Ma3Ke4Li3
Vivek Venkataraman argues that political equality and proto-democracy were the most common form of political organisation in the "state of nature". These ideals preceded modern liberalism & statehood, and are arguably how humans have lived the majority of our evolution.
on-humans.podcastpage.ioSubmitted by Ma3Ke4Li3 t3_12303in in philosophy
Bernardo Kastrup argues that the world is fundamentally mental. A person’s mind is a dissociated part of one cosmic mind. “Matter” is what regularities in the cosmic mind look like. This dissolves the problem of consciousness and explains odd findings in neuroscience.
on-humans.podcastpage.ioSubmitted by Ma3Ke4Li3 t3_11pdufn in philosophy
Neuroscientist Gregory Berns argues that Thomas Nagel was wrong: neuroscience can give us knowledge about what it is like to be an animal. For example, his own fMRI studies on dogs have shown that they can feel genuine affection for their owners.
on-humans.podcastpage.ioSubmitted by Ma3Ke4Li3 t3_11cp3bu in philosophy
Anna Alexandrova, a philosopher of science at Cambridge, argues that a “science of happiness” is possible but requires a new approach. Measures such as “life satisfaction” or “positive emotions” can be studied rigorously. An underlying variable of “happiness” cannot.
on-humans.podcastpage.ioSubmitted by Ma3Ke4Li3 t3_106k3wb in philosophy
Patricia Churchland argues that brain science does not undermine free will or moral responsibility. A decision without any causal antecedents would not be a responsible decision. A responsible decision requires deliberation. The brain is capable of such deliberation.
on-humans.podcastpage.ioSubmitted by Ma3Ke4Li3 t3_100qq63 in philosophy
Philip Kitcher argues that secular humanism should distance itself from New Atheism. Religion is a source of community and inspiration to many. Religion is harmful - and incompatible with humanism - only when it is used as a conversation-stopper in moral debates.
on-humans.podcastpage.ioSubmitted by Ma3Ke4Li3 t3_zwfizu in philosophy
Thomas Hobbes was wrong about life in a state of nature being “nasty, brutish, and short”. An anthropologist of war explains why — and shows how neo-Hobbesian thinkers, e.g. Steven Pinker, have abused the evidence to support this false claim.
on-humans.podcastpage.ioSubmitted by Ma3Ke4Li3 t3_z5b1hv in philosophy
Michael Shermer argues that science can determine many of our moral values. Morality is aimed at protecting certain human desires, like avoidance of harm (e.g. torture, slavery). Science helps us determine what these desires are and how to best achieve them.
on-humans.podcastpage.ioSubmitted by Ma3Ke4Li3 t3_ynt30e in philosophy
Neuroscientist Gregory Berns argues that David Hume was right: personal identity is an illusion created by the brain. Psychological and psychiatric data suggest that all minds dissociate from themselves creating various ‘selves’.
on-humans.podcastpage.ioSubmitted by Ma3Ke4Li3 t3_ybm2jp in philosophy
Philip Kitcher argues that morality is a social technology designed to solve problems emerging from the fragility of human altruism. Morality can be evaluated objectively, but without assuming moral truths. The view makes sense against a Darwinian view of life, but it is not social Darwinism.
on-humans.podcastpage.ioSubmitted by Ma3Ke4Li3 t3_y5iu41 in philosophy
Ma3Ke4Li3 OP t1_jdsk9cp wrote
Reply to Vivek Venkataraman argues that political equality and proto-democracy were the most common form of political organisation in the "state of nature". These ideals preceded modern liberalism & statehood, and are arguably how humans have lived the majority of our evolution. by Ma3Ke4Li3
Abstract
How did humans live before the origin of the state? Such questions about the “state of nature” are used in social contract theories as a backdrop to political philosophy.
While some philosophers, like David Hume, regard this such questions about the “state of nature” as mere thought experiments, most of the original theorists on the state of nature - such as Rousseau and Locke - showed significant interest in information about indigenous people. Therefore, many philosophers have taken interest in the question of what modern archaeology and anthropology suggest about life before organised states.
Anthropologist Vivek V Venkataraman argues that we have a pretty good idea about the political organisation in this “state of nature”: humans were largely living as political equals, with proto-democratic practices. This suggests that democracy is older than the state: communal decision-making precedes organised statehood.
In this episode, Venkataraman explains the relevant research and responds to critics of the relevant methodology.