After reading the latest news about Jackie Chan and his comments about the Chinese people I think he’ll make a great topic for the next volume of the Popular Culture and Philosophy® series of Open Court Publishing. The book can be titled “Jackie Chan and Philosophy: Chinese Martial Arts and the Art of Kicking Your People in the Teeth.” Of course since I adore Jackie Chan as an actor the book can also tackle his movie philosophy, his sense of humour, and the real reason behind his seemingly masochistic tendencies when it comes to stunts. These things alone would make for enough material to write a philosophy book on Jackie Chan but add to that his latest anti-Chinese freedom remarks and you’ve got one interesting character to analyze, someone worthy of a philosophy book.

So what were the things he said that landed him the honor of being considered to be submitted by yours truly to Open Court? Here are snippets of his controversial comments during the panel discussion at the annual Boao Forum for Asia last April 18.

“Sure, we’ve got 5,000 years of history, but our new country has just been around for 60 years and the reforms for 30 years. It’s hard to compare us with other countries. But I feel that in the 10 years after Hong Kong’s return to Chinese rule, I can gradually see, I’m not sure if it’s good to have freedom or not.”

“I’m gradually beginning to feel that we Chinese need to be controlled. If we’re not being controlled, we’ll just do what we want.”

Sources:
Spokesman: Jackie Chan comments out of context
Jackie Chan: Chinese people need to be controlled

How do you get someone who doesn’t care about philosophy but loves TV shows like The Simpsons, South Park, and the Sopranos? Simple. Get them a book about the philosophy of each show. Yes there really are books about the philosophy of these shows. There’s The Simpsons and Philosophy: The D’oh! of Homer (2001), South Park and Philosophy: Bigger, Longer, and More Penetrating (2007), and The Sopranos and Philosophy: I Kill Therefore I Am (2004). All books from the popular culture and philosophy series of Open Court Publishing. Just from the titles alone you’ll get their attention.

So how about if they don’t watch TV and like music instead well then you can recommend any of the following:

U2 and Philosophy: How to Decipher an Atomic Band (2006)

The Grateful Dead and Philosophy: Getting High Minded about Love and Haight (2007)

Bruce Springsteen and Philosophy: Darkness on the Edge of Truth (2008)

The Beatles and Philosophy: Nothing You Can Think That Can’t Be Thunk (2006)

There are also books for geeks, movie lovers, Harley enthusiasts and more. If you don’t find your topic of particular interest what’s great is that you can submit the topic to Open Court Publishing and they’ll consider whether it is worth doing a philosophy volume on. They prefer very specific topics so make sure you think up something really interesting and specific. So far they’re at the 38th volume and have 14 more topics in line. Do check out their site I’m sure you’ll find something of interest.

Envy is an emotion everyone has at some point felt and needed to contend with. But what exactly is envy? When can you say that you are envious and when are you jealous? Is there are difference between the two? Is envy necessarily bad? All these questions about envy are answered in by Justin D’Arms’ paper on Envy. There he discussed the nature of envy, its rationality, and its relation to justice.

What interested me most about the whole article though is how he showed that envy is not always irrational and that despite the fact that it is often painted in a negative manner, even being considered to be one of the seven deadly sins, it can actually be benign. However, I we all understand why envy has earned its nasty reputation what with all the negative things that do tend to happen or at least the negative emotions that are invoked when the green-eyed monster makes it appearance. To be able to understand the whole concept of envy though and see why it can actually be benign, one needs to first understand its basic nature based on its definition and according to the following philosophers envy can be defined as follows:

Envy is pain at the good fortune of others. (Aristotle, Rhetoric, Bk II, Chapter 10)

Envy is a propensity to view the well-being of others with distress, even though it does not detract from one’s own. [It is] a reluctance to see our own well-being overshadowed by another’s because the standard we use to see how well off we are is not the intrinsic worth of our own well-being but how it compares with that of others. [Envy] aims, at least in terms of one’s wishes, at destroying others’ good fortune. (Kant, The Metaphysics of Morals 6:45)

In short, as D’Arms puts it arises from comparing how well you are doing with others. For the in-depth (and very fascinating) discussion on envy read Justin D’Arms’ article on Envy.

Image Source: Digerati Life

I just read Karl Paulnack’s welcome address to incoming freshmen at the Boston Conservatory of Music and was not only deeply moved by it but was really pleased with his take on music. As a music lover I never really had a philosophy about music but has instinctively known its importance to society. Paulnack’s speech is a really good insight to music and its function to society not because of its facts (though some facts were stated) but because it speaks of a truth that resonates in our emotions.

Here are snippets of his speech that focuses on his take on the Greek’s view of music as well as his own opinion on his and every musician’s purpose or job description.

“The first people to understand how music really works were the ancient Greeks. And this is going to fascinate you; the Greeks said that music and astronomy were two sides of the same coin. Astronomy was seen as the study of relationships between observable, permanent, external objects, and music was seen as the study of relationships between invisible, internal, hidden objects. Music has a way of finding the big, invisible moving pieces inside our hearts and souls and helping us figure out the position of things inside us.”

“If we were a medical school, and you were here as a med student practicing appendectomies, you’d take your work very seriously because you would imagine that some night at two AM someone is going to waltz into your emergency room and you’re going to have to save their life. Well, my friends, someday at 8 PM someone is going to walk into your concert hall and bring you a mind that is confused, a heart that is overwhelmed, a soul that is weary. Whether they go out whole again will depend partly on how well you do your craft. You’re not here to become an entertainer, and you don’t have to sell yourself. The truth is you don’t have anything to sell; being a musician isn’t about dispensing a product, like selling used Chevys. I’m not an entertainer; I’m a lot closer to a paramedic, a firefighter, a rescue worker. You’re here to become a sort of therapist for the human soul, a spiritual version of a chiropractor, physical therapist, someone who works with our insides to see if they get things to line up, to see if we can come into harmony with ourselves and be healthy and happy and well.”