COMMENSAL ISSUE 90


The Newsletter of the Philosophical Discussion Group
Of British Mensa

Number 90 : January 1998

ARTICLES
26th November 1997 : Eric Hills

COMMENTS & QUESTIONS ON C89

I have belonged to several SIGs, from two of which I received no communications, and I have left them all because they were so disappointing as regards their declared purposes. Now I have joined PDG and I have received my first Commensal, No. 89. I have been very pleased to read it - except for some things which were obscure and I think should be clarified. I should like to ask several questions and to offer a few comments.

Philip Lloyd Lewis ( C89, p.13 ) :

  1. What is the evidence to justify TTR in dividing reality into two tiers?
  2. What do you mean by current pseudo-scientific theorising about the creation of the universe?
  3. Why do you say that primary reality is not open to scientific investigation ?
  4. The recommendation to ignore knowledge of the laws of nature in favour of swimming in uncertainties seems to be a recipe for unnecessary suffering and probable disaster!
Michael Nesbit ( C89, p.16 ) :
  1. How does human reflexive awareness create the subject-object dichotomy of religion and of science?
  2. Why does the act of reflexive recognition involve a partial disidentification of the nascent self with its body? It suggests to me a greater realisation of their identification.
  3. In any case, why potentially disastrous consequences to the ecosphere ?
  4. Would not regaining the perspective of an unselfconscious organism be an undesirable loss?
  5. I do agree that it is the intention or tendency of all moral and ethical systems to create or facilitate a coherent society .
Alan Carr ( C89, p.24 ) On Ireland : It is probably practically impossible to accommodate all sides. So, if some bodies refuse to participate in the talks, why not reach a consensus (which respects the position of minorities) among those who do participate and implement that ? Why should subsequent hostile acts by deliberate non-participants be tolerated ? I feel sure philosophers of democracy from Locke to Popper would agree.

Vijai Parhar ( C89, p.26 ) : I am surprised that anyone should think that everything is determined and there is no free will. I am surprised also when anyone says that nothing is determined and there is only free will. Common sense suggests that there are some things which we can and cannot do and others about which we have choices.

Rick Street ( C89, p.31 ) : A book by Steven Mithen published last year, "A Prehistory of the Mind. A search for the origins of art, religion and science", describes archaeological discovery and research which show that art originally was probably functional . There is evidence that paintings and carvings from about 40,000 years ago were intended to store, transmit and retrieve information.

Eric Hills


Eric : Welcome aboard and thanks for the vote of confidence ! Thanks also for the pertinent comments and questions. I’ll let those to whom they are directed respond, for once !

Theo