Contents of P:
Philosophy,
Its Practical Importance:
Passion, an elusive gesture to begin with, is often a common supposition
amongst and about philosophers, who today could hardly find want to pursue its
fruits for the sake of anything else. That is, if one is seeking a high-paid
profession, one would best avoid the philosophical activity. The utility of
philosophical inquiry, as opposed to that of the medical sciences,
psychoanalysis, and law, is far from being publicly obvious. To many
philosophers, however, this point of obscurity implicates a broader commentary
which happens not to flatter the prevailing educational priorities. The idea of
the ÎPhilosopher-Kingâ from Platoâs Republic, for example, incites
a common chuckle from the non-philosopher, as it is truly an awkward thought in
the public, or even the inter-disciplinary, context. It seems, perhaps, even to
be rather arrogant. And what, precisely, would the fruits of philosophy be that
could be said to stem from a Îkingly natureâ? Well, there is no single
answer to this question, and to review many is not conducive for the purpose of
this essay. As far as I know, my own position is best articulated by Bertrand
Russell in his essay ÎThe Value of Philosophyâ. In it, Russell points out
that the obviously useful sciences, such as psychology and sociology, are in
fact the fruits of philosophy. He writes:
The
whole study of the heavens, which now belongs to astronomy, was once included in
philosophy; Newtonâs great work was called Îthe mathematical principles of
natural philosophyâ. Similarly, the study of the human mind, which was a part
of philosophy, has now been separated from philosophy and has become the science
of psychology (155) 14.
For
Russell, this does not mean that philosophers have no more work to do regarding
the human mind, but that our most productive place is to be found precisely
where we are furthest from a system of definite answers. Russell concludes the
essay by stating that
[t]he
impartiality which, in contemplation, is the unalloyed desire for truth, is the
very same quality of mind which, in action, is justice, and in motion, is the
universal love which can be given to all, and not only to those who are judged
useful or admirable. Thus contemplation enlarges not only the objects of our
thoughts, but also the objects of our actions and our affections: it makes us
citizens of the universe, not only of one walled city at war with all the rest
(161).
Therefore,
Russell sees that philosophical investigation produces the most sound and
thorough basis for human action.
Thought and action are not separable, then, since one without the other
is only useful by accident. Human action is often based on a complex system of
philosophical principles, while the human actor does not usually know this about
his or her actions. Most people act on the dictates of tradition, obligation,
and social-practice without ever pausing for a close examination of the
principles upon which they act. But what happens when someone does? Do they then
grasp the philosophical grounding of their actions? Not necessarily. Philosophy
is not as simple as this. Learning the reasons for your actions is not the same
as learning philosophy. Philosophy will not merely acknowledge the reasons
discovered, but will seek to problematize them- putting oneself deliberately in
an indecisive state of discomfort. Philosophy seeks to bring with it only those
items that resist a varied barrage of antithetical arguments. From this, the
philosopher achieves the proficiency to intimately understand the arguments that
oppose his or her own. The greatest product of this is the accumulation of
timely perspectives and ways of viewing the world. If one has strong beliefs
regarding religion, and has many reasons for why their beliefs are precise- this
does not alone suffice. Consider, for example, how many Îblasphemous,
god-hating punksâ you know who canât articulate a forceful argument in favor
of religion. They might insist that they canât produce such a thing, since no
such argument is possible. But what an egocentric world of reactionary punks it
would take to oversimplify eons of religious life as Îfools duped by obvious
liesâ. If you can concede, for a moment, that some of your enemies in thought
actually possess some intelligence, two conclusions may follow: 1) If your
strongest arguments have never been compared with the strongest arguments to the
contrary, then you have never needed to produce the best refutation; and 2)
These people may be capable of achieving the level of awareness and
understanding that you claim to be your own. Philosophy asks the actors of the
universe to think; this is its essential request. Most of the slogans that
saturate this sub-culture do not make such a demand.
The
value of philosophy is, in fact, to be sought largely in its uncertainty. The
man who has no tincture of philosophy goes through life imprisoned in the
prejudices derived from common sense, from the habitual beliefs of his age or
his nation, and from convictions which have grown up in his mind without the
cooperation or consent of his deliberate reason. To such a man the world tends
to become definite, finite, obvious; common objects rouse no questions, and
unfamiliar possibilities are contemptuously rejected· Philosophy, though
unable to tell us with certainty what is the true answer to the doubts that it
raises, is able to suggest many possibilities which enlarge our thoughts and
free them from the tyranny of custom (156-157).
If you are fortunate enough to be in college, please try out a philosophy
class as soon as possible. If not, please contact me with your worldly interests
so that I may send you a list of related readings in philosophy.
As astronomical as it is, the sheer enormity of waste we produce often
goes unnoticed. A simple eye-opening experiment can be conducted if we devote a
single day to the observation of how many Îthingsâ we and those around us
accept only to throw in the garbage moments later. Every single item that we
place in a trash receptacle is thereby deemed Îuselessâ and has to be
directed to its final resting place. While this final resting place is not
always visible, it is, sure enough, on this earth, in our backyards (for those
of us who have them), under our feet, and in the water we drink. Those who have
not given it deliberate attention likely produce a completely superfluous amount
of trash. So to begin with, I think it is important that all of us adopt a
sensitive awareness of our own personal waste production· After all, the
second a Îuselessâ object is indiscriminately thrown away- it is no longer my
trash, but ours. To follow up our experiment, we can ask ourselves to take note
of what use we have gotten out of each item that we place into a trash
receptacle. Secondly, we can ask if the use of that object justifies its
disposal. To assist us in this determination we should consider that each thing
we dispose of had to have first been produced; a production which most likely
gathered its materials from the environment; for even synthetic materials (as
opposed to Înatural resourcesâ, supposedly) are a synthesis of materials
found in nature. And for this reason, many of these materials can only be
gathered and synthesized for a limited time.
It is easy, in a culture where the source is never consulted, to assume
that the source is unlimited. But the careless abuse of our environment, like
the careless abuse of our bodies, only accelerates its trip toward exhaustion
and death. What we take from nature is always returned to nature, but very
rarely in the same form. What we give back is usually a bi-product of our
production; ugly gifts like landfills and groundwater pollution. Seeking to
recycle every recyclable thing that we can is a great way to get into the
practice of reducing our personal waste production. That is why I place the word
Îuselessâ in quotes; because anything that can still be used is not useless
at all. If, however, you conduct the simple experiment above and still say
ãwho the fuck cares,ä I doubt you will be eager to become a radical
recycling freak, or even to pick up a resource book such as any edition of The
State of the World. This book is easily accessible, published each year by
the WorldWatch Institute, and, amongst other things, catalogs conclusively the
more-than-substantial effect that our actions have in causing the depletion of
the planet that sustains us. Each year the book is published, it seems that we
are facing additional and further forsaken environmental predicaments; new
predicaments that we must learn of and treat responsibly.
In the bodega next to my place of work I have earned a reputation as the
guy who buys a cup of coffee every morning and refuses to accept a paper bag for
it. I find this fact peculiar yet scary. I mean, imagine the fame I would have
to endure for bringing my own coffee cup!!! You see, the garbage can on Fifth
Avenue, right outside the bodega, is already piling over with Îuselessâ
garbage by 11am each day. It is both interesting and horrifying to see that this
trash consists mostly of clean, unused plastic and paper bags which, if folded
properly, could still be behind the bodegaâs counter. This is no small matter
to the environment, to you, and to the store. The more collective trash we
produce, the less space we have to grow food in; the more bags we take for
take-out coffee and to bag our bag of Sour Patch Kids, the more money the store
has to spend buying bags; and you÷ You are here, like the rest of us, for a
relatively short time. You and I are waste machines who make so much shit each
year that it is a logistical miracle that we are not yet situating our beds on
top of mountainous heaps of garbage bags.
My girlfriend just went to San Francisco where she saw a full-grown seal
with a plastic bag handle around its neck. The seal had clearly been living with
it there for a while, since it was unable to lie down due to the fact that its
fleshy neck had grown around the impediment making it nearly impossible for the
animal to move itself, let alone breathe. I have yet to meet a fish who owned a
Brita water filter or a Poland Springs dispenser, and I know a lot of fish.
Animals actually use natural resources much more instinctually then we do, and
so our throw-away convenience is often their kiss of death. But donât worry,
soon we will send our shit-mountains out into space making our newest landfills
on Mars, and paying a new tax for the (ISRP) Interplanetary Shit Removal Plan.
I realize that this piece has been super-polemical, but it is an
expression of undisputed facts ö of which, to list them all would be
impossible. What needs to be said here is that we can all do something creative
to reduce the production of waste. Get yourself a few canvas bags so that when
you buy groceries you can reject the plastic ones and be prepared to tell the
cashier why· Or just write the answer plainly on the bag itself with a marker
so that the common voyeurs who donât ask will find out anyway. Donât buy
products that are packaged with a needless amount of inconsiderate materials.
Reject bags for products that are not inconvenient to carry. Reuse things. We
can indeed feel good about placing our cans and bottles in a recycling bin, but
why not check first to see if we will need a can or bottle to use as a travel
container, flower holder, or loose-change-bank? Look at what you buy, and ask
yourself- ãIs it worth the waste?ä This is only a beginning. But, perhaps
achieving Îplastic bag consciousnessâ is the first in a many step plan to
saving this planet for future human and non-human inhabitants.
ãItâs time to sexually abuse some women. Political correctness has nothing to do with hardcore.ä When I asked the band what they meant by these words, spoken before their set, they replied that it was ãa jokeä. I asked them to explain it to me because I didnât get it. Their reply was that a joke isnât funny if it has to be explained. My reply is that a joke isnât funny if itâs offensive or demeaning and Iâm not going to let these ãjokesä go unquestioned especially in a place (i.e. the hardcorepunk community) that I go to specifically to escape this sort of thoughtlessness and irresponsibility.
A prescription drug which prevents acid reflux, an insidious digestive
condition which sought to render Chrisâ esophagus useless. (see also Zantac)
Procreation?,
Is Love an Advanced Form of:
Pick
up the magazines, weâre making a mold -
squeeze
in.
Mother
says youâll learn in time to walk in high heels.
Father
says what are you, a girl? (and)
keep
your eye on the goddamn ball.
But
weâre all striking out even
when
we make it to first base
because
sex is still distasteful
and
Iâm attracted to body types
(the
same types that everyone is attracted to).
Iâve
been asked whether Iâm a leg man or a breast man
(and
really who hasnât?)
But
thereâs nothing healthy about emaciation
and
Iâm terrified that love might just be complex procreation.
For lack of a better term, I use this word to describe ideas and
movements which benefit the earth and its inhabitants as a whole. An assumption
- that humans have, over the last few thousands of years, acted in a manner
which is harmful and destructive to the earth - but we can move beyond these
behaviors, progressing steadily towards more balanced dealings with the world in
which we live.
Progressive
Taxation: (see also Regressive
Taxation)
Much of our countryâs federal and state tax system is mildly
progressive. Progressive taxation is founded on the principle that all citizens
should not pay the same tax rate. Those who are more wealthy can both
afford to pay a larger percentage of their income in taxes and ought not
to hold onto as much of the money they ãearnä. Under a progressive tax
system the poorest people are not taxed at all (so that they may purchase goods
and services needed for survival), those of moderate income are taxed at a
moderate rate (to pay for the government services which we all use to some
extent), and the rich are taxed at a much higher rate (to compensate for the
funds which the poor were unable to contribute). Such a system does not
eliminate class differences - the poor person still cannot afford the lifestyle
of the wealthy, even after taxes - but moderates the effect of wealth in terms
of how much our government asks all citizens to provide for the common good. And
it just makes plain sense: the rich can afford the higher rate, the poor cannot.
When you hear about calls for a ãflat tax rateä, usually masked as a
means of ãsimplifying the tax codeä, what you are really hearing is a call
for the end of progressive taxation. Ending progressive taxation will benefit
our richest citizens, who are already enjoying absurd advantages over the rest
of the population (see Welfare Reform). As it is, we
already have diluted the tax code so that it is only partially progressive, in
addition to affording all kinds of loopholes which allow the super-rich to evade
the fleetingly-progressive tax code we now employ. We need a return to a truly
progressive tax structure, one which allows us to resume social spending by
pulling more funds from the income of the rich. The unfortunate
multi-millionaires will have to live with only one Jaguar, one summer home, and
one trip per year to Europe. Poor them.
Punk:
While we do recognize that some things, such as Nancy Reagan, are
decidedly not punk, we question the validity of any and all attempts to define
ãpunkä in certain terms.