layer of varnish and man is that ferocious animal again....

[13:25] CB Axel: Exactly.

[13:25] herman Bergson: but in his opinion that was too easy....

[13:26] herman Bergson: we HAVE changed.....

[13:26] herman Bergson: we are less violent to begin with....

[13:26] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): due to language

[13:26] CB Axel: Until cornered.

[13:26] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): ㋡

[13:26] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): does that count for every human on this planet?

[13:26] herman Bergson: even when cornered....

[13:26] herman Bergson: of course not Beertje...

[13:27] herman Bergson: no

[13:27] herman Bergson: The complexity of this world is that it is in so many different stages of development

[13:27] CB Axel nods

[13:27] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): always have been... seems to shift around the globe

[13:28] herman Bergson: That is one of the tricky points of this project...:-)

[13:28] herman Bergson: the suggestion that we as Western civilisation are in the lead :-))

[13:29] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): This time we are

[13:29] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): China has been for centuries...so were the greek and romans etc

[13:29] herman Bergson: and here I mean in the lead of developing a way of coexistence with our fellowmen based on the concept of individuality

[13:30] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): as you said Chantal last week..maybe it is because we live in a cool area, we can keep our heads cool

[13:30] herman Bergson: China for instance never has been, Chantal....

[13:30] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): By what standards Herman?

[13:30] herman Bergson: by the standard of individuality.....

[13:30] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): writing? they did centuries before we did ㋡

[13:30] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): ah true that one 100%

[13:30] herman Bergson: Teh individual never has been a value in Chinese culture...

[13:30] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): true

[13:31] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): opposite even

[13:31] herman Bergson: the family was or the collective...

[13:31] CB Axel: They even have one time zone for the entire country. °͜°

[13:31] CB Axel: Although, that could be a good thing.

[13:31] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): yes CB ㋡ funny really

[13:32] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): sorry herman... get back on track please

[13:32] herman Bergson: It needs a lot more of research but it is my belief that this typical concept of individuality is a European "invention"

[13:33] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): isn't america an example of it too? american dream and all

[13:33] CB Axel: I'm not sure but I think some tribes of native Americans valued the individual.

[13:33] herman Bergson: That could be the case indeed, CB....

[13:34] herman Bergson: But I also relate this concept of individuality to a scientific interpretation and approach of reality

[13:34] CB Axel: That would be really interesting, since native Americans descended from Asians.

[13:35] herman Bergson: I mean...the relation between the individual and how he looks at his world

[13:35] herman Bergson: To begin with...

[13:36] herman Bergson: it was the European individual who discovered based on hard data that he was NOT the centre of the universe

[13:36] herman Bergson: to discover that you just are somewhere in the universe on some random planet...

[13:37] CB Axel: But did the Chinese, for example, think that mankind was the centre of the universe?

[13:37] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): (Chinese communism states china is the centre)

[13:37] herman Bergson: I don't know enough about Chinese culture in that detail...

[13:38] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): even taught their students you can see the great wall from space

[13:38] herman Bergson: But the emperor was their centre of their universe

[13:38] CB Axel: Did they think the earth was the centre of everything?

[13:38] herman Bergson: I wonder if thy ever thought about such things at all :-)

[13:38] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): me too

[13:38] herman Bergson: in the way we did

[13:39] CB Axel: Yes. We and our one god.

[13:39] herman Bergson: Confucius didn’t for instance...

[13:40] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): Chinese kept their philosophies close to nature, family life and the emperor

[13:40] herman Bergson: Well..Kepler and Galilei caused problems for that one god....

[13:40] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): earth business

[13:40] herman Bergson: for he too was removed form the centre of things and had to find a new home :-)

[13:41] herman Bergson: Yes Chantall....

[13:43] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): during the black death in  

[13:43] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): some died... some did not

[13:43] herman Bergson: Today you may have learnt that I have no high hopes of Evolutionary Psychology to bring us a better understanding of the development of the concept of "teh individual" in an evolutionary sense

[13:44] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): past years we discovered some people are immune .... can it be so... thats some brains are made to function individually and others need "tribes, being part of a group"?

[13:44] herman Bergson: so when we try to understand tribal inclinations in our own behaviour....the mismatch there is just speculation...

[13:45] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): you mean some brains are developing in another way Chantal?

[13:45] herman Bergson: Here I prefer neurobiological insights more

[13:45] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): yes... as in their brain or mind needs others?

[13:46] herman Bergson: I already referred to that issue in my latest lecture Chantal....

[13:46] herman Bergson: and I therefore distinguished between evolution of the mind and evolution of the brain

[13:46] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): yes i recall

[13:47] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): but I keep searching for the why ㋡

[13:47] herman Bergson: as I said last Sunday.....education and a scientific view of the world, Chantal....that could explain a lot

[13:48] CB Axel: That could.

[13:48] herman Bergson: it is also the nature  nurture problem

[13:48] herman Bergson: we just do not know....

[13:48] CB Axel: It's shown that the better educated a woman is, the less likely she is to have children.

[13:49] herman Bergson: that is nly true in a culture where such a woman can get a demanding job, CB :-)

[13:49] herman Bergson: and a cerreer

[13:50] herman Bergson: otherwise you say that there is a simple causal relation between level of education and procreation

[13:50] CB Axel: There seems to be.

[13:51] herman Bergson: Then...when you want a population to grow you should  exclude women form education :-)

[13:52] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): bad idea!!!!!!!

[13:52] herman Bergson: At this moment for instance in China where the one child policy has disastrous consequences

[13:52] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): ㋡

[13:52] CB Axel: Well, is it because education makes women want fewer children, or does having lots of children keep a woman from getting an education?

[13:53] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): Maybe the ability to protection is the reason ㋡

[13:53] herman Bergson: It is true that birthrates went down the more educated a population became here in Europe :-)

[13:53] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): I can imagine african women have less options to get a pill or condom

[13:54] herman Bergson: and education

[13:54] CB Axel: Even when women get condoms, the men refuse to use them.

[13:54] herman Bergson: true...

[13:54] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): I know CB... you are as well as informed I often notice ㋡ love it

[13:55] herman Bergson: I think it is time to come to an end again :-)

[13:56] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): (oh I am assuming here, excuse me, was talking about Africa and the struggles women have there to have safe sex)

[13:56] herman Bergson: Thank you for your participation again ...:-)

[13:56] CB Axel: Thank you, Herman.

[13:56] Chantal (nymf.hathaway): Was great Herman ㋡

[13:56] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): thank you Herman ㋡

[13:56] herman Bergson: Class dismissed ^_^

599: Some evolution of the Individual

What I try to achieve with this project is to obtain a kind of clear picture of the meaning of the concept “the individual”.

We take it so for granted that we are respected as an individual, that we may claim individual rights, freedom and property.

On the other hand, as soon as we claim that this is a real positive achievement and compare this with other cultures, which don’t support individualism,

in no time we’ll hear the objection that this is Eurocentric or Western thinking and values. Is this kind of cultural relativism justified?

As a working hypothesis I take the view, that individualism as it has evolved in Europe is an evolutionary step in the development of the mind.

It is rather dangerous to add in line with modern ideas like “We are our brain”, that this also relates to an evolutionary step in the development of the brain. Yet through the ages our genes have mutated.

If you value individualism and the individual, you then implicitly would be claiming that the Western brain is more evolved than the brains of people in other cultures.

But because we hardly have any idea how the mind is related to or generated by the brain and the equation BRAIN == MIND is questionable,

why couldn’t there be two lines of evolution, one of the brain and one of the mind?

Just imagine a complex machine and two operators. They both operate the same machine, but operator A gets significantly better results than operator B.

Then you would conclude that operator A is better than operator B. You could analyse how A and B operate the machine and thus discover the cause of the discrepancy.

A simple example from real life. Assume that all homo sapiens in this stage of his evolution have the same central nervous system and brain.

But we can see, that using that brain in one way is better than in another way or to say it in other words: a person with education has more chances of survival than one without education.

Thence you could come to the conclusion, that education contributes to or even influences the evolution of the mind.

One of the strong forces in how we use our brain is the WE versus THE OTHERS thinking.

Archeological findings proof, that this way of using our brain has a long history. Recently 10.000 years  old remains were discovered in Kenya.

A group of people, women, children, massacred. Crushed skulls, smashed knees, limbs, an arrowhead inside a skull.

You need little imagination to picture what must have happened 10.000 years ago…. it was US against THEM.

The diagram, which I presented you is completely based on this atavistic feeling. Just think of religious or tribal feelings……they intrinsically define THE OTHERS.

Up to the present day we see how all acts of terrorism are justified by claiming that THE OTHERS have to be killed.

And then there is Descartes, not defining his personal identity by contrasting it to THE OTHERS, but by simple reference to the consciousness of his own mind.

That is what this project is about: the hypothesis that consciousness of individuality is an evolutionary stage in evolution of the mind.

So let’s continue our research on this subject….

Thank you again for your attention….the floor is yours…

The Discussion

[13:19] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate) whispers: interesting so you do agree then that evolution is still going on in humans

[13:19] herman Bergson: Take your time to think this over...:-)

[13:19] CB Axel: So, according to Descartes, everyone is the other. Even our own families, etc. °͜°

[13:19]  Bejiita (bejiita.imako): This we and them thinking i think is a bit strange, after all we are all the same but I guess many dont think like that

[13:19] herman Bergson: of course evolution  is still going on Gemma....

[13:20] herman Bergson: No no CB

[13:20]  Bejiita (bejiita.imako): On the other hand i have strong empathy for others in general as long they are kind to both me and others

[13:20] Wolfy (wolfy737): you were talking about US and OTHERS among the people...but what about an idea if there would not be any US or OTHERS but HUMANKIND and inferior SPECIES

[13:20] herman Bergson: From the Cartesian point of view there IS no other....

[13:20] Stranger Nightfire: seems to me as western thought progressed we just got into larger and larger and more horrible wars

[13:20] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): back then it was tribes

[13:21] Stranger Nightfire: that is why the dada movement rejected western rationality entirely

[13:21] Wolfy (wolfy737): brain has every animal...but human mind is something special and not common to all

[13:21] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): those bones were bodies attacked by another we tribe

[13:21] Stranger Nightfire: they said if the best you can give us is the horrors of WWI then the hell with you

[13:23] herman Bergson: WWII was also base don the US and THE OTHERS thinking.....

[13:23] herman Bergson: the pure race and the rest of the world....

[13:23] Wolfy (wolfy737): but I must absolutely agree with idea that the education - the "will to know" -as I call it myself in my works - gives an advantage to humankind

[13:23] herman Bergson: total collectivistic  situation

[13:24] Wolfy (wolfy737): but not all - as it calls - "races" are able to achieve the highest level of knowledge...

[13:24] Stranger Nightfire: and right now in this country we may be about to elect a vicious fascist as president, doesn't seem like we are doing such a great job of evolving

[13:24] herman Bergson: my point is that collectivism can't occur when we see ourselves as individuals...but that is the extreme point of view

[13:24]  Bejiita (bejiita.imako): If i got hold of Trump i would immediately put him in the trash compactor

[13:25]  Bejiita (bejiita.imako) whispers: what an idiot that is!

[13:25] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate) GIGGLES!!

[13:25] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): ...LOL...

[13:25] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): he is sure an example of oe who is an individual who can do and say what he wants

[13:25]  Bejiita (bejiita.imako): if he becomes president not only US but the entire world is at risk since us affect the rest of the world

[13:25] herman Bergson: There I agree with you, Stranger !!!!

[13:25] CB Axel: That would be nice, Herman, but I don't see that happening. As soon as the individual feels threatened, it seeks to band together with others who think the same.

[13:25] herman Bergson: That man is a danger to world peace...

[13:25] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): agreed

[13:26]  Bejiita (bejiita.imako): indeed

[13:26] CB Axel: I don't know if we can completely pull ourselves away from tribal thinking.

[13:26] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): the centre will not allow it to happen

[13:26] herman Bergson: And if the American people elects him that people is too!

[13:26] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): i really don’t think it will

[13:26] CB Axel: I keep hoping that we can, but I'm pessimistic.

[13:26]  Bejiita (bejiita.imako): I see trump like Homer Simpson at the controls of their nuclear weapons

[13:26] Wolfy (wolfy737): is not Obama danger for the entire world as well?

[13:26] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): not me

[13:26]  Bejiita (bejiita.imako): LALLALA CLICK PUSH KABOOOM BLAM

[13:27] herman Bergson: Trump is the ultimate example of the WE and the others thinking!!!!

[13:27] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): where he is gaining ground is among many uneducated

[13:27]  Bejiita (bejiita.imako): I guess

[13:27] CB Axel: Perhaps, Bejiita, that is the next step in our evolution.

[13:27] Wolfy (wolfy737): the same Obama...as I have noticed

[13:27]  Bejiita (bejiita.imako): I don’t get how people can support this bastard

[13:27] Wolfy (wolfy737): Obama+jews+niggers

[13:27] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): because most of them are astards too

[13:27]  Bejiita (bejiita.imako): he is insane and full of shit

[13:27] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): bastards that is

[13:27] herman Bergson: What do you mean Wolfy???

[13:28] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): yes wolfy??

[13:28] CB Axel: Because they are afraid and think Trump will keep them safe. They're wrong, but I think that's what they think.

[13:28]  Bejiita (bejiita.imako): be safe from an idiot?

[13:28]  Bejiita (bejiita.imako): They are really wrong then

[13:28] CB Axel: And our discussion has evolved into a US political talk.

[13:28] CB Axel: sigh

[13:29] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): true

[13:29] herman Bergson: Explain your "Obama+jews+niggers" plz, Wolfy..

[13:29] Wolfy (wolfy737): I mean that while true MAN pretends to be humanist and follows jewish orders - as called NWO the jews and niggers gets higher power over MANKIND meanwhile

[13:29] CB Axel: The people who back Trump are afraid of Muslims, socialists (even though they are socialists themselves), unemployment, high taxes... the list goes on.

[13:29] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): jewish orders??

[13:29] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): N>>????

[13:30] Wolfy (wolfy737): everybody knows that Obama is supported by jews who wish to own true MANKIND - NWO (new world order)

[13:30] Stranger Nightfire: well trying to wrap our head around that we are evolving into higher level rational beings kind of had to bring it up

[13:30]  Bejiita (bejiita.imako): hmm i guess so

[13:30] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): we dont use that language I hope

[13:30] herman Bergson: Do we have a Donald Trump in here????

[13:30] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): good question i think

[13:30] Stranger Nightfire: modern politics I mean

[13:30] herman Bergson: Guess you are a bit out of line here Wolfy..

[13:30] Wolfy (wolfy737): I do not care of Trump...I do care of human future...and Obama is the best weapon in jewish hands

[13:31] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): unless we misunderstood

[13:31] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): good heavens guess we didn’t

[13:31] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): Obama a weapon in Jewish hands???????

[13:31] CB Axel: So you don't like Jews? I guess that's what you're saying.

[13:31] Wolfy (wolfy737): you began to talk about US and OTHERS and about knowledge and about politics

[13:31] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate) GIGGLES!!

[13:31] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): ...LOL...

[13:31] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): he has been fighting with benny since he got in office

[13:31] herman Bergson: Sorry Wolfy..but  I think you need better arguments for your point of view...so far you produce nonsense....

[13:32] herman Bergson: this is a philosophy class...

[13:32] Wolfy (wolfy737): yes...it is pretty hard to explain the ideas here by chat

[13:32] herman Bergson: we use facts and arguments for our statements....

[13:32] herman Bergson: it never has been otherwise here in class Wolfy....

[13:33] Wolfy (wolfy737): is it not philosophy to talk about humankind? about its unique brain and mind?

[13:33] herman Bergson: so..think twice before you say something

[13:33] Wolfy (wolfy737): ok... I am quiet from now

[13:33] herman Bergson: just a good advise...

[13:34] CB Axel: Yes, bigotry doesn't go over well here. °͜°

[13:34] herman Bergson: indeed it doesn’t...

[13:34] Wolfy (wolfy737): it is not about bigotry...omg

[13:34] herman Bergson: what does the word mean CB..:-))

[13:34] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): but that statement really was

[13:34] CB Axel: When you complain about Jews and niggers (a verboten word in the US) you are being bigoted.

[13:35] Wolfy (wolfy737): you are talking about brain and mind.... about the US and the OTHERS ... but using the wrong view by my opinion

[13:35] CB Axel: You are definitely being them against us.

[13:36] herman Bergson: in dutch Google translate it as "kwezelarij"...but I even do not understand the meaning of that obsolete dutch word....

[13:37] herman Bergson: but yet you are right CB :-))

[13:37] herman Bergson: Well...I think we all gained some new ideas after this debate....

[13:37] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): thinks the professor will edit the commentary for the blog

[13:38] herman Bergson: so...thank you all again for your participation :-)

[[13:38] CB Axel: Asterisks are our friends in editing. °͜°

[13:38] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): true

[13:38] herman Bergson: I will not edit a syllabi Gemma...it is as it is...

[[13:38] herman Bergson: I only will correct the typos...

[13:38] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): ♥ Thank Youuuuuuuuuu!! ♥

[13:39] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): see you next Tuesday I hope

[13:39] bergfrau Apfelbaum: ***** APPPPPPPLLLLAAAUUUSSSSEEEEEEE***********

[13:39] bergfrau Apfelbaum: ty herman & Class

[13:39] herman Bergson: Everyone here is responsible for his or her own remarks...

[13:39] CB Axel: I hope so, too, Gemma

[13:39] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): Thank you Herman

[13:39] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate) GIGGLES!!

[13:39] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): ...LOL...

[13:39] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): get yourself together bergie

[13:39]  Bejiita (bejiita.imako): anyway, lets dig deep into this

[13:40] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): bye for now

[13:40] herman Bergson: We will Bejiita :-)

[13:40]  Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ㋡

[13:40] bergfrau Apfelbaum: byebye Gemma :-)

[13:40] herman Bergson: Thank you all...class dismissed...

[13:40]  Bejiita (bejiita.imako): cu next time