Pronoun Absurdity

I have problems with comma placement. Most of the time it's due to not proof reading my work, other times it's due to my lack of grammatical training. What I have noticed this week, however, is how many people have problems with pronouns. This week I had a piece of assessment due for a philosophy subject I'm studying and I had the opportunity to view some other students work. I have read 14 pieces of assessment so far. While on the most part these essays were of a good quality there was a general problem, that being the use of pronouns.

I think this problem is due to the response to a particular students question relating to the use of the personal pronoun I. You see, my tutor advised against using this (another grammatical quirk I've noticed recently is the use of said or former as pronouns to refer to a previous subject, not strictly 'wrong', I know, but still not necessary especially when the reader will need to read previous sections of text to gather the meaning again) pronoun so the essay would remain neutral. While there's little wrong in many circumstances with avoiding personal pronouns in academic writing the directive of the tutor seems to have shocked many students into absurd pronoun usage.

You see there is a general rule governing the usage of pronouns and this rule states (Do you like my use of states? This is not grammatically correct either. rule is an inanimate object. I should perhaps have said - this rule of which is stated, but I'm not that idiomatic), a pronoun requires a true antecedent. Nearly every essay I read used it without an antecedent, which in itself may not be wrong but it is subjectively governed. For example, if I say "Epicurus offered to theorise but it was not accepted" then it is not governed by a true antecedent. I would need to say "Epicurus offered his theory but it was not accepted". Maybe I'm being to idiomatic here but ambiguity is the worst enemy of academic writing.

Another common mistake that I've noticed focuses on the use of he. There is also nothing wrong with using the word he but this pronoun, whether he, him, his, refers to the subject of the sentence. Notice I've used the word sentence here as this is important. You cannot use the pronoun he etc. in a sentence if the subject is yet to be identified in the sentence or if there is more than one applicable subject. I cannot say "Epicurus is a classist. He is, therefore, evil" because the he is not adequately governed. It makes sense audibly but not when read. I could write "Epicurus is a classist and he is, therefore, evil". I should probably even write "Epicurus is a classist so he is evil". I cannot, also, say "Locke describes Epicurus as a hedonist so he is, therefore, evil". The he in this sentence doe's in fact govern Epicurus but it is ambiguous. I may have been attempting to slander Locke. English is, as far as my knowledge extends, the only language that is ambiguous with he type pronouns. Latin has two he type pronouns with only one being subjective and my other language, Hindi, has three or perhaps more he type pronouns.

Antecedents to pronouns are necessary and do keep them in mind. There may be cases where you can place the antecedent after (I know it sounds absurd placing an antecedent after a pronoun) the pronoun but these are extremely limited. Look at this statement, "If the baby does not thrive on raw milk, boil it". It is here plain to see for all.

I won't go on and mention all the pronoun errors. I've likely made many myself. I know I've placed many commas in incorrect locations in previous works so I'm not the best person to comment on grammar. I just received an essay back today and while I did receive a HD I have found seven misplaced commas. One of these misplaced commas changes the meaning of the sentence drastically but my tutor either didn't notice or agreed with the alternate meaning. I won't comment on my essay that I've just submitted because my tutor may read this and....well you get the picture.

Open Philosophy Forum

I've just enrolled in a philosophy course over summer as it is a prerequisite for some other philosophy subjects I'm doing next year. What's interesting is that there are quite a few students who've previously completed other philosophy subjects and the online discussion was, therefore, getting a bit too much for the first year students. Oh yeah, did I mention I study externally? Well, to address this problem the course co-ordinator has set up a forum so we can debate the course content, and anything else philosophy related, as much as we desire as this is a voluntary forum. Best thing though, it's open to all. Come on over and have a look and join up and post a message. The forum is called Open Philosophy and you can find it HERE

New Creative Commons License

I'm not a huge fan of licensing material but I've had to put a creative commons license on my page. I've been plagarised by some fellow Uni students (who knows what of any value they've gotten from my site!) and the teachers have asked me to place a license on my site to clear up any ambiguity. I'll put one one my other site -link to the right- where I share my University papers too but I'll get to that when I can be bothered 'cause I dont have a web site program and I need to edit the source. Short reason, I can't be bothered at the moment! I hope the license here will suffice for now as this blog is the only link to my Uni papers site. If you hate the license I hope this reason at least explains why I put it up.

Exams Over With

I am so relieved to get home today. I had five hours of exams today and four hours of train travel to get to the study centre and back! Great to have them over with. My first exam was for PTR110 Structure, Thought and Reality and was so much simpler than I was expecting. Two questions, Q1 was a short answer of around five hundred words on Foucault's Power and Knowledge relationship and Q2 was an essay of around 2000 words on what consequences will flow on from thinking of globalisation and the War on Terror as socially produced concepts. Two hours for this exam and finished it in 1.5. Easy. Next exam was for PAC10 An Introduction to Asia and was in three sections. Even easier! this exam was for three hours and I had quite a bit of time left over. I must admit though that after hand writing more than 6000 words in one day I'm a little tired.

I had some good news from Griffith as well. some of you may know that I've had a little trouble with them of late but today I received my marks back from my new tutor and I received a HD. I couldn't be more pleased.

Those of you from PHI110 I have to appologise for not posting much today, the exams killed all my time and energy.

Kazakhstan Human Rights Abuses

I thought it was about time I pasted this on my blog. Some Vaisnava devotees in Kazakhstan have been being persucuted solely because of their religious affiliation for many years. We never seriously thought it would go this far with numerous Human Rights orginisations observing and wide spread condemnation from Europen Governments such as the British and the French.

On November 21, however, the Kazakhstan Government decided that they would 'take back' the land that these devotees have established a farm on. What's worse is that the houses were demolished while people, predominantley women and children, were still inside. All media and Human Rights observers were banned from the area and were threatened with force and violence if they did not comply. All photographic material was confiscated.

During this 'procedure' there were no officials present which is required under Kazakhstan law and no one is willing to take responsibility for the actions. Not a single police officer or demolition worker would wear their name tag or identify themselves either. The leader of the operation, the Hakim, even said to one of the Human Rights observers

'If I see you here again, I will personally crush Your eyes, even though I am the Hakim.'

I'm going to post the few videos that are available in my humble attampt to make this issue more widely known.

This is part of the demolition and police response.

There's still more if you care to look. Click HERE to see.

Tabla in Udaipur

As some of you already know, I'm off to India in April for some further extensive Tabla classes. My Guruji, Suresh Kumara Prajapati, lives in Udaipur and I thought I'd post some old pictures of Udaipur for those of you who have been before.

This is the City Palace -

This is the entry gate into the City Palace looking up from where Jagmandir is -

This is view from what is now the clock tower looking towards the City Palace. The temple in the foreground is Jagmandir and the smaller one off to the left is the Radha Krishna Mandir -

This is a view looking towards what is now the clock tower from the market -

This is a view of Jagmandir looking from the City Palace side -

This is a view of Jagmandir looking up from the market place. I'm not sure what the temple on the left is -

Jagmandir is also known as Jagdisha Mandir not to be confused with jagmandir island in the lake.

The Qualia Dilemma

I'm feeling a little less creative for this weeks Philosophy Blog War having been writing too many essays of late. This week I'm going to post a 'dilemma' and see if anyone can help me out with it. Remember to VOTE FOR ME.

Imagine a series of women, all called Mary, who have been afflicted from birth with a weird physiological condition—if they see colours they will die. (Maybe it is a curse.) They are given goggles that convert all colours into black-and-white images. They are given televisions and bedrooms and offices and laboratories in which everything is black-and-white, so they can take off their goggles (provided they wear black-and-white cover-alls).

Some of these women become fascinated by colour vision, precisely because they have not experienced it yet. They hope that their physiological condition will eventually be cured, and then they will see colours for themselves; but in the meantime they decide to study everything that has been written about colours. They collect and read virtually everything that has been written, not only about the science of wavelengths of light, but also about how retinas and brains respond to different patterns of stimulation from different wavelengths of light, about what poets and art critics say about colours, and so on.

Collectively, the Marys come to know everything relevant, anything that anyone could possibly tell anyone, about colours, and about what people say about colours, and about what goes on in people's brains when they think about colours, and when they experience colour vision. If one of the Marys has a ‘blind spot’, some relevant physical fact that she is somehow unable to know because it is about herself, then one of the other Marys can generally be counted on to have the knowledge, of that first Mary, which that first Mary lacks. The Marys also have helpful friends. For any scientific discovery that can be put into words (even if it is something that could only have been discovered by people with colour vision), this discovery is recorded in language, is found out by friends of the Marys, and then is communicated to them—in black and white.

Then one day, one of the Marys develops a cure for their condition. She gives herself the antidote, takes off the goggles, leaves her rooms, and sees red for the first time. Her brain undergoes various changes in response to the new stimulation, and she says, ‘Wow, so that's what it is like to see red! That is what people with colour vision have been experiencing. That is what we Marys have been missing out on.’ She tells the other Marys that the experience is great.

The other Marys have been watching their black-and-white video monitors, which have shown them exactly what went on in the first Mary's brain when she first saw red. Then the second Mary takes off her goggles and sees red, and all the remaining Marys watch their black and white screens again, to see what happens in the brain of Mary II. More or less the same thing happens in her brain as in Mary I's brain, and she too exclaims: ‘Gosh, so that's what it's like to see red!’

When we get to the nineteenth Mary, she knows almost exactly what is going to happen in her brain when she sees red for the first time. She takes off the goggles, and what happens in her brain is just what she predicted would happen. Her brain goes into a series of states almost exactly as she knew it would. The few unpredictable physical differences are definitely not ones that would cause her to say ‘Wow!’ or ‘Gosh!’

Virtually everything physical that happens, after Mary XIX takes off the goggles, is something that she already knew would happen when she took off the goggles. She gains no significant new knowledge about what physical properties are instantiated in the physical world. Yet she too, like the others before her, says, ‘Wow, so that's what it's like to see red!’—just as she expected she would. (Bigelow & Pargetter 2006, pp. 356-357).

Now these are my questions.

1. Does Mary gain 'new' knowledge?
2. What is 'new'?
3. What is the knowledge?
   
4. Since Mary already knew of all the material properties She was going to experience is the knowledge immaterial?
5. If the knowledge is 'new' and and not physical what is it?
6. Finally, how would a materialist or a non-dualist reconcile their views in light of such Qualia?
   

Of course you can just post your own thoughts into the matter as well

And

Remember to VOTE FOR ME!



References

Bigelow, J & Pargetter, R 2006, 'Re-acquaintance With Qualia', in The Australasian Journal of Philosophy, Vol 84, No 3, pp. 353-378).

Failed Streaming Media

Looks like the links in the last post are down again. Go to THIS PAGE for track one and THIS PAGE for track two. DISREGARD THIS (I Think) THE LINKS BELOW ARE WORKING AGAIN. I POSTED THE FILES ON ANOTHER SERVER AND THEY SEEM TO BE WORKING OKAY.

Streaming Rehersal for Ben and Craig

Last night's rehersal went well and I ripped the two recordings off of the Mini Disk player without a hassle. There are a few places on the recording where it skips though. Maybe you paused it Ben? I'm just not sure. Craig, the sitar didn't come through very loud at all. The Microphone was far to close to the tabla and it dominates the recording. The santoor is clear but also soft. I'm fairly happy with the tabla sound but it gets a bit monotonous being so loud. I should have played more solo. Overall, not bad. Lets just hope you can get that multi track mixer for the concert Craig so we can limit the volume of the tabla and/or increase the volume of the two lead instruments, specifically the sitar. Track one is in Kherava and Bhajani Tala while track two is in Bhajani tala and Kherava.

Track One -

Track Two -





Bloody free internet hosting services. I posted some m3u files on my web page linking to the audio but the free hosting server appears to change the file names every once in a while. The above players should now work. Third time lucky hey!

Does anyone know of a FREE site, like YouTube, that I can post audio clips on? My web space with my service provider is only 10mb so I can't even fit one of these files on there. Just post a comment if they stop working again

Ustad Ahmed Jan Thirakwa

I also thought I'd post this video that I found of probably my favourite tablaji - Ustad Ahmed Jan Thirakwa. I am of the same tabla gharana as ustadji. Enjoy.

Ravi Shankar, Alla Rakha - Rag Charukeshi

This is also the Late Ustad Allah Rakha Khan Sahib with Panditji Ravi Shankar in Jhap tala but Panditji is also playing sitar in raga Charukeshi. Enjoy.

Ravi Shankar, Alla Rakha - Tabla Solo in Jhaptal

This one's for all you tablaji's out there. I'm quite a fan of the late Ustad Allah Rakah Khan Sahib and I hope you all enjoy this jhap tala with Panditji Ravi Shankar.

Fast Food Nation

I'm a fan of the book Fast Food Nation and while I live in Australia and our farming and processing practices are slightly different I just had to post this LINK for any Americans who may be reading.

Hi All

Hi all.
I won't be submitting an entry for the Philosophy Blog War this week; too much Uni work to do. To keep you all interested though have a look at THIS article about an abattoir in India.....disgusting!
Also, in America this week the Frito-Lay company unveiled a new range of crisps...vege crisps. Now I thought this wasn't such a bad idea however Frito-Lay CEO Al Carey voiced his.....um....concern. He stated 'God help us all, would you look at these flavors, weren't Sun Chips healthy enough for you, you goddamn hippie bastards?' If that wasn't enough he described his company's product to his share holders as 'some shit that's made from beets'. and furthered that with 'I hope you're all happy now that you have your precious beet chips with the recommended daily serving of fruit, or vegetables, or whatever the hell a 'beet' is'. I'm sure his share holders would have left having new found confidence in their company's new product. Here's a picture of what their delivery van will probably look like for the new product.

Prosthetic Cow!

I stumbled across this picture by Chris Kidd in the Courier Mail on Wednesday (November 1, p. 25) and wondered what was going on. Apparently in an Australian first a prosthetic leg has been fitted to a cow. I was quite pleased when I saw this thinking that we Australians are becoming more compassionate. However dear reader, I was wrong. Upon reading the article it seems that the cow was only fitted with the prosthetic leg so its owner can keep on making money off its milk and I suppose its calves. Its a shame that we treat animals as mere commodities and the owner of poor Theresa shown above would have just as easily killed her had she not been able to effectively produce more milk for his business.

Tin Tal Kaidas and Thekas

I've got another rehersal tonight for an upcomming festival and have just packed up my tabla. This reminded me that I did say I'd post some simple tabla Kaidas and Thekas etc on here so this is something simple that I start rehersing/playing with. You can vary the amount of times you play each segment, it's up to you. Enjoy.

Da Din Din Da - Da Din Din Da - Da Tin Tin Ta - Ta Din Din Da

Da Da TiRa KiTa - Da Da Tin Na - Ta Ta TiRa KiTa - Da Da Din Na

Da Da TiRa KiTa - Da Da TiRa KiTa - Da Da TiRa KiTa - Da Da Tin Na

Na Na TiRa KiTa -Na Na TiRa KiTa -Da Da TiRa KiTa - Da Da Din Na

Da Da TiRa KiTa - TiRa KiTa TiRa KiTa - Da Da TiRa KiTa - Da Da Tin Na

Na Na TiRa KiTa - TiRa KiTa TiRa KiTa - Na Na TiRa KiTa - Da Da Din Na

Da Din Din Da - Da Din Din Da - Da TiRa KiTa Ta - Ta Din Din Da

Da Din Din Da - Da Din Din Da - Da TiRa KiTa Ta - Ta TiRa KiTa Da

Da Din Din Da - Da Din Din Da - Da TiRa KiTa Ta - TiRa KiTa TaKa TaKa

KaTa TaKa Da _ - TiRa KiTa TaKa Da - _ TiRa KiTa TaKa - TiRa KiTa TaKa TiRa - KiTa TaKa TiRa KiTa

KaTa TaKa Ta _ - TiRa KiTa TaKa Ta - _ TiRa KiTa TaKa - TiRa KiTa TaKa TiRa - KiTa TaKa TiRa KiTa

TiRa KiTa TaKa TaKa - TiRa KiTa TaKa TaKa - TiRa KiTa TaKa TaKa - TiRa KiTa TaKa TaKa

Da Tin Tin Da - Tin Tin Da Da - Tin Tin Da Da - Tin Na Ka Ta

Ta Tin Tin Ta - Tin Tin Da Da - Tin Tin Da Da - Din Na Ka Ta

Da Tin Tin Da - Tin Tin Da Da - Tin Tin Da Da - TiRa KiTa Tin Na

Ta Tin Tin Ta - Tin Tin Da Da - Tin Tin Da Da - TiRa KiTa Din Na

These are some simple Kaidas, Thekas and a Rela all in Tin Tal.

To Pork or Not To Pork

I was really looking forward to seeing some adds appear this week in particular Australian magazines such as Marie Claire, Good Weekend, and Delicious about the Australian Pork Industry. Two magazines, The Australian Women's Weekly and Women's Day, have pledged to continue with the adds however. The adds are a unique attempt to illustrate the cruelty of the Australian Pork industry.

I’m vegan and proud of it!

This is a post for the Philosophy Blog War and you can vote for me HERE.

I’m vegan and proud of it!

I haven’t always been this way though. I used to be vegetarian and before that, when I depended on my parents for my daily meals, I ate meat and eggs. I’m often asked why I’m vegan, what on earth do I eat, and how I reconcile my views with the dominant western ideology of the necessity of meat eating.

Well, the primary reason I’m vegan is moral. I certainly know that it is not universally accepted that animals are moral agents but I believe they are. I’m certain that here in Australia our Government believes they are as cruelty to animals is against our laws. Before I became vegetarian my first job was in a chicken and pig abattoir so I know first hand the degree of cruelty and blatant torture that goes on behind closed doors. I’ve witnessed chickens being scalded and plucked alive and once I saw a chicken being eviscerated alive! I know of few people who would accept such cruelty. Animals are not just things to be exploited in any way what-so-ever just so we can have cheap meat, eggs, and milk.

Most people will respond to such a moral argument by stating that because the animal industry is so ingrained in our society, my ceasing involvement in the animal industry will have no noticeable effect on animal welfare issues. Is it a valid argument to claim that people can only be morally culpable if they commit perceptible harm? To this I have to turn to Jonathan Glover and what I’ll call ‘Glover’s Problem’. ‘Glover’s Problem’ is as follows:

Glover imagines that in a village, 100 people are about to eat lunch. Each has a bowl containing 100 beans. Suddenly, 100 hungry bandits swoop down on the village. Each bandit takes the contents of the bowl of one villager, eats it, and gallops off. Next week, the bandits plan to do it again, but one of their number is afflicted by doubts about whether it is right to steal from the poor. These doubts are set to rest by another of their number who proposes that each bandit, instead of eating the entire contents of the bowl of one villager, should take one bean from every villager's bowl. Since the loss of one bean cannot make a perceptible difference to any villager, no bandit will have harmed anyone. The bandits follow this plan, each taking a solitary bean from 100 bowls. The villagers are just as hungry as they were the previous week, but the bandits can all sleep well on their full stomachs, knowing that none of them has harmed anyone (Singer 1998:67).

Each of us, even though it may not be perceptible, is responsible for the collective damage we cause.

To this one may validly state that I am just one out of the 100 bandits so 99 beans will still exist, however, in our increasingly global society one cannot know whether one is the first bandit or the 100th bandit. Even if I was the 80th bandit the villagers would still suffer. I may go into the supermarket and decide to purchase some pork chops and rationalise that I am not committing a moral offence because the pig would have died anyway and it’s likely that my not purchasing the pork chops and instead choosing TVP will cause no difference to the supermarket’s purchasing pork chops next week. This may be correct, however we will never know how many pork chops the supermarket, or pig farm pigs, need to sell to make it viable to purchase or produce more next week, and the same for TVP. Maybe I’m the deciding customer.

The meat industry is the world’s largest environmental hazard. It is the world’s largest consumer of water and the largest consumer of fossil fuels. Using just under ten kilograms of grain protein to produce one kilogram of meat protein is absurd. If we stoped feeding grain to animals used in the production of meat and instead made bread we would have enough grain to feed every person on earth with the equivalent of seven loaves of bread per day!

It takes 50 kilograms of water to produce one kilogram of wheat while it takes up to 50,000 kilograms of water to produce one kilogram of beef! Stop complaining of a drought Australia and become vegan, the whole world will be better off for it.

As for what I eat. Well being a vegan chef I find that question quite easy and I’ll even provide a simple recipe for you all to try.

Simon’s Asian Noodle Soup

• One 250 Gram packet of dried flat egg free noodles
• Five dried shitake mushrooms
• Half a cup of soy sauce
• Half a cup of mirin
• Half a handful of chopped shallots
• Two tablespoons of sugar

1. Boil the noodles until cooked, strain and rinse under cold water

2. Boil the mushrooms in half a cup of water

3. When mushrooms are softened remove from water, slice and put back in the pot with the soy sauce and mirin and cook for another five minutes

4. Add the sugar and stir well

5. Combine the cooked noodles with the sauce and sprinkle with shallots

Singer, P 1998, 'A Vegetarian Philosophy', in Griffiths, S & Wallace, J, Consuming Passions, Manchester, .pdf

We're Not Happy John!

You see, Australia is one of the countries that supports the Iraq war and I'm not ashamed to say that this is one of the reasons why I opted for dual citizenship when I became an Aussie. Our Prime Minister, John Howard, has long declared that we will leave Iraq when our 'job is done'.

Apparently, we went to Iraq to dispose of Saddam 'cause the blighter was creating a stockpile of nuclear and biological weapons to use against us. I know, isn't that a great word, us, just who is that exactly? I love Little John's alterity.

This morning, after the opposition Labor party hounded the little guy for over a week, John Howard has come out of his closet, or should we say 'walk in robe'? It'd have to be pretty large to keep all of those euphemisms and blatant lies in there! Anyhow, it would appear our job description has changed. Little John has said Australia will leave Iraq when democracy has been established. Was this our original objective? It would seem likely as there were no chemical or nuclear weapons found in Iraq.

Our Little John, it seems, has become a neo-colonialist who's aim is to take over other Nation States that the original colonialists failed in creating. Most people argue these days that Iraq was a strategic move to control oil. Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't, I just don't know.

What I am now certain of is that John Howard has become, always was, an ideologue. He seems convinced of the ideology of the Nation State and maintaining the Nation State, even when the Nation States in question were created by colonialists and not the citizens (a very democratic procedure indeed!).

Little John is definitely an ideologue when it comes to neo-liberal democracy. His 'coming out of the walk in robe' statement this morning shows him for all that he is. Little John wants to establish democracy in Iraq, undemocratically, for the sole purpose of getting what he, and the other neo-colonialists George Bush, Tony Blair etc. want.

Little John, stop harassing us University students for being ideologues when we mention Marx or apply the theory of orientalism to contemporary society. You are an ideologue yourself and what's worse is that your ideological actions are destroying the lives of thousands and your influence, however unfounded, is influencing millions of people who know no better.

Wake up little John! We all know your political career is drawing to an end so out with it. Come out of the closet John and let Australia know who you really are! I promise we wont treat you like Fraser.

Dead Vacuum

My vacuum cleaner just ran out of batteries. That's right, I use a battery powered vacuum cleaner and while it's charging up I thought I'd take the opportunity to write on my blog again (it has been a while!) You see I have an assignment due tomorrow and one every Friday now for the next six weeks and then two exams the week after that. I decided that today I'd clean my house before I started, something I don't usually do, and 'cause my vacuum has a flat battery and I haven't finished cleaning my house I couldn't start studying. So I've come on here to write 'till the damn things charged.

Back in the blogosphere

Just announcing that I'm back in the blogosphere! I've been snowed under with quite a heavy workload lately with assessment pouring out my ears. I even missed this weeks Philosophy Blog War! I hope everyone who's heading over to my University Papers page (link in sidebar) from here is liking what they see. There are around 70-80 of you per day and it seems that HST140 and PHI120 are the two most popular destinations with around 200 downloads each over the last three weeks. Hope I'm being of some help.

Simon.

Some reasons why I'm vegan..well, sort of

Some of you may know that for quite some time I've been vegetarian and fairly recently I've extended that to vegan. While I'm not going to go into detail here I thought that these couple of links might shed some light on it for you. Link One & Link Two.

How many dead cows does it take to save a dog?

Yesterday while visiting my local IGA supermarket there was a group of 'animal welfare' people rallying up support for a campaign to stop cruelty to dogs. The group in question are called paws. Now I'm not against animal welfare at all but these guys were raising money by having a sausage sizzle. What I fail to understand is why they see it as okay to mistreat cows, slaughter them, process them, and then capitalise off of their sale and in the same breath see it as not okay to mistreat dogs? I'm sure that those sausages weren't made of dog meat!

On a different note, I'm slipping in votes in this round of the Philosophy Blog War. Please take the couple of seconds to vote for me by clicking here. Much appreciated.

Do Trees Have Rights?

I've finally gotten around to posting my first philosophy blog war entry. I hope you all enjoy and I'm sincerely looking forward to your comments. To vote for my post click here

Do trees have rights? Do other in-animate ‘life’ forms have rights? These questions are too often over looked by predominantly ‘western’[1] post Socratic philosophers and scientists often unjustifiably and without any reason other than heritage. Ethics and Moral ‘codes’ are fashioned around a human-centric view of the cosmos and extend only so far as to include other conscious creatures that have a relative similarity with us. Arbor (1986, p336) illustrates the key foundation of ‘western’ ethics as:

[o]nly the conscious states and interests of sentient being[s] can be valuable in themselves. Other things are valuable only in so far as they bring about desired conscious states or promote these interests.

This statement assumes that one can do whatever one desires to anything that is not classified as a ‘sentient’ being as long as it causes no direct or indirect harm to the interests of other sentient beings. Is this an ethical position to hold? Can I go out and mutilate any non-sentient being I desire? Well, it depends on who I am and how I identify myself with my world.

In Japan there is a long tradition of an art known as Bonsai. Arbor (1986, p336) uses this as an example to argue that mutilating a tree is ethically wrong. He presents a conditional proposition that gave rise to Bonsai; if trees are deformed by natural forces then trees can be deformed by un-natural forces. Arbor then presents an analogous argument stating that if trees are deformed by natural forces and it’s okay to extend that to deforming trees by un-natural forces then it follows that if humans are deformed by natural forces (birth defects, genetic illnesses etc.) then it should likewise be okay to deform humans by un-natural forces. This would be opposed by most and this opposition would rightly sit with the above mentioned definition of ethics. Does this make it right though? There is an air of a bourgeoisie, colonial, or even chauvinistic character in this definition. Let us look at another example.

There is much dispute over whether it is ethically correct to expose certain animals, such as apes, to laboratory tests for the benefit of humans. The most fundamental ethical claim put forward by those conducting these tests is that the creatures, while certainly being sentient, have no conception, or at least a very limited conception, of their future well being. They live in the here and now and that causing suffering to them is not upsetting the definition given above because their interests are not being inhibited. Remember, the claim is that they have a limited conception or none at all of their future so they therefore have no self interest. Can we extend this claim then to other sentient beings such as humans? When a human child is born it cannot identify itself with this world nor have an interest in its future. It can be argued, however, that the child will develop these characteristics with age. Sometimes, however, humans are born with, or develop, mental disorders where they cannot identify with their surroundings or with themselves and they have no conception of their interests or their future. Can, in this instance, humans be subjected to the sort of treatment that laboratory animals endure? Most people will argue that no matter what, humans cannot be tortured or undergo laboratory tests such as grafting an ear of another species on her back. Some will even state that euthanasia is ethically wrong in such a case. What is the basis for such an argument? Treating these humans in this way would certainly fit with the definition of ethics given above but most still object. This is obviously a case of 'humanism', stating that being human is the characteristic that provides us our ethical liberties and not something that makes us human.

How does this example of comparing lab animals with humans of similar mental capacities, whether right or wrong, relate to whether trees have rights you may ask? Well, the fact that trees seem to be outside the scope of ‘western’ ethics is an ideological distinction. The fact that the ethics we have in ‘western’ society derives from a post Socratic weltanschauung, by definition, cannot be thought of as universally relevant. Because some may think, according to their ideological heritage, that trees have no rights does not mean that all people think that trees have no rights. In traditional Indigenous Australian philosophy even rocks and other inanimate objects have rights; traditional Indigenous Australians act ‘ethically’ towards such objects. What makes someone human, makes them alive, makes them ethically valuable, is the same as what makes a tree a tree or a rock a rock; some inanimate objects and places are even considered more important than humans. I can just imagine a ‘western’ scientist saying we can torture humans but we mustn’t even look at that rock. What seems absurd to us may be undeniably true to others.

Do trees have rights? I think so. But my reason for this position is that my ideological position is different from the generic ‘western’ model presented above. It is the dominant ‘western’ scientific ideology that reduces ethical nature, the nature of life, to sentience, to consciousness. I believe that there is a uniting force, an anima if you will, that is common in all life; in humans, in animals, and in trees. The ethical rights I give myself and to other humans I extend to all that shares what I share. If you declare that the definition of ethics given above is what you believe then that is fine, however, please remember the heritage of that position and the validity of other ethical view points as well. After all, ‘western’ thought, including science, can be argued to be just another social construction.

References

Arbor, JL 1986, ‘Animal Chauvinism, Plant-Regarding Ethics and the Torture of Trees’, Australasian Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 64, no. 5, pp. 335-339.

---

[1] I’m not overly happy with the term ‘western’, I may have used ‘northern’ or something similar to describe the ideological system adhered to by the group in question, however, ‘western’ remains the most widely understood term in classifying this ideological system.

IE changes

Just updated my page for all those who use IE and complained that the sidebar was dropping below the main window. Hope it helps. It may look a little strange in firefox now as the gap between the main window and the sidebar is larger now.

Rehersal

Last night I had a rehersal for a concert I'll be performing at this weekend. I've attached a couple of pictures of the group. I'm on tabla, Craig is on Sitar, and Ben is on Santoor.

Got it Figured

Got it figured now. I'm new to this CSS thing.

Does anyone know how to edit my pages background image settings so the header, sidebar, and posting area remains clear/white?

Broken Link

That previous link will no longer work. If you are interested point your browsers here.

History

Finaly got my last History paper in. I'm not very happy with it but I'm glad to have it over with. I've just got one more paper to complete - Religion. It's not such a bad topic but I just need a couple of days off. If anyone feels like going over my last history paper and giving me some criticism you can find it here.

ARGH!

I'm still slaving away here over last semesters final papers with an exam looming on Friday and what's worse is I started a new semester yesterday and haven't even had a chance to go over the course material yet. I have just finished hand writing my final Philosophy paper for last semester and I just need to type it up now so thats a relief. I do need to extend an apology to those philosophy blog warriors out there, I did hope to get a post up this week and maybe I still will but with being so consumed with these papers I haven't even had a chance to think of a sbject to talk about. I was hoping to post my Philosophy paper to get some ever helpful comments but I'm not to sure if many people out there desire to read 6000 words of analytical logic so I guess I'll just have to trust my limited ability and hope for the mercy of my tutor. Regards to all

Islam Question

Explain why the Qur’an is so central to the life of the Muslim.

Islam extends itself throughout the world; it does not discriminate. It exists within the richest of the rich and the poorest of the poor nations, it exists simultaneously where ultra-liberal ideologies reside and amongst super-conservative dictatorships. Islam is present in all corners of the globe.

The uniting force within Islam, no matter whether one identifies as Sunni or Shia, or liberal or Sufi, is undoubtedly the Qur’an. Muslims believe that the Qur’an is the final revelation from God, known as Allah[1], to Muhammad thus superseding the Torah of Moses and the Gospels of Jesus (Crotty 2005, p.145). The word Qur’an means ‘recitation’ and the Qur’an as a book consists of 114 chapters, known as suras. Muslims assert that Muhammad is the Prophet of Allah and that the Qur’an is the preserved version of Allah’s directions to Muhammad through his ambassadors (Welch 1997, pp.164, 177).

The life of every Muslim contains five intrinsic rituals, the Pillars of Islam. The first ritual, shahada, is a public display of faith asserting that Allah is the only God and that Muhammad is God’s messenger. Both of these statements occur in the Qur’an (Welch 1997, p180). The second ritual, salat, is the earliest of all the Islamic rituals. It is a prayer given everyday, originally by Muhammad alone, but extended to the entire Islamic community in the Medinan sections of the Qur’an upon the creation of a new religious community (Welch 1997, pp.181-187). The third ritual, zakat, was fundamental in the development of an Islamic welfare system. It is a system of alms giving quite similar to a tax. The Qur’an states (2. 219/217) that the amount to be paid is your surplus (Welch 1997, pp.191-192).

The fourth ritual, fasting during the month of Ramadan is described by Welch (1997, p.192) as having its roots in a war victory in Ramadan to the Muslims. Fasting during this month is mentioned in numerous places in the Qur’an, most notably Sura 2. 185/181 and Sura 2. 187/183 (Welch 1997, p.192). The fifth ritual is a pilgrimage to the Hajj and corresponds with other rituals exercised along the journey. These rituals in full, apart from the first which is in segments, are found in the Qur’an.

These five Pillars of Islam illustrate the centrality of the Qur’an to the life of the Muslim. The Qur’an is a mirror of things past, historical events and sacred times associated with Islam such as the Muslim’s victory in Ramadan; a guide on how to conduct ones life in the present in accordance with the will of Allah; and presents insight into the future, giving certainty to the daily practices of Muslims. The Qur’an codifies the identity of the Muslim, it describes all that a Muslim is or should desire to be. The Qur’an defines and unites the Islamic community, not through a process of alterity but through quite the opposite. It is not apologetic. A passage highlighted by Crotty (2005, p.158) from the Universal Islamic Declaration, 1976 highlights this well:

Islam is a complete code of life suitable for all people and all times, and Allah’s mandate is eternal and universal and applies to every sphere of human conduct and life, without any distinction between the temporal and the spiritual.

With the influence of western ideologies and European colonial rule over many Islamic ‘nations’ in modern times many diverse and at times seemingly contradicting responses have occurred. Islamic nations have been established, many along western democratic guidelines while others advocate traditional and some times fundamental Islamic policies (Welch 1997, p.208). Some Islamic groups have dealt with this change by placing an emphasis, like Ibn-‘Adb-al-Wahhab[2], on removing any external influence upon Islam and focusing on the Fundamental principles of the Qur’an. Others, such as Muhammad ‘Abduh[3], maintained that rationalism and science were congenial with Islam and the Qur’an (Welch 1997, pp.208-213).

Islam has played witness to enormous change within the world having enormous outside pressures placed upon it at many points of history. While Islam itself has indeed modified itself to suit the beliefs, culture, and ideologies of those who follow its teachings; a Muslim, whether Sunni or Shia, or liberal or Sufi, still places the most fundamental importance of their identity and certainly their faith upon the Qur’an.

Bibliography

Crotty, R 2005, ‘Islam’, in Religion Studies: The Long Search Study Guide, University of South Australia, pp. 141-160.

Welch, AT 1997, ‘Islam’, in Hinnells, JR (ed.) 1997, The New Penguin Handbook of Living Religions, Penguin, Camberwell, pp. 162-235.

---

[1] From al’ilah – ‘The God’. This became ‘Allah’ (Crotty 2005, p.141).

[2] Ibn-‘Adb-al-Wahhab was an Islamic reformer from Arabia (Welch 1997, p.210).

[3] Welch (1997, p.212) describes Muhammad ‘Abduh as a leading Egyptian modernist thinker. He died in 1905.

Philosophy Blog War

Just a quick note to all those philosophy blog warriors out there, I will post an entry but not untill I've completed my assessment. I have a History paper due on Wednesday and then a Religion and a Philosophy paper due on Friday. If i get all these done on time I'll post on Saturday, if I don't get these done on time I'll post when ever I get the chance.

History for those who asked

This is my last History tutorial paper on Euripides’ Bacchae for all those who asked to see it. I hope it helps.

In what ways are Pentheus and Dionysus different?
In what ways are they similar?

As outlined in the beginning of Euripides’ Bacchae[1] (pp.805-806) Pentheus and Dionysus have common heritage on their mother’s side to Cadmus, their Grandfather and previous ruler of Thebes (Segal p.178). This is where overt similarities cease[2]; Pentheus and Dionysus couldn’t be presented as more diametrically opposed. Not only do these two cousins assert their Kratos[3] from different parental heritage[4] but Euripides seems to have used the two characters to assert bipolar opposites in Greek thought; In the case of Pentheus, an immature concept and application of rationalism and a deficiency of Apollonian values ultimately leading to Hubris[5], and in Dionysus an illustration of all that Greek society labels as other (Harris & Platzner, p.749).

Why does Pentheus see Dionysus as a threat to civilisation?

The relationship between Pentheus and Dionysus reflects binary oppositions of masculine/feminine, rational/emotional, and civilised/uncivilised natures. Pentheus views this contrast between himself and Dionysus as hazardous to not only his own character but the Greek world he represents[6]. No doubt Pentheus sees himself as the protector of Greek heritage trying with all his very limited ability to preserve the Greek culture from this ‘other’ non-Greek influence personified through Dionysus and his followers. Pentheus outlines his disapproval of Dionysus and his threat to civilisation with an attack, from a very conservative perspective, in his opening passage in the Bacchae[7] (Euripides, pp.806-809).

To whom is Dionysus dangerous?

From a prima facie perspective, it would seem that the Bacchae presents a classic dichotomy of good versus evil but on further introspection deeper social themes develop (Johnston, p.3). The Greek Paradigm, represented by Pentheus, is deeply ethnocentric and through extreme exclusionism defines the ‘other’[8]; all those outside the Greek Ethos, represented by Dionysus. It is therefore not those who are in direct material opposition to Dionysus himself that are at threat but those who through their ethnocentric principles refuse to accept the limitations of their own world view and the value of the alternative that Dionysus is presenting[9].

Does Euripides’ tragedy provoke criticism of Dionysus?

Dionysus, as the head of the bacchants, is an easy target for criticism as he seemingly represents a religious movement vastly polarised from an orderly city existence. The Bacchants are driven to not only depose of the city but to establish themselves on moral principles seen as filth in the eyes of Pentheus (Euripides, p.806). This view asserts that Dionysus represents the menace of religion[10] (Johnston, p.4). The obstacle here is that Euripides alternative, namely Pentheus and the Greek world he represents, offers no better solution; it can be effectively argued that Pentheus is as much a danger to society as Dionysus[11].

The Bacchants was first performed in 406 B.C. Briefly discuss the theatrical and historical context in which the play was first performed. In what ways might Euripides be using the myth in this context to reflect upon his view of Athenian and or Greek society?

The Bacchae is one of Euripides’ final plays and was composed while the Peloponnesian war was drawing to a close[12] (Harris & Platzner, p.748; The Peloponnesian War). By this time Euripides had disenfranchised himself from Greece[13] (Johnston, p.6). The Bacchae can easily represent Euripides views on the society he was living in[14] as numerous features of the play, such as dissatisfaction with the political leadership and the inability of traditional methods of military control to ensure political stability existed throughout the Greek world particularly during the period of the Peloponnesian war that the Bacchae was composed in[15] (Hornblower, pp.166-170).

References

Euripides, (n.d.), ‘Bacchae’, in Harris, S & Platzner, G 2004, Classical Mythology: Images and Insights, 4th edn, McGraw-Hill, New York, pp. 800-853.

Harris, S & Platzner, G 2004, Classical Mythology: Images and Insights, 4th edn, McGraw-Hill, New York.

Hornblower, S 1983, The Greek World: 479-323 BC, Methuen, London.

Johnston, I 2001, An Introductory Note to Euripides' Bacchae, viewed 23 July 2006, , Malaspina University-College, British Columbia.

Roberg, J 2003, Heritage Studies: An Odyssey in Learning, Carthage College, Kenosha.

Segal, C 1997, Dionysiac Poetics and Euripides’ Bacchae, 2nd edn, Princeton University Press, Princeton.

The Peloponnesian War, 1998, viewed 23 July 2006, .

---

[1] The Bacchae, circa 406 B.C, is one of 19 surviving plays composed by Euripides. It is named after the Bacchants, the women devotees of Dionysus. Euripides is famous for his psychological illustrations of distraught characters suffering because they fail to recognise their true identity (Harris & Platzner, pp.748-489; Roberg, p.11).

[2] Throughout the play Pentheus is struggling to deny any similarities that he may have with Dionysus, this will eventually be his downfall as Dionysus recognises that Pentheus is more alike to him than he would like to think. Dionysus antagonises these repressed similarities that Pentheus holds.

[3] Kratos is used in this context and by Segal (p.178) to mean royal power.

[4] Pentheus is the ruler of Thebes through the (inferior feminine?) heritage of his mother Agave whereas Dionysus asserts his Kratos not only through his mother Semele, sister of Agave, but more importantly through his father Zeus, King of the Gods (Segal, p.178).

[5] Hubris is presented by Harris & Platzner (p.749) to mean excessive pride.

[6] Thebes, of which Pentheus is the ruler, is the birthplace of Greek civilisation (Johnston, p.2).

[7] Right from the very beginning of the Bacchae, in a major departure from the traditional Greek hero story, it is blatantly obvious that Pentheus has some personal psychological motivation in his opposition to Dionysus. His emotive reaction to the arrival of Dionysus, such as excessive military force and his apparent obsession with Dionysus’ looks, appear as an illustration of his psychological inadequacies (Johnston, p.2).

[8] On numerous occasions Pentheus ridicules Dionysus and what he represents as inferior and foreign. Pentheus terms the Dionysian cult a travesty (Euripides, p. 806) and filth! (Euripides, p.807), and many times mentions or infers that the culture Dionysus is bringing is foreign (Euripides, pp.806-809, 813 etc.).

[9] This is not to say that the alternative presented by Dionysus is any more meritorious, in fact Euripides constantly illustrates its destructive nature. The argument is that because of ethnocentric ideologies the possibility that anomalies may exist within native Greek thought or that other cultures may have something valuable to offer is ignored, disaster befalls.

[10] At least fanatical superstitious religion lacking in the principles of rationalism.

[11] Of course this entire argument can only be seen as a single aspect of Euripides play as if the fundamental aim of the Bacchae was to convince the audience of the dangers of superstitious religious practice a more appealing alternative would have been presented (Johnston, p.5).

[12] The war began on 4 April 431 B.C. and it ended on 25 April 404 B.C. (The Peloponnesian War).

[13] He was actually now living in Macedonia (Harris & Platzner, p.738).

[14] If the play is to be interpreted from a historical context.

[15] Numerous other parallel features exist with enough correspondent features to effectively assert the conclusion that Euripides based his play on his observations of the Peloponnesian war. Dissatisfaction with political leadership and direction was becoming widespread, along with the sometimes rapid retreat of Greek Democratic systems of government therefore Greek government was becoming less influential overseas. This produced a climate whereby Greek citizens began to open up to and even actively search for other political systems and personal saviours. Eventually the Greek City States began to fail in their attempts to stop their citizens experimenting with foreign ideas of leadership and eventually crumbled (Hornblower pp.166-170). If we take, as mentioned earlier, Pentheus to represent Greek ideology and Dionysus to represent foreign or non-Greek ideology then this historical interpretation competently explains many, if not most, of the attributes of the Bacchae.