Parlor Wit

Wherein Edmund Blackadder discovers that Captain Rum's ship has no crew...

Blackadder: Look, there's no need to panic. Someone in the crew will know how to steer this thing.
Capt. Rum: The crew, milord?
Blackadder: Yes, the crew.
Capt. Rum: What crew?
Blackadder: I was under the impression that it was common maritime practice for a ship to have a crew.
Capt. Rum: Opinion is divided on the subject.
Balckadder: Oh, really? [starting to get the picture]
Capt. Rum: Yahs. All the other captains say it is; I say it isn't.
Blackadder: Oh, God. Mad as a brush.

http://homepage.eircom.net/~odyssey/Quotes/Popular/TV/Blackadder.html

The Open Society and Its Enemies: Karl Popper

When I first heard of Karl Popper, many years ago, it was for his articles on the philosophy of science. He was most famous in that field for having asserted that "the scientific status of a theory is its falsifiability, or refutability, or testability.. " [http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/popper_falsification.html]

But I learned only recently that he also contributed to the philosophy of democracy. Here are some of his insights pertaining to political philosophy, as reported by others:

1. …[I]t is time for the ‘open society’, the one which: “sets free the critical powers of man” and “in which individuals are confronted with personal decisions”….[from “The ‘complete review’s Review” of The Open Society and Its Enemies, http://www.complete-review.com/reviews/popperk/opensae.htm]
2. “Economic power must not be permitted to dominate political power; if necessary, it must be fought and brought under control by political power.” [from “The ‘complete review’s Review”]
3. “Instead of posing as prophets we must become makers of our fate. We must learn to do things as well as we can, and to look out for our mistakes.” [from “The ‘complete review’s Review”]
4. The state is a necessary evil: its powers are not to be multiplied beyond what is necessary. [from “Liberal Principles” by Karl R. Popper, http://www.liberalsindia.com , Liberal Position Papers #2]
5. Freedom of thought, and free discussion, are ultimate Liberal values which do not really need any further justification. Nevertheless, they can also be justified pragmatically in terms of the part they play in the search for truth. Truth is not manifest; and it is not easy to come by. [from “Liberal Principles”]
6. “Because [Popper] regards living as first and foremost a process of problem solving he wants societies which are conducive to problem solving….a society organized on such lines will be more effective at solving its problems, and therefore more successful in achieving the aims of its members, than if it were organized along other lines.” [from “Philosophy and the Real World: An Introduction to Karl Popper”, by Brian Magee, Open Court Publishing, 1985; as are the following quotations. Extracts at http://lachlan.bluehaze.com.au/books/magee_popper_open_society.html.]
7. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.
8. The vital question is not ‘Who should rule?’ but ‘How can we minimize misrule – both the likelihood of its occurring and when it does occur, its consequences?’
9. The general guiding principle for public policy put forward in The Open Society is: ‘Minimize avoidable suffering.’
10. …[W]e do not know how to make people happy, but we do know ways of lessening their unhappiness.
11. Instead of the greatest happiness for the greatest number, one should demand, more modestly, the least amount of avoidable suffering for all; and further, that unavoidable suffering – such as hunger in times of unavoidable food shortage – should be distributed as equally as possible.

Parlor Wit

Chicolini: Well, who you gonna believe, me or your own eyes?

[also from "Duck Soup"] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0023969/quotes

The Evolution of Rights: Dershowitz

Law professor Alan Dershowitz has published a book which, in my view, describes the application of Pragmatic Social Exchange theory to the field of law. One discovers from reading the book that the title, Rights from Wrongs, pretty much says it all. The central thesis is that people have derived their concept of legal rights, such as those enumerated in the Declaration of Independence and appended to the Constitution, based on their experience with being wronged in some fashion. I would argue that he means within the context of their social exchanges, specifically their social exchanges within a given Social Cooperative. Dershowitz points out that, where the political majority does justice to the political minority, there is no need for a concept of rights. It is only where the majority does injustice to the minority that the development of rights becomes essential. He notes that this reflects “the common-law approach to the development of legal doctrines,” and summarizes that “The history of the common law has been a history of adapting legal doctrine to avoid or minimize injustice.”

Note the principle of minimizing injustice and suffering. This will be a common theme winding through upcoming posts.

[Rights from Wrongs: A Secular Theory of the Origins of Rights, Alan Dershowitz, 2004, Basic Books.]

Parlor Wit

http://www.montypythonpages.com/index1.htm

Flying Sheep Sketch [excerpt]

A "City Gent" out in the country encounters a "Rustic" whose sheep appear to be in the trees:

Rustic: Exactly. It's my belief that these sheep are laborin' under the misapprehension that they're birds. Observe their be'avior. Take for a start the sheeps' tendency to 'op about the field on their 'ind legs. Now witness their attempts to fly from tree to tree. Notice that they do not so much fly as...plummet.

(Baaa baaa... flap flap flap... whoosh... thud.)

City Gent: Yes, but why do they think they're birds?

Rustic: Another fair question. One thing is for sure, the sheep is not a creature of the air. They have enormous difficulty in the comparatively simple act of perchin'. (Baaa baaa... flap flap flap... whoosh... thud.) Trouble is, sheep are very dim. Once they get an idea in their 'eads, there's no shiftin' it.

City Gent: But where did they get the idea?

Rustic: From Harold. He's that most dangerous of creatures, a clever sheep. 'e's realized that a sheep's life consists of standin' around for a few months and then bein' eaten. And that's a depressing prospect for an ambitious sheep.

City Gent: Well why don't you just remove Harold?

Rustic: Because of the enormous commercial possibilities if 'e succeeds.

Voice Over : And what exactly are the commercial possibilities of ovine aviation?

[Reminds me of the current Republican leadership cadre and their Neocon "Harolds". ;)]

Pragmatic Ethics for Democracies: Dewey, Putnam & Cavell

The logical purpose for a Social Cooperative is to create and maintain desired benefits. In terms of individual ethics, it follows that a member of a Social Cooperative – whether it’s a family or a nation – should conduct himself or herself in a manner which, based on experience or applicable science, is likely to help that Social Cooperative create and maintain the desired benefits. That’s because survival of the Social Cooperative depends not only on the benefits it can give its members, but also on what the members contribute to the Social Cooperative. As John Dewey reportedly commented, “democratic institutions are no guarantee for the existence of democratic individuals…[while] individuals who are democratic in thought and action are the sole final warrant for the existence and endurance of democratic institutions.”

This is why philosophers of Pragmatism such as John Dewey, Hilary Putnam, Stanley Cavell and Richard Shusterman argue that, as a matter of ethics, democratic individuals should cultivate “a dynamic self directed at self-improvement and [through this] at the improvement of society”, and should provide for their fellow citizens “new models or experiments of good living.” http://www.artsandletters.fau.edu/humanitieschair/democracy.html

I would add that a list of pragmatic ethics for democratic individuals should include the following:

1. Keep an open and inquiring mind;
2. Celebrate diversity, applying control only when harm can be proven;
3. Question authority;
4. Test existing beliefs and suppositions for veracity;
5. Contribute to the common good to the extent your capacities permit without harm to yourself or others;
   
6. Be honest, respectful, generous, and fair in your social exchanges, to maintain the trust and harmony upon which all social cooperation and exchange depend; and
7. Stand up for democracy in the face of authoritarian threats.
   

Conservatives claim that liberals ignore individual responsibility, but this is false. What conservatives mean is that liberalism gives slight regard to conformity. That is because conservatives seek to conserve past beliefs and practices. But in the liberal worldview, the individual’s responsibility is not to conform without question. That is a dangerous proposition in a constantly changing world. On the contrary, the individual’s responsibility is to challenge past assumptions, explore and test new options, and help the Social Cooperative to improve and adjust to new conditions, so long as that is feasible.