A public club that meets to talk with philosophers and discuss a wide variety of philosophical issues. We aim to promote a philosophical and thoughtful approach to everyday life, and to help connect the outside world to the thinking of professional philosophers. We are supported by the Royal Institute of Philosophy and based in Barnes, London SW13, UK.
Thank you to everyone who attended Fiona's recent talk, and for some excellent questions.
You can view the recordinghere and the handouthere. Please do subscribe to our channel so you can easily find future talks.
Prof Ellis defended a form of naturalism which has much in common with Iris Murdoch’s ‘true naturalism’, but argued that it can accommodate God. She considered what it could mean for naturalism to be theistic in this sense, and respond to the charge that it leaves no room for the transcendent.
Fiona is happy to receive questions about her talk - her email address is included in the handout.
This lecture, given on-line to Barnes Philosophy Club (sponsored by the Royal Society of Philosophy), in London, April 2020 is the first of 2 Parts. This talk, simply put, has been constructed to promote a 'System' by the author which brings together Psychology (Attitude Analysis, Numbers and Psycho-metrics) with Philosophy (Words, Linguistic Analysis and Meta-Ethics). Previously the author has talked on the subject of Russell's major contribution to Analytic Philosophy and his association with Psychology when the 'System' was first presented to an audience in London in May 2017 .
This second lecture uses Bertrand Russell as an example of how and why a Philosopher can and does change his or her Ethical Position over time, seemingly as a result of a combination of effects relating to life events and the influence of other Philosophers. By using a combination of Philosophical and Psychological ideas it seems possible to create a Psychometric-Philosophical Paradigm (PPP System) which enables 2-dimensional (X - Levels of Aggression , Y - Levels of Self-Esteem) mapping of different Ethical positions, with Russell being seen to move around such a mathematical 'Grid' ( sc. Moodgrid /moodgrid.com as inspired by Eyesenck's Personality Diagram ) to significant degrees). 5 such Main Ethical Positions are so described and analysed. Such mapping appears to be a potentially useful method to improve comparability and commensurability of Ethical Norms. Also, the 'Grid' facilitates identification and analysis of a number of logically created Dimensions running across the Grid, which hopefully assists in the understanding of the multitudes of Dichotomies and Dialectics within the realms of Philosophy, to be discussed in more detail in Part 2.
Part 2 deals with how such differing Ethical positions might drive Higher Order thought and significantly affect Philosophical, Social and Political Positions. The third dimension (Insight-Ignorance (Z)) of the PPP is described which facilitates construction of cubic space within which to locate and quantify more complex sets of ideas and permit analysis and grouping of individual Philosopher's Positions at any given 'time'. The 4th Dimension, as with any Cartesian System. being time.
As such, the whole 'PPP System' is an attempt, as also inspired by Russell and Wittgenstein, to uncloak any disguise in the language of higher level argument, Such language is usually designed to effect social control and promote sometimes highly suspect and distorted political agendas, not necessarily therefore truthfully represented in that language. Finally, some quotes from Russell himself, extracted from context within the talk ..... “Emotions drive the Attitudes which distort our Ethical Norms “ “In all Ethical Questions are Feelings” “The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so ‘certain’ of themselves and wiser people so full of doubts…” "Not to be absolutely certain … is one of the essential things in exhibiting rationality or reason" "Ethical metaphysics is fundamentally an attempt, however disguised to give legislative force to our own wishes…." Robin K Strachan London, U.K. April 2020
There were some good stories from the floor too ! Not of class in the same way as in England but in New Zealand, in Hungary, and a story not of class but maybe of priviledge. Interestingly Dr Neil Williams showed how complex the notion of class is illustrated from both the internalisation of the self as well as external circumstances
Neil meeting the folk of the club ... and some relaxing ...
Some researching on the Phone !
Some like advertising the club
and ... Some love cooking for the club too !!
Meet Vicky the OSO Catering Manager and her husband
The evening was very interesting and made accessible and fun by our Speaker: Dr Neil Williams University of Roehampton
In this talk, I am interested in exploring the exact nature of social class, and the role that our social class plays in allowing us to operate comfortably within certain social spaces. In particular, I will focus on experiences of social mobility, and in challenging the modern assumption that moving to a higher socio-economic group is always an unalloyed good. In fact, I will suggest, when we examine the experiences of those who have been ‘upwardly mobile’ in this way, we typically find them pervaded with a sense of profound alienation. Even when they have – by all objective markers – attained socio-economic success, the socially mobile are haunted by what cultural critic Mark Fisher describes as ‘‘[the] sense of not belonging there, of being intruders’ (Fisher, 2013). After presenting and analysing an illustrative range of these experiences, I will argue that to take them seriously we must provide an account of class which places an emphasis on class identity, rather than an account based solely on socio-economic conditions. To end, I will present my own account of class identity in terms of an innate sense of inferiority and superiority.
Many thanks to Phil Collins who
gave up his time after a day's work and an uncomfortable dentist
appointment to talk to the Club. He gave us some stimulating ideas on a
future generated from our political history. His main argument was
that now British politics has 'slipped its moorings' and that the
political affiliations have changed, we might be able to see a way
through old traditions to form a new centrist party: one that would
look more realistically at the issues facing us, rather than clinging to
the old ideologies. He delivered all this with clarity and wit. Speaker Phil Collins
Thanks
also to our members for coming last night: we had over 80 folk who came
to hear the talk, one of our largest audiences ever. And thanks especially to those of you who contributed questions,
discussion and ideas -- as a special feature of a special evening, I
was able to give away signed copies of Phil's fascinating book 'Start
Again', and I hope that those of you who got the copies will enjoy it
!
Very interesting talking of love matches in Plato a sort of sexual communism but as Dave Preston says in his paper, Plato saw faults with his own proposed
society, which strongly suggests he never actually believed such a
system could ever be practical in a society ultimately governed by human
nature.
More Barnes Philosophy Club Members
Abstract
Plato’s Republic is perhaps best remembered – or indeed misremembered – by some for the similarities between the ‘ideal’ (kalós) society outlined in the dialogue and the society proposed by Karl Marx and later supported by Lenin. While there are certainly distinct differences between the conditions of Marx’s Utopia and Plato’s Kallipolis, such distinctions become blurred when we consider the more familiar brand of communism enforced by Josef Stalin – ‘Marxism-Leninism’ - which bears a lot in common with the society proposed by Plato. While such ideology was advocated by Stalin as an ideal solution to the inequality and disenfranchisement resulting from capitalist economies, history has now shown that while seeming perfect in theory, claims that human interference prevents such an ideal from ever coming to fruition.
This paper will outline similar faults Plato saw with his own proposed society, which strongly suggests he never actually believed such a system could ever be practical in a society ultimately governed by human nature. He also extends communism beyond property to the family; in quite a strange passage in Book V he claims Sexual Communism would be standard in Kallipolis. It does not appear, however, that Plato was unique in advocating the benefits of such a practice, as there is evidence to suggest it was practised by a number of societies in Antiquity. This, perhaps expectedly, raised a few eyebrows and criticisms, the most subtle of which, perhaps unexpectedly, came from the comic poet Aristophanes.
