Eleventh Ex.phil. lecture

Today I have given the eleventh lecture in Ex.phil. this Autumn, at University of Stavanger´s Department of social studies. The course is part of the bachelor in psychology as well as the year-long study in psychology. Today´s main topic was political philosophy and specifically political freedom.

Eleventh Ex.phil. lecture

Today I have given the eleventh lecture in Ex.Phil. this Autumn, as part of the University of Stavanger´s bachelor degree in psychology. The topic was political philosophy, specifically political freedom. I also brought up aspects of US politics in this regard, as made pertinent by the presidential election results that are all over the news today.

11th Ex.phil. lecture

Today I gave the 11th lecture out of 12 this Autumn in Ex.phil. as part of the University of Stavanger´s bachelor in psychology. The topic was political freedom.

9th Ex.phil. lecture

Today I have given the 9th lecture in Ex.phil. this Autumn for students in the University of Stavanger´s bachelor in psychology. The topic was freedom and determinism, and other minds.

Abstract: "Wealth and freedom: Beyond planet B"

I have just finished the book chapter abstract below, for an invited chapter contribution.

***

Wealth and freedom: Beyond Planet B

Author: Morten Tønnessen, Professor of philosophy, Department of social studies, University of Stavanger, Norway

Abstract

The Norwegian philosopher Peter Wessel Zapffe (1899–1990), a pioneer in Norwegian eco-philosophy and the conservation movement, can best be characterized as an eco-existentialist. In this chapter I discuss his economic outlook and compare it with philosophical and economic viewpoints of fellow-philosophers Adam Smith and John Stuart Mill. His philosophy of technology had a critical favour, and he tended to assess technological innovations in light of how they affected what he called the “brotherhood of suffering”, ranging, according to Zapffe, from the amoeba to the human being. In his view, modern humans faced with existential dilemmas “save themselves” by using four “mechanisms of displacement”, namely isolation or expulsion of disturbing thoughts and emotions, conventional beliefs, distractions, and sublimation. As existentialists in general, he favors the authentic, autonomous life. In the context of nature conservation, Zapffe was outraged by the “vandalism” that takes place in modern society in the name of economic progress, because it destroys nature, but also because it removes possibilities for living a fulfilling, multifaceted life in nature (and where else are we?).

   A bridge between the thinking of Zapffe and that of John Stuart Mill is implied in the question: What sort of economy maximizes freedom, especially with regard to individual life style choices? The liberty to choose how to live one´s life is fundamental to a liberal such as Mill. He emphasizes the utility that human inventions and action patterns should have for us to label them as progressive or sound, and stresses the value for society of allowing a variety of individual lifestyle choices. Like Adam Smith, Zapffe too was concerned about the moral sentiments of people, though he had a bleaker view than Smith on the impact that egoism vs. altruism has on society´s development. Based on the ethical, existential and economical outlooks of Zapffe, Mill and Smith, I will look for commonalities and differences in their views on wealth and freedom. This will result in a liberal eco-philosophical vision of future societies.

   While environmentalists use “There is no planet B” as a slogan, economists and entrepreneurs are apparently not so sure. Once asked how he related to the prospects of human emigration to Mars, Zapffe (or rather his alias) replied: “Sure, and it'll be exciting the first week. Eventually, though, people will start worrying about how much to tax the uranium mines in order to keep the price of margarine down … the whole thing will repeat itself” (p. 57 in Zapffe 1992). The human condition won´t change by expanding the global economy beyond Earth, and if we don´t solve our current challenges here on Earth, it is not likely that we will solve them by settling on Mars, as entrepreneurs such as Elon Musk and Richard Branson have suggested. Earth´s resources are limited, as is the current economic mindset with its visions of endless growth. The logical end point for such visions is illustrated by Trantor, the administrative planet in a future galactic empire as portrayed by science fiction author Isaac Asimov in his Foundationnovel series. Trantor, with its planet-spanning indoor environment, is a planet were nature has vanished, to make room for the administration of systematic exploitation of resources elsewhere in the galaxy. On Trantor, “nature” is but a faint memory. Its wealth is impressive, but trantorians´ freedom with regard to lifestyle choices leaves much to desire.

Reference

Zapffe, Peter Wessel 1992. Farewell, Norway. Pp. 52–59 in Peter Reed & David Rothenberg (eds.), Wisdom in the Open Air: The Norwegian roots of deep ecology. Minneapolis, London: University of Minnesota Press. 

Autumns 4,5th article writing day - solving environmental crisis

Today I had the 5-ish article writing day this autumn - half day, bringing total up to 4,5 days. I made an article abstract for my paper "Anticipating the societal transformation required to solve the environmental crisis in the 21st century: Umwelt trajectories revisited" (first held as a talk at NASS XI), meant for an invited special issue constitution (Sign Systems Studies). I have also started drafting an abstract work-titled "Wealth and freedom: Beyond Planet B".

3 hours of MA teaching on welfare state topics

Today I have taught for three hours in the Norwegian Master course "Velferdsstaten - politikk og teori". The topic was liberalism´s idea of a neutral state and its relation to people´s freedom to choose their life projects, with Norwegian family policies as a case study.

5th lecture

Today I have given the 5th lecture this autumn in Examen Philosophicum at University of Stavanger´s Department of social studies. Today´s topic was (political) freedom.

Full draft of chapter on family policies and liberalism

Today, along with Svein Tuastad, I finished our (practically) full draft of our joint book chapter "Familie og fridom. Norsk familiepolitikk i lys av liberal politisk teori" [Family and freedom. Norwegian family policies in light of liberal political theory]. Ca. 7.000 words.

See also:

Preliminary reference for chapter with Tuastad

Agency review cited in article by van Hateren - remarks on choice, freedom

My article

Tønnessen, M. (2015). The biosemiotic glossary project: agent, agency. Biosemiotics 8: 125–143.

has been cited in

van Hateren, J.H. (2015). The Natural Emergence of (Bio)Semiosic Phenomena. Biosemiotics. Published online May 27th 2015 (DOI 10.1007/s12304-015-9241-4).

Excerpts:

Agency as understood here is in fact largely consistent with its typical use in biosemiotics (Tønnesen 2015), where the "core attributes of an agent include goal-directedness, self-governed activity, processing of semiosis and choice of action" (see also van Hateren 2014b). For most species, the expression "choice of action" is probably a bit too strong, because choosing seems to presuppose sharp categorization. I rather prefer to call it "some behavioural freedom" (van Hateren 2015), where behaviour is interpreted broadly to include also processes within plants and unicellular organisms. But apart from wording, it points to a similar concept.