Rumblings of a Not-so-Sane (?) Man

Searching for the intangibles are next to impossible if we search using our sensory faculties. As paradoxical as it may sound, we find them by using our heart. Love, the meaning of one’s life, one’s purpose or telos, are all best found using the eyes that are somewhere in our hearts.

Yes, you got that right! I believe that there are things in life that are best discovered via our emotive side more than our rational constitution. Just waking in the morning and seeing the sun’s beautiful ray shimmering on the vast expanse of a rice field or on the beach elicits a feeling that at times move me to just shed a tear or brings a smile on my face. I get the same feeling too after I put down the final page of  a book that I really like.

Julia Robert’s latest flick,  Eat Pray Love, had the same idea. One of these days when I can afford to gallivant around the planet and has little to no worry anymore, I would love to Eat in Italy too. Pray in Tibet and Love in Greece.

One of persons I truly value in the world, a religious priest, once said we should go to these three places and just let our hair down. Forget all our worries. Just live and be carefree for a week or two.

Live. In the past year, I ceased to live. I have been plodding. And being a plodder in this world is not my idea of fun.  I wanna live again. And to live means taking on the mantle of a seeker of wisdom once more.

Thank God, I have some really wonderful friends who have made my search for enlightenment tolerable coz mind you the path towards authenticity is one lonely road. At times, I find myself just wanting to give up. But I keep telling myself that I wanna get out of the dark cave where I have been thrown into.

So friends, if you see me talking to myself or lost in thought, just leave me be. I am just in one of those soliloquies .  Then again, should I become catatonic for longer than a day, slap me hard on my cheek please coz for certain I have collapsed into a schizophrenic world. And that’s one place I don’t want to find myself in. Not yet.

 

Blaise Pascal Speaking From the Grave

A thought just occurred to me, a thought that has occupied my mind when I was a young philosophy student and hearing the Pascal’s Wager for the first time.

In presenting his argument for the existence of God, an argument that I believe is rooted more on pragmatism than on faith, I posit the position that the French mathematician has actually presented an argument that merely convinces those that have already been convinced.  Personally, I subscribe to the position that the argument begs the question.

My present task, however, has nothing to do with the intricacies and nuances of the Wager. Rather,  I would like to state how extremely frustrating current discussions in the public sphere have become on just about any political and social issue.  I am beginning to believe that people presently engaging in any public discussion have ceased to believe in the possibility of a successful dialogue. As such, they merely dish out arguments that merely convince those that has already swallowed their positions hook,line and sinker.  It’s like Pascal all over again. It’s like interlocutors in public discourses are simply talking to those who are already convinced in their way of thinking.

It becomes more frustrating when the discourse degenerate into name calling.

Can we never have any rational discourse anymore? I am beginning to fear that at the end of the day every issue in this country will simply be resolved via the numbers game. True, this is a democracy where the majority rules.But the argument for democracy rests on a people that has arrived at a decision through a public exercise of reason. Rationality then is an imperative in any commonwealth. But when a society ceases to exercise their civic duty to discuss and thresh out issues, then that society is condemned to be ruled through a tyranny of the majority.

Sorry, but I cannot leave in such a community, I would rather find my own Walden’s pond.

It has dawned on me while listening to the discussions in my Metaphysics class under Z. Lee how extremely difficult objectivity is, nevertheless, I came out of those classes with a firm resolve that difficulty is not tautologous to impossible.

My experience in the parliament of the streets in particular, and in life in general, has made me a firm believer in the free market of ideas. Everyone has a right to find adherents to their way of thinking and convince me through the soundness of their arguments sans populism.

It’s time that we eschew irrationality. It’s time we ground our beliefs on reason and not emotion.

Revisiting the Gettier’s Problem

Anyone who has been schooled in the analytic tradition of doing philosophy would most probably have spent considerable time pondering over Gettierization’s onslaught against the old Platonic analysis of knowledge. This is a philosophical problem that has occupied epistemology when Edmund Gettier examined Plato’s analysis in 1963.

As I was sipping a glass of brandy while seated outside my house last night, I saw a dog urinate on a tree; and that reawakened my old epistemological passion on analyzing the quiddity of knowledge. But let me tell you first why a dog peeing on a tree stirred my old passion,lest anyone misconstrue me being a zoophiliac.

I remember an old Gettier example that was posited by Louis Pojman in his book ‘A Theory of Knowledge.’ The Example goes like this. Assuming that you (Winston John Romero Casio aka WJRC) were watching outside through a window and saw a dog urinate on a tree. Having seen what recently transpired, then you would say ” I saw a dog there.” while pointing at the direction of the tree. Unknown to you, what you see was actually a cleverly crafted robot that was made to mimic a dog’s ability to urinate. As far as the said robot’s appearance is concerned, it looked just like your ordinary mutt except that it really was not a biological robot. Let us assume further that a biological dog was actually sleeping behind the tree seemingly oblivious to the robot dog’s peeing on his territory. Question, when you said that “there is a dog there”, did you actually KNOW that there is a dog there.

Let us recall Plato’s Justified True Belief (JTB) account for Knowledge. Plato say’s, so does Roderick Chisholm though in a bit refined presentation, that

S knows P iff  (S=the knower; P= knowledge claim)

i. P is true. (truth condition)

ii. S believes P is true. (belief condition)

iii. S is justified that P is true. ( justification condition)

therefore, S knows P.

Let’ go back to Pojman’s example.

S=WJRC; P= There is a dog there.

i.  There is a dog there is true.

ii. WJRC believes that he knows that there is a dog there is true.

iii. WJRC is justified in his belief that there is a dog there is true.

therefore, WJRC knows that there is a dog there.

But wait, Gettier says let us examine how the entailment came about. Or how did S infer that he knows P.

P is true because there is indeed a biological dog there.  Keep in mind that though that it was the robot dog that moved WJRC to say that there is a dog there. The second condition on belief is also met because WJRC believes that there is a dog there is true. And the third justification is met because it is justified to believe that there is a dog there is true given that there is a biological dog, albeit sleeping behind the tree and not the robot dog that WJRC was alluding to when he said “there is a dog there”.

Gettier’s point then is this, even if you are able to satisfy all the three conditions of Plato for knowledge, the three condition are insufficient because of the so-called gettierization examples that he has shown.

He, therefore, calls for a revisiting of the old analysis of knowledge.  Thus, the question begging to be asked given the aforementioned example is this, “Does WJRC know that there is a dog there?”

And many have take on the cudgels either for Plato or Gettier. For those interested in a more thorough reading of this philosophical issue. Click here.

My Pedagogical Praxis

I have always known how extremely powerful the spoken word can be. It has been responsible for moving people into action and helping them form opinions in just about anything under the sun. Thus, it has been impressed upon me how truly powerful a teacher or a professor can be. They can either set their students on a path that would define their lives or they can ruin their lives for good, all on account of what they dish out in their classes.

The history that we subscribe to, in the Hegelian sense; and the history that we become responsible for, in the Spenglerian sense, can both be traced in no small terms to the ideas we have heard our mentors  give life to in their lectures or lessons.

Mindful of this awesome power, everyone who dares  to wear the mantle of an educator has to always ask himself the question of whether he is teaching his/her students anything that would help them understand the world. For before they can even contemplate of changing it, they ought to understand it. In this regard, I always pay heed to Heidegger‘s dictum of unraveling the world first from top to bottom before even thinking of changing it. His exhortation is grounded on the possibility that if you choose to shortcut the process, you may actually be fashioning out your own world view. Meaning to say, you did not actually change the world at all but simply tailor made it to your own liking.

As a teacher, therefore, I strive that I do not impress upon my students my view of the world in the hope of transforming them into little robots created in my image. Rather, I consciously make an effort to help them think for themselves. So to speak, to form opinions for themselves and by themselves. The world will not be best served with the peripatetic musings of men and women who mimic me. It would not serve evolution‘s interest.

Salsalang Diwa sa mga Schools

I’d like to let conservatives and our so-called church leaders on an open secret. It is something that many have known and talked about in hushed tones since time immemorial. Namely, students have not only been talking about sex but in many occasions they have been doing sex in schools for some time now. And in many cases, the doing part, has been done in ways and means that would put many porn stars to shame.

Thus, it’s about time that they face up to the fact that our youngsters are not only sexually active but in many cases, sexually adventurous as well.  In the 90s I remember an occasion when two students studying in a Catholic school were caught having sex in their school’s rooftop. They are just examples of students who are into stuff that I would not have even thought possible. And mind you, I’ve had my own fair share of sex, from the kinky stuffs that are textbook varieties, to some things that I would rather forget having failed dismally to get my rocks off. At least on this account, I take my hats off to these young people.

My point of contention is that there is no credence to the arguments being espoused by certain conservative sectors calling on the government to put a stop to sexual education in schools. Their main argument is that it’s the job of parents to educate their children on sex. Duh! Wake up call. Our parents have been reneged on this job. And second, many parents are laboring abroad to provide for their families. The churches have been poor substitutes in this regard as well. They have their own skeletons sneaking out of their closets to worry about.

Their other argument is that talking about sex will turn our youngsters into sex fiends of the nymphomaniacs and satyriac varieties. I’d hate  to say this but wanting to have sex is as natural as breathing oxygen. Sooner or later, our youths will find their ways and means to explore and enjoy. Yes! You read that right. Enjoy! Because they will surely enjoy it and have lots and lots of it.

So it’s about time we teach them how to enjoy it without adding more to our ballooning population and without unwanted pregnancies and contracting STDs.

It’s about time that we bring sex out of dingy and dark rooms and into the light of the open sunshine. Oops, I’m talking about sex talk and not an orgy. Okay?

Chill out and unwind.

Better yet! Ejaculate!

The Measure of a Man

A few days into my 33rd bday, I suddenly found myself re-examining the life I have lived thus far. Have I lived a life worth living or do I belong to the group of wretched humanity who have been a serious waste of oxygen and precious living space?

I have yet to find out. Ill get back to blogging about it when I am granted some enlightenment.

For the meantime, I’d look for a Bo tree or a coconut tree perhaps.

Religion, Postmodernity and an Unbelievable Universal Conspiracy

With postmodernity’s often heralded ‘incredulity towards metanarratives’  gaining a firm foothold in intellectual circles, its intrusion into the conventional mindsets of people,religionists included, via their university education and popular media, has become but a sure thing. Hence, the question that remains in many thinking people’s minds is this, ‘will religion survive the postmodern age?’.

As a seminary philosophy junior professor and an avowed believer in the Christian faith, I am naturally inclined to say that religion will outlive even the most sagacious of the postmodern soothsayers. Then again, I may simply be speaking as a believer, and may be doing so as  a knee-jerk reaction devoid of any rational grounding.  As such, for the time being I’d like to don on a new cap, that of a skeptic. I’d leave it to my readers to evaluate whether this would-be skeptic is following the paths taken either by Descartes or Hume and even that of Nietzsche.

So here goes. You be the judge.

The basic premise of every atheistic postmodern thinker is that all religions, as a matter of fact, every theistic claim, are merely socially constructed or culturally invented. Thus, for varying reasons of expedience, the ruling classes of all known civilizations have taken upon themselves the role of intellectual midwives, foisting the idea of a supreme being into the unknowing and hapless masses.  In doing so, they were consequently able to to firm their grasp on power and consequently condemned the huge mass of humanity to live in perpetual fear of earning the divine’s ire. In the process, they have been languishing too long in a sea of superstition.

On a sidebar: hmm. sounds familiar? try the screenplay of a Hollywood movie.  Interposed with the American predilection for visual spectacles and 10000 B.C.  comes to mind.

However, I’d like to look at it this way. All known human civilizations from the Mesopotamians to the Sumerians and to the Greeks and Romans, all the way to the Chinese and Indians, Mayans and Incas; have something in common, that is, a form of a religionist faith. Hence, organized religion is a universal phenomenon common among known civilizations.

A question is once more begging to be asked, and let me ask it now. If organized religion is a universal phenomenon then does it mean that all human civilizations have been victims of a universal conspiracy thrown upon them by their leaders? If religionist ideas and theism are merely social constructions then the logical answer points to the affirmative.

It is on this ground that I find the entire postmodern thesis falling flat and outright incredulous. To be honest,I’ve never been the type who swallows conspiracy theories hook, line and sinker. It’s simply plain difficult to believe that some people will go the great lengths to create elaborate plans to fool other people. Besides, the sheer size of a conspiracy such as the one postmodernists would have us believe is simply too astounding. It would mean that a large number of people have been party to this elaborate conspiracy. Worse, it would have to transcend both time and space. Time because if this conspiracy is true then it must have started early on in human history. In fact, it should have started from the very beginning when men started coming together as a cohesive unit.

Worse, a conspiracy of that magnitude denigrates the thinking capacity of the entire human race, minus the conspirators. We would have to be moronic to fall prey to such an obvious ruse.

Given the universal scope of this supposed conspiracy, I would have to say that the principle of sufficient reason comes into play, that is, something or someone has to be responsible for this universal conspiracy or idea. Better still, this conspiratorial idea must have emanated from some place. A cause is responsible for everything. No such thing as instantaneous  generation. Inasmuch as civilizations barely knew the existence of other groups apart from those in their proximity, I would have to hazard a guess by saying that they did not have the means to communicate with each other and agree on foisting this ‘divine conspiracy’ on all of their subjects.

If the ‘reason’ does not point to a human construction, divine perhaps?

You be the judge.

Utopia a.k.a. Dystopian Nightmares and Villar

Whenever someone hands you a utopian vision and promises to deliver results in a silver platter, my advice is for you to better cast a cautious look rather than opening your arms to give the utopian a warm embrace.

Why? Let history’s lessons provide the lucid arguments.

The entire cabal of the world’s savage and brutal despots began by promising utopian visions, the high heavens included.  Immediately after they attained power, however, their dreams wreak havoc and poured nightmares upon nightmares upon their blighted people.  Hitler, Stalin, Lenin, Mao and Castro; to name just a few. Oops, I almost forgot the one nearest to home, Pol Tot’s genocidal Khmer Rouge which claimed a third of Cambodia’s people.

Then again, we have had our own version here in the not so shiny pearl of the orient. Marcos’ ‘New Society’ ushered in and institutionalized brutality into the Filipino mindset, albeit in a less than spectacular scale compared to his counterparts. I’d say the CPP-NPA purges in the 80s and 90s may qualify as well.

A question begs to be asked.

How come dreams for heaven on earth end up perpetuating a regime of terror and brutality?

The answer is plain and simple. Human nature. Despite recent attempts by postmodern thinkers and their poststructuralist comrades to denigrate human nature as nothing more than a social and cultural construction, it rears its head day in and day out.   All utopian revolutions are bound to fail inasmuch as human nature is a two-sided coin. Volition or free will always play an integral part on how societies and people turn out to be. Every utopian can easily don a new cap and become a despot anytime he finds his utopian dreams as difficult and unattainable.

Thus, my word of advice is simple. Never expect your deliverance on a single person. Worse, never give absolute power to a utopian, lest, you give him the keys to ruin your life and everyone else’s for that matter.

Never play around with human nature.

Finally, let me say emphatically that Money Villar is a kleptocratic utopian.

Whoa.
Bah humbug!

Money Villar for Prexy. Na-ah!

Hey there everyone, try my version of Money Villar’s campaign jingle.

“Si Villar ang tunay na kurakot. Si Villar ang tunay na mandurukot. Si Villar ang may kakayahan na magnakaw sa kaban ng bayan. SI MANNY VILLAR ANG MAGTATAPOS SA ATING KINABUKASAN.”

Try this one for an LSS fit. Last Song Syndrome, for those not in the know.

To think that I almost fell for this guy’s limp defense. I guess I was too suspicious of the messengers knowing of Lacson’s and Madrigal’s predilection for the headlines. This time around, I’m too sorry for almost throwing away the message together with the messengers. Then again, I opted to throw away my distrust.

Whew, Thank God.

I never thought the day would come when I would be thankful of anything emanating from Senator Lacson’s and Madrigal’s camps.   This time around, I take my hat off (figuratively of course, unless someone sends me an Italian Fedora hat) for these two.

13th Floor, Bliss and Musings

Whoa! I’ve been on tall buildings and getting on elevators since 1994 (that’s when i came to the big city a.k.a. urban jungle) but I can’t quite recall a time when I was on a building’s 13th floor. I’ve been racking my brains trying to remember when I was on the traditionally ill-omened building floor but I can’t seem to place my fingers on a single instance. I really can’t. I dunno if this is another of my premature geriatric moments  but If I’m right, then this afternoon was the first. Unlike my other first, this one lasted longer than a few minutes and I didn’t sweat profusely despite being on a building without any central cooling system.  Come to think of it, the building prides itself of being a skyscraper. Tsk tsk, the tenants are obviously not getting their money’s worth. But that’s for another blog. I’m getting off tangent.

At exactly 4pm on January 21,  I was at the One Executive Plaza at West Avenue in Quezon City. There were no Sadako but I had the misfortune of meeting a potential business partner from Mainland China who turned out to be full of hot air. A braggadocio straight out of Edmund Spenser’s ‘The Faerie Quenne’.    Pure and unadulterated man made out of hot gas.

Coming out of the meeting, I was tempted to prick him with a pointed needle. Too bad I had none at hand at the time. Otherwise, he would have fizzled out.

Bah humbug.