Discussion Summary
Flanagan begins by introducing Aristotle's concept of 'eudaimonia'. Eudaimonia was originaly translated as 'happyness' but there is more to it than just hedonistic pleasure. Flanagan feels 'flourishing' is a better word because it includes an aspect of our influence on the world, a judgement of what we leave behind. As an example he points to Ghandi and Martin Luther King neither of whom may have lived a particularly pleasure filled life, but each did live quite meaningful lives. One constant that Aristotle found is that everyone wants friends.Flanagan defines a good life as one lived at the intersection of 'the true, the good, and the beautiful'. Flanagan wonders if there could be a science that is both descriptive of human well-being and useful in guiding it's attainment. He calls this field 'Eudaiomonics' and describes some approaches and findings. Some of the research only looks into hedonistic measures. One interesting finding is that students who feel money is important for well-being later need to earn twice as much compared to those students who ranked money lower, in order to obtain the same sense of well-being. There are downsides to jumping on to what he calls the 'hedonistic treadmill'.
Dan Dennet points out how we do a poor job both in recognizing and anticipating our own subjective well-being. The set-up of one study that shows this is discussed. Students are told that they need to photo-copy a questionaire before they fill it out. For some students a dime is intentionally left in clear view on the copy machine and the students inevitably place it in thier pocket. They then fill the questionaire which probes them about how well thier life has been going. The results which are robust and have been replicated show that the students who were presented with a dime report that thier lives have been going (as a whole) much better than those who did not find the dime. Dennet is very suspicious that subjective well-being can be accurately measured. He points out that because of the difficulties we often fall back on using money as a measure. He also points out that parapalegics report higher life satisfaction than millionaires. This may be because the parapalegics are forced to re-evaluate what is important.
Sean Carroll points out that the need to contemplate the future may be a possible selection mechanism in the origination of consciousness. A fish could not see very far and therefore had very limited decision choices to model. Once animals came to land they developed the capacity to see farther. With this vision came many more potential choices with some leading to better fitness outcomes than others. The role of consciousness in making these chioces then seems apparent. Carrol makes what I think is very smart point. He suggests we should not necessarily be thinking about states of well-being but instead of processes. In what way does the process we incorporate to move from state to state relate to well-being and meaning?
Rebecca Goldstein who is an author describes the usefullness of inhabiting characters in the writing process. When an editor asks her why a particular character is so unhappy given that the character is so talented and succesfull in many ways this stumps Goldstein for a bit until she realizes that the source of the unhappyness is that the character doesn't feel as though she matters. She concludes that we need to feel as though we matter to flourish. She also points out that this is a tool that religions utilize to build adherents. There is a built in gauruntee of mattering that may not seem so obvious in a secular framework.
Dan Dennet agrees with Goldstein and suggests it will be important to build secular campains, projects, organiztions, and communities that offer a sense of mattering to those who are looking. Sean Carroll is very unclear how we can make this happen. Flanagan follows up by pointing to the finding that attending religous servicies increases well being. He states that follow-up studies have shown that this effect is entirely due to the sense of community that goes with attendance. Flanagan says 'it is because they are not bowling alone' in refernce to a book by Robert Putnam. Following up on Carrolls comment Massimo Pigliucci points to the failure of 'Ethical Culture' which is an organization for humanists in NYC. The organization has beautiful buildings in beautiful locations but Pigliucci points out that ironicly , in order to survive that they are relying on renting their space to churches. In contrast Norway (and ancient Greek culture), have no built in organizations yet there is a much stronger sense of secular community.
Goldstein suggests that reading groups are their own little communities. Steven Weinberg makes the interesting point that many people in Unitarian religous settings are not especialy religous and the discussion of politics is a big motivation for the reason to congregate. He feels the growing lack of belief will eventually kill these types of churches. Dennett points out that Religions have had thousands of years to hone the marketing aspect, but now informations is more readily available causing recruitment problems. Yet one thing religions provide that secular institutions do not is an open door regardless of what you have to contibute. He points out that book clubs are not an option for those who are illiterate.
Alex Rosenberg adds that there is a very strong correlation across societies in the strength of religious attendance, income inequality and the lack of a social safety net. Those societies with greater income inequality and weaker safety nets have more religiousity. This is why the US is more religous than Western Europe. Weinberg asks if the causality might go the other way. Jerry Coyne points out that it appears that the religiosity follows the other factors time after time as a consequence moreso than cause. He feels that people in Europe are less religious because they feel like thier society is taking care of them.
Goldstein and Carrol point out that naturalists need to do a better job of presenting a way to experience a form of transcendance within their frame work. Goldstein likes Flanagans conception of unfying the true, the good and the beautiful. Coyne thinks we first need to address the basics (like health care). Ross points out that the spatial geography in urban areas relative to rural area also plays an important role in the capacity to build secular community.
Terrence Deacon brings things back to what he call being part of a larger self. The idea of living with as opposed to living apart .He feels was missing from the discussion on morality. 'We need to be in each others heads' and this informs our morality.
Don Ross has conducted research in many different societys in the area of monetary risk. He decribes an intersting finding that only occurred in two cultures (Guatamalia & South Africa). In these two cultures women live in such fear that when givien the oppurtunity they reject obvious profitable choices. The conclusion is that they don't want anything that might call attention to themselves. Goldstein find the idea 'staggering' in a culture a fear has lead to a desire to not 'matter'.
My Commentary
In this session there was quite a bit of agreement. All the participants agree that is not necessary to hold supernatural beliefs in order to find meaning in the world. No one argued with the premise that a sense of mattering is important in this quest. There also seemed to be consensus that the top-down effects of culture are a crucial factor effecting the way individuals interpret meaning, and that it is important to reduce inequality and increase social safety nets.I feel however that the session would have benefitted from more discussion on the process of finding meaning which Sean Carroll alluded to. Owen Flanagan mentioned the concept of the true, the good and the beautiful, but there was little discussion about how we might explore that intersection. As Carroll also pointed out there is a reluctance among naturalists to discuss transcendance. With this in mind I suggest that anyone reading this watch this short video (<5 minute) by the great physicist Richard Feynman: Feynman on Beauty
While there was consensus on the idea that 'mattering' was fundamental to finding meaning I would argue that 'not mattering' is fundamental to experiancing meaning. When we look into the cosmos, at the ocean, the unfolding of a flower, or the quantum wave of possibility that precedes every event, we can lose ourself in a sense of awe. Is this loss of mattering not a meaningful experiance?
Tao Te Ching - Lao Tzu - chapter 14
Look, it cannot be seen - it is beyond form.
Listen, it cannot be heard - it is beyond sound.
Grasp, it cannot be held - it is intangible.
These three are indefinable;
Therefore they are joined in one.
From above it is not bright;
From below it is not dark:
An unbroken thread beyond description.
It returns to nothingness.
The form of the formless,
The image of the imageless,
It is called indefinable and beyond imagination.
Stand before it and there is no beginning.
Follow it and there is no end.
Stay with the ancient Tao,
Move with the present.
Knowing the ancient beginning is the essence of Tao.
(translation by Gia-fu Feng and Jane English)
The search for meaning is complemented by it's experience. The words 'stand before it and there is no beginning, follow it and there is no end' describe a circle. I believe Terrence Deacon was getting at this with the idea of a larger self. As we expand our awareness of the cycles of nature we simultaneously expand the reach of our self. This expansion is driven by the embrace of uncertainty which in turn holds the promise of further self expansion. Mattering in the sense of a more finite self becomes less important and we become less self-important as a larger self expands.
This is one way to concieve of the true, the good, and the beautiful.
When knowing is constrained by uncertainty truth is approached.
When the narrative self is constrained by the experiencing self what is good becomes apparent.
When mattering is constained by not mattering beauty comes into view.
At the intersection of the true, the good, and the beautiful there is meaning.
No comments:
Post a Comment