Gone are the days of transparency and self-righteousness and in with secrecy and executive privileges. True to this many governments have fallen victim to the so-called values they so hold dear. Even the biggest and largest democracy on this earth, the United States has suffered a lot of scandals and political wrongdoing.

The war in Iraq which many have seen as a mistake came out to be a very costly and big mistake indeed. Being victim to the shortcoming’s of failed intelligence. Or maybe it wasn’t such a bad idea, for you see, Iraq was an ally of the US way back when the old regime before Saddam was in power and the US along with it’s many allies supplied weapons such as guns and even the famed Stinger Missiles many of which were found scattered in and around the country after the invasion were supplied by the US through the many clandestine operations that were conducted to throw out the old government. As Saddam took control of the government, he turned against his supporters (the US and other western states) and turned dictator himself becoming an enemy of the democracies that had supported and placed him in power.

The story of the ill-fated Gerald Bull, the famed American ballistics Scientist and visionary who was out to develop the most powerful cannon capable of launching a projectile out of the earth’s atmosphere (which was supposedly being developed to launch ballistic missiles capable of reaching half-way around the world). He was an American dreamer who envisioned cannons as a viable way of sending satellites into orbit and even joked about hitting the moon with his most powerful gun. He was murdered allegedly by Israeli Intelligence for he posed a threat to the world order (and Israel’s of course), but many rumors regarding the matter hover with the CIA and other Western intelligence agencies in the mix when his death was talked about.

Aristotle, one of the founding fathers of modern philosophy has written many works regarding politics and his interpretation of such. In the book, Nicomachaean Ethics, Aristotle’s foundations for his political projects were based on the presumption that ethics and politics were closely related. In a sense of reverse thinking, he says that the main purpose of politics is to empower or entice citizens to become honest and empower them to do or perform noble actions. This has been greatly contested by many Western civilizations of today who see politics as a sort of undertaking based on greed and self-interest which might be true no only for these areas but anywhere else in the world.

He also defines the aim of politics in the creation of a society with high regards for moral standing. Modern politics is defined as a governance which protects us from each end every body else outside the system with the use of military and policing forces. This has normal people on one side who abide by the rules set by the political leaders and all who are against the said order to be outcasts to be protected from. Much of Aristotle’s ideals are lost in the modern world of politics with very little so-called honorable constituents going into the system to truly represent society as a whole. Some even do it for mainly personal reasons making politics a bridge to personal gain. Today’s modern society sees the kind of molding as counter productive seeing it as a form of making people think out of their own accord. Much is to be learned from the fathers of modern philosophy whose ideals and studies has given rise to all current political systems though not much is left of the ethical part of the ideals.

These are totally unrelated areas of study in philosophy yet they are somewhat similar due to their aim, the study of force. Politics is the study of how political force in relation to the general public and Legal Law is the study of how to best laws can be used to achieve social and political aims. The two are often mixed and used in conjunction with each other because of this simple truth. Legal Philosophy determines or studies, which laws are better, and whether this one or that is better for all or that if this law should even be followed at all due to underlying circumstances that might substantiate invalidity. It tries to explain the relationship of social factors and human nature in a balanced outcome deciding that the outcome would be best for all. Political philosophy on the other hand is defined by the development of a government as it evolves into its current state. Meaning the development of the political structure of a country is highly dependent on which political system it has been based upon and how it’s people have reacted to those systems deciding which is best to apply. True to this, many governments and political figures muddle and try to erase the fine line in order to justify their acts. Those acts then elicit response from the public and the legalities of such actions are questioned further muddling the distinctions. Politics should always follow a certain limit and so does the legal system so instead of focusing on these personal political agenda that they try to substantiate by using the law. Politics and religion for example should always be separated due to a never-ending battle that would ensue. Governments are formed and maintained by the legal system and they should share a common goal which is to represent the society for which they represent in their best interests and not their own.

I came upon another blog that referred to a group of segments of the BBC News Agency in one of it’s programs/special reports about democracy and it’s implications on world society as a whole. The discussion on Philosophy News was a true and timely battle of the minds that asked, “Can democracy work for the whole world?” This is a very challenging question which was showed in the programs many discussions on what it means to people from all walks of life from all corners of the globe.

For those who have been enjoying democracy, they should be thankful to their forefathers for the great job that they have done in establishing and propagating the idea of democracy. For those who are now only getting a taste of what it is and what it can do, well that’s not a very simple matter to contend with. Most of the former communist countries, who have started to embrace Western culture and some form of democracy it is a very scary story indeed. A society that has evolved to be a workforce that does all the leaders of their countries tell them to can be intimidated by the prospect of having to choose whatever and whoever they wish to become. Like the children in China who are now being taught in school of the concept of democracy who were dumbfounded by the ideals and differences that it had to their own society.

For now, the world is evolving as well as human society. The financial crisis of times past and the many natural disasters that have plagued us ever more frequently have opened many doors for people who have usually been left in the dark about the rest of the world. True to this, to ask the question of “Why Democracy?” is not only a very difficult one but quite sensitive for many a wealthy nations are still run under rule of a monarchial government. Some still follow time honored traditions that were reminiscent of the medieval ages when we had kings and queens and that succession was a right rather than a voted upon right.

Democracy might not be for everyone but it may be time that all of us embrace it for it allows us the freedom not only of society but of the global scene and the part that we can play in it if we were all allowed to participate. No society is ever self-sufficient for all those that have tried have miserably failed. We humans have a built-in drive to do what we want, when we want it and where ever we want it to be. Many say that there is no such thing as a democracy but we must always remember that democracy is a form of government that can be defined on paper and is subject to personal interpretation. So for now, democracy has still offered the best tools for the growth of countries around the world. The famous philosopher Kant predicted 200 years ago that democracies don’t go to war with each other but with those who do not embrace it and promote it. In a way this might sound true but a discussion on that must be left to another day. So till then enjoy life and embrace it for all the good and bad. It’s not about the trip, but about the journey that has passed and we currently are on….

[tags]Democracy, Philosophy, World Events, News[/tags]

I came upon an article on the EPhilosopher news regarding the Metaphysics of Ceteris Paribus Laws that made quite a lot of sense and was nice to ponder. The term Ceteris Paribus is Latin for all other things being equal stating the generalizations that science in all it’s history has placed upon certain aspects of science as a whole. But pondering the said term and it’s literal meaning it comes under great fire for many matters on this earth and even the sciences that aims to quantify it has evolved into a science of exceptions meaning that the rule doesn’t apply because….
This might be so for science is never constant as time is and that everything is evolving into something that we don’t know yet. Science has blessed us with many a wonder yet science itself seems to always re-define what it has already termed as known or defined. We humans have a never-ending quest for discovery and re-discovery and something that seems impossible should never be termed as so, someone just hasn’t figured out a way of doing it……
So the term Ceteris Paribus is a fundamental foundation for something that is termed to be an analytic truth which in science terms if definite, defined, final. Or is it???? Thanks to the people who continuously form, challenge and subsequently change the definitions of everything else for in the process we gain a little more understanding of our purpose on this earth which as scientists say is just one of millions if not billions of possible inhabited planets in our solar system alone(Let us just hope that the beings on those other worlds are thinking of the same stuff we are).

[tags]points to ponder, internet philosophy, philosophy books[/tags]

Many have said that the world of science and philosophy are worlds apart and cannot be understood or used to complement each other. These two fields seem to contradict each other at every angle but some do think they can be used together to allow a better understanding of the universe and our place in it.
Science as we know is based on fact or the search of an explanation for something through facts. Meaning why a candlestick burns scientifically is because of many known scientific processes like; oxidation, fuel, air, combustion and so on and so forth. But taking the standpoint of a philosopher pondering that fact would result in a totally different definition or explanation.

The merging of these two fields of study is not as far off as you think. Many of the fathers of philosophy were scientists in their own rights. These ancient people formed the basis for both philosophy and the sciences. Thales, who is considered to be the father of philosophy wondered about the universe from his time and the significance of man in that universe. He was said to have employed a form of research that can be en-likened to a scientific inquiry or study. The next ancient philosopher, Anaximander, focused more on the nature of the universe as a whole. He is credited to have made the first accurate sundial marking accurately the hours of the day on a sundial. He made elementary maps in his quest to find the relationships of the places he knew and their significance to his existence. One of the most famous philosophers was Pythagoras who was a philosopher and mathematician where he formulated some of the most elementary basis of mathematics and their relationships with the universe.
Many more ancient philosophers and scientists shared the same passion for a better understanding of the universe and the way we influence it or are a part of it. True to this, we can say that it may be theoretically possible to meld the two areas of science and philosophy into a new area of study where we seek answers and hopefully better questions to answers to them.

[tags]ancient philosophers, science[/tags]

Extremism is defined by many as a form of strict adherence to laws or beliefs that takes one a step further from the rest of society. Some are considered to be conservative extremists, or those who use the fundamental bodies of study in their belief as justifications for their actions towards other people, society, government or race. They are also labeled as patriots for their aim is to uphold the basic values to which their society is founded on and uses that foundation as their motivation. There are also those who are called Political Extremists like the Extremist Islamic Network, or those who rage a war between a society based on race, color, or other factors that differentiates them from others in society. Many of these people live outside the normal behavior that most observe and turn to more violent forms of showing their adherence to their laws.

Many of these so-called Extremists have foundation in peaceful society but due to influences from people like for example in the Middle East where religion plays a central part of daily life clerics form the basis for their formation and upbringing. Many have interpreted and infused the holy books of all the religions from around the world to incite violence that many find unacceptable hence they are labeled as radicals or those who do not think normally. Many who commit these crimes to society are indiscriminate, killing not only their intended targets but many innocent civilians in the process just to prove the point that they are capable of doing so. More on this on the next post as we take a closer look at some of the most extreme actions taken by people against others in society.