I’ve Never Seen Star Wars @tiffanyjenkins

I count myself as one of those who has never seen Star Wars. OK, I’ve obviously seen plenty of clips, and experienced the memes,  and maybe even accidentally seen large chunks of the original as “Christmas TV” – but I’ve never deliberately watched any of them.

Like any good vs evil soap-opera, they’re a rehash of the perennial myths, same old underlying plots with a new cast of characters, situations and props. Ditto Narnia, ditto Lord of the Rings, (or Godfather I, II and III in my case) etc. That’s a given and indeed a necessity for each generation, each culture, each evolution of current media and story-telling fashion. But I agree here with Tiffany Jenkins that rehashing the rehashes to milk the franchise is not the point – that is too much.

Hell

Can’t stand Dan Brown, but this BBC magazine article is somehow interesting none-the-less.

What’s so funny ’bout … #37

Feynman already was inspirational when he was alive, but “The Fantastic Mr Feynman” was an excellent science documentary for a science editor to conclude, as Feynman himself did, that love is more important than science.

Ironic that they included that science-101 lecture clip where he emphasises the basic falsification rule of science, that if the experiment doesn’t agree, your theory is wrong. Hmmm. Pretty sure he’d have highlighted more likely conclusions if he’d created that lecture later in life.

That is, the more removed the theory from an experiment representing an individual’s empirical experience under control of that individual (like the clip of the clamped Challenger O-ring in the iced-water), the more the “experiment” is a complex logical network of people, experiments, equipment, interpretations, reports, organisations, culture, memes, politics, myths, media, motives, funding, rewards and reputations. Then, the less-significant-whilst-still-relevant the core scientific rule is when compared to all the other possible relationships involved – love (true, misguided, or the lack of it) conquers all.

It would have been fascinating to hear him elaborate on the value of “authority” and “respect” in the context of who can we trust, what can we value, and how that value gets realised and “recognised”. The Swedish Nobel Academy may be imperfect, but the value of a body of work is surely not a scientific question.

Great documentary on many other levels too. Art & Science, Science & Fun, Science & Technology Applications, Education & Learning, Information & Computation, Visuals & Stories …. and so much more. (Hat tip to Smiffy on Facebook for the link.)

[Ha – topical – today, as if to make my point; George Monbiot in the Guardian (Comment is Free) The Treason of the Scholars. I said “lack of love” – George says, quoting Julien Benda, “the chorus of hatreds”. Science is indeed full of moral judgements, prejudices and a wishful “redeeming hypocrisy”. The sooner science takes its head out of its arse, reverses the denial and recognizes it actually needs (humanist / cosmic) ethical underpinnings, the better. Thanks to Nick Maxwell for the link. Real world empiricism really is, and should be recognised as, “aim oriented”. Continuing to pretend it is neutral wrt to values is the denial, the hypocrisy, the neurosis of science. Behaving neutrally wrt to values is to leave ethical decisions to random opportunism. Here with Nick Maxwell’s response to George Monbiot:

I applaud George Monbiot’s call for “a disinterested class of intellectuals which acts as a counterweight to prevailing mores” (‘If scholars sell out, where’s the moral check on power?’, 14 May).  But, as I have argued for decades, we need to go much further.  We urgently need to bring about a revolution in universities so that the basic aim becomes to seek and promote wisdom and not just acquire knowledge ” wisdom being the capacity to realize what is of value in life, for oneself and others.

We have inherited from the past the view that the proper way for academia to help promote human welfare is, in the first instance, to acquire knowledge.  First, knowledge is to be acquired; then, secondarily, it can be applied to help solve social problems.  This view not only encourages the kind of amorality Monbiot depicts.  It is also damagingly irrational.  If we take seriously that the fundamental task of universities is to help promote human welfare by intellectual and educational means, then the problems that universities should be centrally concerned to help solve are problems of living, not problems of knowledge.  It is in general what we do, or refrain from doing, that enables us to achieve what is of value, not what we know.

Knowledge is of course important but secondary.  What we lack is a world-wide system of universities rationally devoted to helping us learn how to solve our problems of living, above all our global problems, in increasingly cooperative, wise ways.  In order to create a wiser world we need to learn how to do it, and for that, in turn, we need institutions of learning devoted to the task.

]

Public Image by PiL

Interesting, the full live Moshcam You-Tube video of PiL performing in Sydney 10th April includes Public Image amongst all the regulars from the recent tour sets. Starts riskily with the sparse and least accessible Four Enclosed Walls. The mix and visuals make a great record of a current PiL performance.

Not sure what the full running time is (two minutes shy of two hours) but even second track Albatross is a 14 minutes version! Interesting Flowers arrangement. Only regular missing so far as I can see is USLS1.  Whoa! no Religion either – weird. Thought they’d dropped old “hit” Public Image forever – fortunately not – a great 3 minutes “goodbye, you got what you wanted, goodbye” to end the main set, with Open Up as the regular final encore.

[Coincidentally, just finished reading John Lydon’s “Rotten – No Blacks, no Irish, no dogs.” Great inside story on the Pistols’ story from a 1992 perspective. Interesting on several levels – the historical content obviously if the musical events interest you, but the style – chapters in John’s voice with quote inserts from others, but also chapters entirely in the voice of others, with John’s inserts – and the players – including Chrissie Hynde and Richard Branson – the back story on New York Dolls, Johnny Thunders and the dreadful Nancy Spungen. Great use of language by John – yes, his arrogant over-confidence can make him a pain in the arse, but it’s “his” autobiography “and we don’t care, (reverb to fade)”. Love the Lydon vs McLaren court battle – simply presented as the written witness affidavits – honesty pays.]

Voting is Divisive

One major reason why “democracy” by popular vote is the worst form of governance (apart from all the others).

(Consensus vs tyranny of the majority, etc. Concensus = Parker-Follett integrationism.)

Interesting review of David Graeber (Occupy Wall Street) book The Democracy Project by Dave Pollard.

Learning How to Help

Thought this was very interesting on several levels.

Increasingly Popular with Young People

Gallipoli still seen as the day that defined Australians and New Zealanders.

How in that hell that they called Suvla Bay?

Lack of Clarity is Better

Another classic example from the football world. It is right that punishments for “unacceptable” transgressions of rules are in some sense arbitrary in their severity.

If there becomes a rule for the punishments against breaking the rule, then we have a game-changer where calculations based on the punishment become part of the rule-breaking decision. Pardew is wrong for this very reason, precisely because he wants clarity on the punishments. Liverpool in this example, but Chelski are the usual suspects in this morality play. I last highlighted this in the Hazard / Ballboy counter example here and the John Terry / “Professional” Foul case here.

Art for Art’s Sake ?

Not only is science a branch of economics, so now is art.

See: BBC Story and Guardian piece.

In fact if you think about the current scale of funding into fundamental physics, actually science is the branch of culture being funded for it’s own sake. Mad. The world turned upside down. (Follow @TiffanyJenkins)

Full transcript here.  Less bleak than the journalists’ selective headlines.

Terry Eagleton & Roger Scruton on “Culture” (Hat tip to David Morey on FB)

[Post Note : The price of everything and the value for nothing.
Deputy London major Munira Mirza, via @TiffanyJenkins]

Dennett Hard Talk

Missed this last week on BBC World Service – Stephen Sackur interview with Daniel Dennett – introduced predictably as one of the “4 Horsemen of New Atheism“.

Much confirmation of my own view that Dennett is the most considered and sophisticated thinker in this space. The four I have before ranked Dennett > Harris > Hitchens > Dawkins (the first two are philosophers notice). The questioning by Sackur is typically caricatured in terms of the standard arguments, but Dennett always manages subtle qualification in his responses, though he pulls no punches with his final statement:

[Whatever theistic religion evolves into …]
“Love, faith, beauty and joy – I hope it lasts forever.”

[Note – the HardTalk link is only for one week. I have an offline copy if anyone wants to hear it.]