Hello Philosophy Society!
Discussion 1: Plato’s Forms
The first discussion was about Plato’s abstract world of forms. This world is the ideal world which our physical world is analogous to. The ideal world of forms is where our understanding of mathematics and number comes from. It is puzzling how nowhere in the physical world do we ever see a perfect circle, but we can conceptualize, understand and create formulas to calculate the diameter or radius of a perfect circle that can be applied to the circles we observe in the physical world. This same geometrical distinction occurs with the pythagorean theorem, A²+B²=C² in terms of triangles. How is it the case that we can have these calculations based on idealized figures but never actually observe a ‘perfect’ figure in the physical world?
If we zoom in on any shape in the physical world, we will eventually find imperfections in that shape. No circle that we see is actually a perfect circle but appears to be so from the distance of observation we are perceiving it. Even a straight line, when zoomed in enough, will have imperfections within that show it is not straight. It is from these kinds of observations that Plato determined there must be some other world, the world of Forms, where the geometrical equations found their validity. For, it cannot be from our observations of an imperfect world that we derive perfect equations.
This dualist perspective is difficult to cohere for if it is the case that there is this alternative world of forms, how do we, as physical beings, have access to this world? What is the link in us humans between the physical world and the world of forms?
Even if we understand the world of forms as simply concepts derived from our language and observations of the world, it still is unclear how these concepts produce the results they do. For example, why is it the case that the equation 1+1=2 is consistent in its ability to yield the same results?
Whatsapp Chat
WaC Discussion 1: Network State
Reggie: The Network State
Been reading this quite a bit lately, by the former Chief Technology Officer of Coinbase. Digital passports issued by virtual communities that adopt cryptocurrencies to crowdfund physical dwellings or structures. Historical records that are shareable, auditable and immutable. Science conducted with direct access to raw data. This is how we should think about unlocking the full potential of blockchain technology. Not just as a YOLO strategy from Wall Street Bets.
Achilles: This is interesting. I started reading the quickstart. It is a different way of thinking about nations but i don't know if this statement is realistic, "As the population and economy of a startup society grow comparable to that of a legacy state, with millions of citizens and billions in income, it should eventually be able to attain recognition from existing sovereigns — and ultimately the United Nations — just as Bitcoin has now become a bonafide national currency." Pg 3ish
A nation based on its geographical roots seems necessary. Aswell how are laws imposed via the network and what if they come into conflict with geographical laws. Maybe that's addressed later on but not too sure
Reggie: The idea is that you'd start with a community online, develop the culture, adopt a crowdfunding mechanism, and then come together to build physical structures. "Cloud first, land last." Laws/rules would be decided within the community. Basically, the issue is that unlike companies, you cannot have a government 'start up.' Think about operating systems or programming languages. It would not be efficient to build from scratch. The 'libraries' would be our history: we'd simply leverage learnings from the past. Balaji is a visionary, to be sure.
Achilles: It's a super interesting idea. I'm not sold on crypto yet. I still feel it's a Ponzi scheme.
Natalia: Agree with you, but I think it's just lack of information or experienced individuals. One needs to be an insider.
Achilles: I understand that. I'm not in that position and many people have lost a lot of money in the last few years.
Reggie: Cryptocurrencies as they trade, sure. But Balaji is talking more about blockchain and tech. And with a visionary's lens. Whether one can successfully execute that vision, that's something different. To me, from a purely philosophical perspective, his ideas and ideals are solid.
Achilles: The networking idea is very interesting.
Academic Reflections: Gender Identity vs Dysphoria
Let there be a reality independent of human perception. Humans perceive some form of that reality. They use this to navigate the environment they live in to survive. Humans developed a mode of information to compress that perception of reality into symbols. Those symbols are used in thought and can be communicated between humans. The symbols being used develop over time. As humans perceive reality more clearly, they branch off new terms to describe those perceptions.
Now enters the Gender Discussion. All people perceive a state of gender in themselves. This state of gender designates a feeling of masculinity and femininity. All humans are both masculine and feminine.
Masculinity and Femininity developed through our evolutionary trajectory as a species that has two fundamental sexes: female and male. The root of femininity and masculinity are from the biological structure of our DNA that our specific animal, and most other animals on our planet, have evolved with. These parameters of male and female have been the biological way species produce offspring.
Over time, male and female as sex has developed genders that are associated with each. Gender is fundamentally an expression of masculine and feminine traits that were derived in sex from male and female.
Humans, for as least we know, have now reached a stage in their evolution where there is not a strict identity relationship between masculine -> male and Feminine -> female. What has happened is a more fluid notion of gender within males and females. What is the reason for this fluidity?
If we approach the situation as such, we can begin to start asking the right questions. If we become confused about the premises before this question, we will reduce our ability to conceptualize and come to the correct answer.
Gender fluidity is something that we can explore empirically. Whether we have the technological means to do so or scientific methodology that would produce sound results is another question. Let us ask those questions too.
A person who is faced with feeling that they are unacceptable in society by being labeled the incorrect gender is a problem. To solve this problem we have several factors to consider:
1) What is the natural development of identity?
2) What is the natural development of gender identity?
3) If gender is fluid, does that mean that an individual person can fluctuate between masculine and feminine throughout their lives?
3.1) If so, what factors contribute to this fluctuation? ex: socio-cultural, developmental, situational, personality factors, biological, etc.
4) How can we be accurate to the factual data about male and female and build on those forces of nature in our understanding of gender so that people are identified by others accurately and without creating suicidal and existential angst from misidentification?
The solution: In our perception of reality we have entered into a new stage of human development. Here, we need terms that transcend male and female that are traditionally used to describe people. The difficulty is that when we look at a person, our visual acuity is the main data used to determine or identify what sex/gender they are. It is important to keep sex and gender distinct for biology and psychology for they are two different tiers of phenomena. It is okay for some of the male sex to feel a feminine gender or vice versa.
Due to the practical limitations of our evolutionary history, people who have not made efforts through their appearance to match what they feel inside can understandably be mistaken for the sex that they are biologically assigned. We cannot change that as a matter of fact in reality.
What we can change is how we respond to people who have a different gender than their sex. The process of physical modifications so that the person on the inside matches what they feel on the outside is something to understand.
Your feelings are important. How you see yourself is important. How others treat you is important. But some things will never change. We, as a society, need to accept that. No matter how much one makes an effort to change their chemistry or anatomy, they cannot change where they came from or where we are as a species.
If all you want is to feel good, we can do that together. We can create new terms and a way of using those terms socially so that everyone is respected. But not at the cost of reality. We need to understand reality. This is fundamental to our existence.
In all ways possible, the human mind has an a priori function to grasp and decipher reality as it is perceived. This will never change and it is wrong to lie to people about that. What we can do is work with each other's feelings, accept reality as we see it for what it is, and make efforts to communicate with each other so that we are all understood.
Let us separate those people out that simply want to be respected for how they feel and the ones that truly need to go through the physical suffering to make themselves appear different externally. It is not necessary for you as a human to have hormone therapy or surgery. What is necessary is for you to love yourself and love your life. We have a place to love each other but recognize that the beauty of our human condition has both a positive and negative side.
Our autonomy gives us our freedom but at the cost of other people not doing what we want. If you take the autonomy away from others, you are taking away the humanity in them. What we need to do is find the right words. This is a much simpler solution than trying to reengineer someone's DNA. Let us distinguish between what is in our control and what is not.
Let us make it acceptable for you, as a man or a woman, to feel feminine or masculine as the situation or social context demands. Our ability to have a fluid gender, to be both masculine and feminine, gives us the power to connect and meet each other's needs depending on what and how we need them met.
There is a greater perspective than trying to control each other and our use of words.
First, let us find the correct words, then look beyond the micro aggressions of gender entirely. Instead of worrying that someone called you a man or a woman, you can be grateful that you are able to express and feel both, the masculine and feminine. This gives you your dynamic and unique individualism for which you can be part of the larger society as it needs you to be.
Some situations will demand a more feminine approach but others necessarily need masculine energy. We all are both the masculine and the feminine. Let us learn now to love each other as such.
© Achilles Atlas Justice and achillesjustice.com, 2018-22. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Achilles Atlas Justice and achillesjustice.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.