Violence in Media

The idea of living in a world without violence sounds appealing but it's unlikely that this is going to happen. Men are violent by nature. Human history proved it over and over - there's never been a society without violence.

Now, you remember the romans and their arena games where gladiators used to fight, sometimes kill each other. There were some good reasons to have those games back then. It was benefitial for the overall society - keeping the population occupied, allowing them to vent violent impulses in a rather controlled environment, teaching roman values like strength/courage, training/discipline, firmness, endurance, contempt of death, love of glory, and the desire to win. It were these traits that allowed the roman society to play such a dominating role in the world.

Now I feel that nowadays violence in media saves a similar purpose. We are violent by nature. What we gotta do is find a way to channel these violent impulses in a harmless way not supress them. It's never good to supress your feelings. Games are just perfect for that. Interactive media like videogames, or team sports, or martial arts. It's violent to a certain degree but in a save context.

Banning some things from our daily live and dealing with it in a more abstract way like media and games is a good thing. Games nowadays have just the same potential as gladiator games for the romans. With the added bonus that in a virtual simulation, book or film no one is ever really hurt.

So in my opinion virtual violence is not a bad thing at all! It should be indulged freely by people that got the skills to deal with it in a constructive way. That means I do agree that some games/films/books are inapropriate for some audiences especially minors. But that's about all I do concede in that matter!

Purpose by Design

In the last post I mused about how a deterministic universe would hold no room for true freedom of choice because every thought would ultimately originate from conditions and effects outside my control. If fully embraced that realisation would mean a number of troublesome conclusion. But is it practical to do so?

I have awareness of myself and my place in my surroundings but this awareness is incomplete because both the input and the processing capabilities are very limited. It might not be possible to really understand how the universe works. But it's possible to answer the question: What am I designed to do? Every organ of the body has it's distinct purpose. It's not too weird to believe that the same is true for our perceptions. There is a place for intuition, feelings, emotions just as there is a place for logical, rational, analytical thinking. The fact that both exist is a strong hint that it proved beneficial in the context of evolution to have these potentially contradicting approaches to process input. The same is likely true for concepts such as morality or free will - they might be shortcuts or illusions but they are just a part of being human like having a heart or two feet is.

You can use the gift of awareness to put all the things in the right perspective, to weight them depending on the situation, but you can't really change or deny what you perceive, feel and think. There is no point in trying to make your heart stop beating. There is no point in questioning the way your brain processes the input it gets. You can just try to configure it so it performs in the best possible way.

And what's best? We got a meter for that too: it's called happiness. There might be no purpose to life but your body gives you a purpose by design. Questions like whether true freedom of choice exists or not, whether there is a god or not, whether we have a soul, whether there's life after death... none have to be answered. Pursue happiness and you're doing exactly what you're meant to do!

A society advocating Individual Liberty gives the individual the best chances to align his actions with his wishes and do what it takes to become happy. The validity of values like freedom and liberty are not based on the existence of true freedom of choice at all but on the human design.

Causality and Free Will

I recently had the unpleasant realization that two concepts I've been believing in seem to be mutually exclusive. The one is causality and the other is free will.

I see the universe as matter exchanging energy in different layers of complexity. Matter is interacting following the laws of physics and forming more and more complex structures (which again is a natural law). Atoms form molecules, molecules might form cells and DNA, hormones and all the other building blocks of living organisms. Living organisms exist in all sizes and complexities and might even form new systems, herds, flocks, societies...

And I tend to agree with Laplace who says:

We may regard the present state of the universe the effect of its past and the cause of its future.

Following this line of thought would mean to accept that what an individual thinks or does is determined by the nature and current state of the system we call life. This raises an important question:

Is there any plausible evidence or even a indication that any of us is more then a mere puppet in a fancy play?

Now, I like fancy plays. I could deal with life having no greater purpose. But it's hard to accept that freedom of choice is a mere illusion. Whenever I make a choice a person with the same genes, conditioned like me, in the same situation would act the same. But if I am determined in my choices of actions, then I'm like other mechanical things that are determined in their behaviour.

In this case noone would be morally responsible for his actions. There would be no justification for punishment or praise, pride or regret. And there would be no reason to respect a persons autonomy if that individual has no control over his fate anyway.
This bothers me because I've always considered individual liberty to be the most important goal for a society to strive for. A uncomfortable clash of principles. :/

Yet another blog is born!

I know the internet is already full of blogs. I don't think mine will be particularly special. But sometimes I feel a thought or an idea is worth saving. A blog might be the perfect place for that.

Whatever I plan to write about I have to make fit to be put on (virtual) paper. It should be a good exercise leading to a clearer perspective on what I actually believe.

And I wonder about the visitors that might come to this site. Will there be a few? Many? Will some come back? Maybe I inspire someone? Maybe I receive feedback? It's time to find out... curiosity has always been one of my major driving forces!