Stimuli For Your Moral Taste Buds
The food-for-thought menu includes: The Ozone Layer, Aristotle’s Public Philosophy, African Agency, George Kennan's Hierarchy, Church as a Powerless Centre, and Separation of School and State.
The Care/Harm Moral Taste Bud: How We Fixed the Ozone Layer
Do you only ever hear arguments in terms of alarmism vs. complacency in discussions about the environment?
The Ozone layer episode instructs us that taking into account the fundamental facts of any environmental issue is the only way to resolve the endless ideological debate over the legitimacy and illegitimacy of the regulatory State on that issue. Evidence disproves ideologically motivated alarmism and complacency and shows us how to let markets, technology, and the government deal with the problems we face.
Sample this:
“Unlike the pace of scientific research however, the political response lagged behind. Several countries – the US, Canada and Norway – only banned the use of CFCs in aerosol sprays, in 1978, after many consumers moved away from using them voluntarily […] Richer countries, such as those across Europe and North America, are not only located where ozone depletion is higher, but their populations are also more likely to be vulnerable to risks such as skin cancer, due to skin colour. There was therefore strong incentive for the world’s largest producers of ozone-depleting substances to take action. A headline piece in the New York Times in 1986 warned of millions of excess skin cancer cases in the coming decades as a result of ozone depletion. The fact that the largest producers had the most to lose probably accelerated efforts to fix it. This is not the case with climate change: those at greatest risk of climate impacts are typically the world’s poorest, and do not have the resources to adapt. Those who contribute least to greenhouse gas emissions are those who have the most to lose. The incentives to preserve the status quo are flipped. Another big difference between the problems of ozone depletion and climate change is that ozone depletion was an industry-specific problem while climate change is an economy-wide one.”
The Fairness/Cheating Moral Taste Bud: Speak To the Shoemaker| Philosophy Need Not Be Arcane
To heed Aristotle's counsel, I have dabbled in layperson blogging for my published works on cancer research. Some examples are provided below:
The idea of lay summaries may seem simple at first glance: academicians write digestible statements emphasizing the importance of research in an accessible way. However, what stops academicians from adopting the Aristotelian way of communicating in two registers is that it is easy to communicate with peers while focusing on the central argument of a thesis. On the other hand, lay audiences include a broad spectrum of people from different ages, cultures, professions, and socioeconomic backgrounds. Or, to put it another way, the lay audience is frequently left undefined, leaving the academician floundering in the dark.
Though academicians view lay summaries as another administrative task on top of an already busy calendar from an ivory tower, it is clear, however, that spreading one's research through broad communication has clear professional benefits, connecting public communication and increased visibility of research to greater citations.
Dissemination of research and academic discourse is undergoing radical changes. Communication pathways for academic information have evolved from a traditional top-down transfer of knowledge to one where readers play a much more active role in acquiring information and setting priorities. There is evidence that the general public uses increasingly diverse sources of information (e.g., blogs and social media) for absorbing science-based news stories worldwide.
Though these radical changes have increased the value of lay summaries in science media, academicians continue to reluctantly learn from Aristotle— who was too farsighted— to address questions like, "So what?" and "Why is this pursuit important? rather than "How should the pursuit be carried out?" in distilling the essence of their elite intellectual endeavors.
The conceptual diagram shows how scientific findings might be communicated to academics and other interested parties (represented by black dotted lines). Using lay summaries would promote multidisciplinary collaboration, boost access to knowledge for decision-makers, and strengthen potential channels of contact between scientists and the general public (see solid black lines in the diagram).
The Liberty/Oppression Moral Taste Bud: Olúfẹ́mi Táíwò’s “Against Decolonisation”
I am yet to read Olúfẹ́mi Táíwò’s Against Decolonisation. Based on the core arguments highlighted in this article, the book should offer a nuanced challenge to arguments favoring decolonization. As I consider the arguments made here, I have the following two observations regarding decolonization:
The desire to pursue justice through culture war is motivated by the observation that only some historical eras, as opposed to others, have resulted in more resilient political generations, whose influences and attitudes are more persistent through time. The issue of indigenous agency is not as clear-cut when those persistent influences and attitudes originate from alien colonial sources and are forcibly imposed upon locals by colonized elites among the natives.
The arc of time is not bending toward justice, in fact, it is inherently inequitable, uncharitable, and unjust. Therefore, given the history of colonization and the current “rules-based world order,” nations with a history of protracted struggles against colonization need something analogous to quantitative reasoning on the cultural front to serve as a constant reminder of what they have lost and what has been traded off from their heritage to be considered "modern." One objective of the decolonization process in India, in my opinion, is to create a generation of Indians skilled in historical and cultural thinking. This demands consideration of causation, motivation, and contingency, coming from the standpoint of empathy for native civilization, all of which are currently lacking in “modern” education.
Sample this:
“The fact that Africans write and speak English or French or take those as their national languages is often seen as proof of the unconscious mental and cultural servitude of Africans. But this, again, denigrates African agency. One of the ironies of European imperialism in Africa is that it leads to a deracination of language. English and French aren’t the exclusive property of England and France: they are world languages. Like India, Nigeria (where my own origins lie) has created its own branch of English literature, both in the homeland and the diaspora, which is read around the world, and has also created its own variant of English blended with native languages, which reflects the diversity of the nation. This is far from using the English language as a tool of white supremacist colonial hegemony. We Nigerians have claimed the English language for ourselves and refashioned it in our own way. Is this not true decolonisation? […] The decolonisation movement, as it is presently constituted, will keep Africans trapped in the “tower of the past,” pessimistic about the present and cynical about the prospect of a better future for Africa, within the potential for modern civilisation. Táíwò has given us a sober, subtle, yet powerful reflection on true self-determination and freedom for Africans, as participants in the grand drama of world history—which will only come about through a recognition of the immense potential of modern civilisation, not a rejection of it.”
The Loyalty/Betrayal Moral Taste Bud: The Last American Aristocrat
How would you react morally to Kennan in the current cultural context, given his oddities [i.e., his desire to divide the United States into 12 independent republics; his belief that extensive domestic servant employment is essential for the survival of culture; the significantly less palatable side of his character regarding the prohibition on voting for black and naturalized citizens; his "soft spot" for apartheid, as he put it]? If George Kennan were still a part of US foreign and domestic policy today, would you cancel him? But is he, however, devoid of wise counsel for the US in other respects?
Sample this from a 1989 New York Times article on George Keenan’s elegiac conservatism
“Born in 1904 and raised in Wisconsin, Mr. Kennan has always had something of the Wisconsin Progressive in him; like that great Progressive, Theodore Roosevelt, he admires intellectuals and at the same time is drawn to natural beauty and the rugged challenge of the wilderness. In ''Sketches From a Life,'' we encounter Mr. Kennan as a conservative, but his is not the conservatism of postwar America; rather, it is a conservatism that the historian Henry Adams, Theodore Roosevelt's great friend, shared. Mr. Kennan's conservatism is often a melancholy commentary on a world that is fast disappearing, a felt need for civility and the proper relationship of rhetoric to goals […] Mr. Kennan bemoans ''the prevailing egalitarianism'' and ''the frantic urbanization'' that have depopulated not only the European countryside, but also the American […] George Kennan incarnates much of the American Century. He has shaped our lives as few diplomats have. And as we near the year 2,000, what he stands for - his opposition to a continued nuclear buildup, his advice that we should deal with the Soviets with a realistic assessment of America's and Russia's respective power and interests, his heartfelt plea to save our environment from the mindless wastage of modern industrialization - these views are increasingly shared by Americans of all generations. ''Sketches From a Life'' is a book by one of the wisest men in American public life today; it is a wonder to read, and I was sorry to put it down.”
I sense a vague foreshadowing of the Ukraine War and the results of the economic weapon unleashed against the Kremlin (but in reality hurting the Russian people) in the New York Times article on Kennan? An aside: Would the New York Times today run a story even tangentially endorsing a Kennan-like figure?
“On the other hand, blows aimed in exasperation at the regime itself are no help to the people it dominates. Such injuries are promptly ducked and passed on to the people, while the regime, breathing sympathetic indignation, strikes one fiery attitude after another as the protector of a noble nation from the vicious envy of a world which refuses to understand. And if then, in the train of policies of arrogance and provocation, real catastrophe finally overtakes the nation, the regime promptly identifies itself beyond all point of distinction with the sufferings of the people and takes refuge behind that astounding and seemingly inexhaustible fund of patriotic heroism and loyalty which human nature seems to reserve for all such occasions. The benevolent foreigner, in other words, cannot help the Russian people; he can only help the Kremlin. And conversely, he cannot harm the Kremlin; he can only harm the Russian people. That is the way the system is geared. From ''Sketches From a Life.''”
The Authority/Subversion Moral Taste Bud: Why is the Church Obsessed With Gay Sex?
Sample this:
“The Church of England was formed on the basis that “the Bishop of Rome hath no jurisdiction in this realm of England”. Yet in the years to come, the Bishops of Nigeria will play a decisive role in choosing the most senior member of the British establishment outside the royal family, and ex officio member of the House of Lords […] Unfortunately, Christianity has this thing about centralisation. Perhaps it’s the whole “one God” thing that creates a desire for “may they all be one as your heavenly father is one”. This thirst for oneness is an excellent thing when understood spiritually as the universal coming together of human beings, our fundamental solidarity under God; but organisationally it is a recipe for domination and bitterness. The idea that the latter can force the former is a terrible idea. The more power that gets located at the centre, the more there is to fight over.”Playing devil's advocate against the article's main contention: Are the organizational changes brought about by the discussions surrounding gay sex simply the centralization that comes with a monotheistic framework, or are they also consistent with a "constitutional federalism" based on the Church that upholds the Catholic principle of subsidiarity and propriety?
Paying devil's advocate against the article's main contention: Are the organizational changes brought about by the discussions surrounding gay sex simply the centralization that comes with a monotheistic framework, or are they also consistent with a "constitutional federalism" based on the Church that upholds the Catholic principle of subsidiarity and propriety?
The Church of England—with its Anglican doctrine straddling the line between Roman Catholic and Protestant viewpoints—may have formed on the basis that "the Bishop of Rome hath no jurisdiction in this realm of England," which entails a consequentialist argument captured in the dictum that "Needs are best understood and satisfied by people who are closest to them." This idea comes from the Catholic doctrine of subsidiarity, which is one of propriety.
Propriety implies that some authority should rightfully reside with different social actors before and independent from any potential adverse effects of redistributing authority. The propriety principle is, therefore, neither committed to centralized nor decentralized authority. The "right" distribution of authority can be achieved in several ways, including devolution.
Subsidiarity and propriety have played an essential role in the Church's oppositional stance against liberalism's exaltation of the individual over the concerns of the common good following the French Revolution. The same subsidiarity and propriety principles prompted the Church to hold a steadfast resistance against the State's expansion as a coercive force. Therefore, subsidiarity and propriety principles served the interests of the Church to limit the scope of State power while opposing unfettered liberal individualism. James Madison, who postulated that larger associations are less likely to be overturned by factions in a way that jeopardizes the liberties of individuals and minority groups, may have been informed by the subsidiarity and propriety principles.
Therefore, throughout its long history, the Catholic Church has vacillated between the free individual, mediating associations of individuals, and an intervening State to form evolving Catholic interpretations of the idea of human rights. Accordingly, subsidiarity and propriety principles may be the conceptual tools the Church employs to debate gay sex rather than a dogmatic centralization.
The Sanctity/Degradation Moral Taste Bud: The End of School Reform?
According to American playwright and essayist David Mamet, the foremost rule of tinkering is to first save all the parts. Unfortunately, this is forgotten while attempting to tinker with society, beginning with education. Moreover, to believe that every component that has ever operated in a system is wholly unnecessary is far worse. Or, to put it another way, the act of tinkering with schools and education itself requires reform.
Samples this:
“This early 21st-century focus on accountability and choice signified a pair of important shifts in Americans' understanding of K-12 education. In the era before A Nation at Risk, people generally gauged school quality on the basis of inputs, resources, and reputation, not student-learning outcomes. Americans also generally took for granted that, unless their families were wealthy or Roman Catholic, children attended the district-operated public school nearest their home. Yet by the time Barack Obama entered the White House in 2009, a "good" school had come to mean one with high reading and math scores — at least from the perspective of parents and policymakers (not to mention real-estate agents). And though many places did not yet furnish families with a decent supply of quality schools to choose from, the right of parents to select their child's school was increasingly taken for granted. That sentiment feels like it's here to stay, especially after three school years of pandemic disruption. But results-based school accountability is a different story. NCLB's heavy-handedness led to widespread backlash as schools that had long enjoyed fine reputations were dinged for not making "adequate yearly progress" for one or another student subgroup. By 2011, just under a majority of the nation's schools had been deemed failing. Given the choice of trusting a procrustean federal scheme or their own eyes, increasing numbers of parents, voters, and politicians lost faith in NCLB. Meanwhile, the federally prescribed grab bag of interventions intended to fix such problems was seen — not unreasonably — as rigid and often unworkable. All of this would unexpectedly worsen with the additional reform wave powered by Obama's 2008 election […] No one in school-reform circles believed those warning that the new reading and math standards, quietly adopted by dozens of states, would cause a fuss down the road. Yet those fights would ultimately mark the beginning of the end for the contemporary reform coalition. In hindsight, that collapse might well have been foreseen: Many teachers already resented the pedagogical, cultural, and curricular impact of having schools judged primarily on test scores in reading and math, and their resentment only deepened when it appeared that their livelihoods might be at stake on the basis of complex, opaque, value-added calculations that would soon be based on as-yet-unseen Common Core tests. All the while, the fond hope that good schools and teachers could be identified based on test scores was increasingly attacked by populists on the left and right as technocratic overreach.”
Some biases are conserved without consequence.
The remark I received on my blog article, Seventy-Five Years Since the Inaugural Moment of Post-colonial History, confirms the crude prejudices I highlighted in my blog post that are disparaging to India and Hindus in particular.
So, I've included mathematician Manjul Bhargava's excellent overview of the history of Indian mathematics to assist readers better understand India's contributions.
He emphasizes that while the contributions of zero to mathematics are acknowledged and taught in classrooms all across the world, the majority of the other significant contributions of India are typically completely ignored. The Indian numeral system, the Baudhayana-Pythagoras theorem, the mathematics of language, the sine function in trigonometry, negative numbers, solutions to quadratic equations, binomial coefficients, the Virahanka-Fibonacci sequences, error-detecting/correcting codes, first exact formula for Pi, are few examples of India’s contribution to mathematics, aside from zero.
Beyond Zero: A Survey of Some of India’s Fundamental Contributions to Mathematics
The previous edition of Stimuli For Your Moral Taste Buds can be found here.
Re: Fairness/ Cheating
An eye-opening section, thank you (yes, it is perfectly possible to live and study in Greece and still don't get an even basic grasp of Aristotelian thought...).