Courage, common sense, and fortitude in times of terror

Scary times call for courage

Fresno Bee, December 12, 2015

These are terrifying times. Mass violence plays across our screens. Frightened people want reassurance. And fearmongers manipulate anxiety. But dread is no substitute for deliberation.

The world’s philosophical traditions teach us to temper trepidation. Here is some practical advice from the ancient philosophers. Acknowledge the inevitability of suffering. Don’t dread evil. Accept what is beyond your control. Avoid panic. Minimize violence. Overcome hate.

But panicked, violent and hateful proposals abound. Some call to ban Muslim visitors. Others want to carpet-bomb the Islamic State. Some encourage us to arm ourselves.

Bombs and bans won’t build a better world. For that we need courageous commitment to democratic and humane values. We also need to understand the nature of fear and its role in political and moral life.

Fear undermines mental health. It clouds judgment. And it feeds on itself. Scare mongering is useful as a rhetorical tool. But reactionary panic makes for bad policy and risks betraying central values.

Wisdom requires courage, justice and moderation. Moral decisions depend upon calm reflection. A key to wisdom and equanimity is careful consideration of the object of our fears. It turns out that we often fear the wrong things.

PHILOSOPHICAL FORTITUDE FREES US FROM REACTIONARY OUTRAGE AND ALLOWS US TO BUILD A BETTER WORLD, ONE FEARLESS STEP AT A TIME.

Consider the risk of mass violence. Since 1982 there have been 73 mass shootings in the United States, resulting in nearly 600 deaths. If we add in the fatalities from the terrorist attacks on 9/11 and other terror attacks on US citizens, we end up with fewer than 5,000 deaths from mass shooting and terrorism during the past 33 years.

Even one mass shooting is horrible. We should work to end these atrocities. But there is no reason to panic.

Other things are much more dangerous. There are around 16,000 homicides and 38,000 poisoning deaths every year. Approximately 2,000 people are killed annually by weather-related causes. More than 33,000 people are killed yearly in vehicular traffic.

We accept the risk of driving, while taking common sense precautions: drive carefully and buckle up. But no one is panicking about traffic deaths. No one is calling for background checks on vehicle ownership or radical changes in the speed limit. No one is calling for a ban on alcohol or drunken driving, even though drunken driving is much more deadly than terrorism. Drunken drivers kill 28 people every day – more than 10,000 people per year.

Some fears are magnified because we associate them with evil. Death by terrorism seems worse than death by drunken driving. Fear of evil seems more dreadful than fear of accidental death. But one wonders why that matters: When you are dead, you are dead.

Rhetoricians manipulate our fear of evil. They also manipulate our hopes and dreams. Hope is, in a sense, the opposite of fear. Hope can moderate fear. But unrealistic hope also clouds judgment. We hope that war, crime and atrocity will be abolished. We hope that politicians will behave themselves. We hope that rationality will prevail. We hope that evil will disappear. Or we hope that strangers will conform to our expectations.

BOMBS AND BANS WON’T BUILD A BETTER WORLD.

But history dashes these hopes. We should give up hope for a perfect, risk-free world. Evil people will always exist. Idiocy often overcomes common sense. Politicians routinely fail to impress. And diversity is a fact of life. We may wish things were otherwise. But wishing does not make it so.

Like fear, hope is a tool of demagogues that is used to hoodwink and manipulate. The danger of hope is that when idealistic hope crashes on the rocks of reality, despair sets in. Cynical hopelessness is as dangerous as ruthless idealism.

The key is moderation. Equanimity develops from understanding the nature of hope and fear. Fear is useful – when it is based on facts and prevented from becoming paranoia. Hope is also useful – when it is modest and limited in scope. Without moderation, however, hope and fear overwhelm good judgment.

A temperate mind is immune to the buffeting winds of fortune and the alluring buzz of political hot air. Wisdom teaches that evil is unavoidable, suffering is inevitable, panic is counterproductive, and good judgment is difficult and rare. Understanding this can liberate us from fear. Philosophical fortitude frees us from reactionary outrage and allows us to build a better world, one fearless step at a time.

Read more here: http://www.fresnobee.com/living/liv-columns-blogs/article49219050.html#storylink=cpy

December 9, 2015February 11, 2016

Morality and the drought

Moral lessons from the drought

Fresno Bee, December 9, 2015

Special Report: From drought to El Niño
Columnist Andrew Fiala says drought exposes conflicting ideas

Scarcity prompts moral reflection. Imagine a group of hikers lost in the desert with limited water. How do they share the water? Perhaps you should share the water equally. Or maybe the thirstier person should get more water, or the person who owns the bottle – or the youngest or weakest.

There are conflicting intuitions about such cases. Drought exposes conflicting ideas about property rights, liberty, justice and communal good. Here are some moral insights that can guide our thinking about droughts and other conditions of scarcity.

1. Droughts challenge civilization. The oldest written code of law in the world – Hammurabi’s Code – contained rules and punishments for maintaining a system of irrigation. Agricultural civilizations require a complex division of labor, bureaucratic control and obedient citizens. Droughts challenge this system. Droughts have caused civilizations – such as the Anasazi of Chaco Canyon in New Mexico – to collapse. Drought prompts reflection on the fragility of civilization and the importance of stable, resilient social systems.

2. Environmental justice matters. Droughts create suffering, poverty, unemployment and homelessness. Successful responses must be fair. We owe special care for the weak and vulnerable. Resentment grows when some go thirsty while others thrive. Drought reminds us to focus questions of fairness and justice.

3. Egoism is immoral. A thirsty egoist may feel resentful or envious. Those with money and water may feel a similar sense of entitlement. But egoism is immoral. A selfish desert hiker who sneaks a drink is stealing water from the mouths of others. It is immoral when selfish owners of water refuse to share – or engage in price-gouging or wasteful water use. Drought shows the insufficiency of egoism.

4. Collective action limits liberty. A world of egoists left alone to pursue their own self-interests could end up destroying shared resources or creating resource wars. That is why law and regulation are needed. However, in a free country and a capitalist economy, we value liberty. Regulation limits liberty, including imposing limits on what we can do with our own property. Free people resent such limitations. Others suspect that regulation is manipulated by the rich and powerful. Drought exposes the conflict between individual liberty and collective action.

5. Cooperation is important. The optimal solution is cooperative self-regulation. People must limit their own liberty out of concern for others. Sharing and cooperation may sound naive. But the thirsty desert hikers will each do better if they cooperate and share. Sharing and caring are taken for granted within stable communities – and they help sustain community spirit. Drought demonstrates the importance of building and maintaining community spirit.

6. Consumption can be reduced. There is more to share when we each consume less. The lost desert hikers quickly learn that it is wrong to squander water. Scarcity causes us to reassess about how we use – and waste – things. We’ve discovered that we don’t need green lawns and long showers. We’ve learned to wash dishes, brush teeth, and flush toilets in new ways. Drought forces us to conserve water and to understand the difference between a need and a luxury.

7. Democracy is the key. When our needs are considered and our voices heard, we find it easier to cooperate – and we feel that justice prevails. Whatever way our thirsty desert hikers decide to share their water, they should each be consulted. Democratic deliberation creates cooperation and community spirit. Democratic values are tested in times of crisis, when leaders are tempted to revert to authoritarian policies. Drought should strengthen our commitment to democracy and inclusion.

8. There are reasons to hope. The good news is that 40 million Californians survived another arid summer. Moral action depends upon hope. To be inspired to do the right thing, you have to hope that others will do the right thing – and that doing the right thing will lead to good outcomes. To survive drought, you need moral hope.

So far, so good. We have limited egoism. We have developed community spirit. We have reduced consumption. We have attended to justice. And we have kept true to principles of democracy. There is always more work to be done. The rainy season provides a chance to hone our moral intuitions as we plan for the future of our hot, crowded state.

Read more here: http://www.fresnobee.com/news/state/california/water-and-drought/article48833525.html#storylink=cpy

November 27, 2015December 8, 2015

Misguided War on Liberal Arts

Candidates short-sighted war on liberal arts

Political attacks on philosophy prompt a philosopher to reply
Liberal arts education is a key to progress in troubled times
Citizens benefit from training in critical thinking and moral educatio

Fresno Bee, November 27, 2015

Last month, Jeb Bush suggested that a liberal arts degree was a waste of time. “That philosophy major thing,” he said, “that’s great, it’s important to have liberal arts … but realize, you’re going to be working at Chick-Fil-A.”

Marco Rubio made a similar point at a recent debate. He said we need “more welders and less philosophers.”

But in these troubled times, we need more philosophical reflection and less heated rhetoric, more careful analysis and fewer glib one-liners. A broad liberal arts education teaches us to think. Good thinking is essential for citizens of a free, self-governing democracy.

Consider the question of war against the Islamic State.Sen. Rubio describes this as a “clash of civilizations.” He said, “They do not hate us because we have military assets in the Middle East – they hate us because of our values. … They hate us because we have freedom of speech, because we have diversity in our religious beliefs. They hate us because we’re a tolerant society.”

Claims like these deserve critical scrutiny. Is this really a clash of civilizations? How can we know why someone hates us? And what should we do about it? To answer those questions, we need philosophers, historians and students of religion and culture.

The study of the world’s religions sheds light on the idea of a clash of civilizations. Muslims, Jews and Christians share common roots and a long history of intolerance and warfare. These traditions share an ideal of holy war, crusades and jihad. They also contain a common hope for peace, shalom or salaam. Understanding the similarities and differences among these traditions develops through broad historical, cultural and philosophical inquiry.

A liberal arts education also helps us understand the value of religious toleration. Secular systems of government evolved in recent centuries as a response to ongoing religious violence. Theocratic regimes are throwbacks, seemingly at odds with the general logic of historical progress.

But does history have a logic? And are we wise enough to figure out what to do next? Historians warn against such broad generalizations. Consider this: the Sykes-Picot agreement that divided the Middle East among European powers was hammered out 100 years ago. A century of European and American intervention has left us with a mess. Perhaps we are not as wise as we think we are.

Jeb Bush has urged an all-out war against the Islamic State. But in order to decide that war is justified, we need a substantial amount of philosophical reflection. We need to ponder – among other things – the justice of the cause, the question of proportionality, the issue of how noncombatants will fare and the plan for postbellum peace.

NO MATTER THE TRADE OR PROFESSION, WE NEED CITIZENS WHO UNDERSTAND THAT WAR, TERROR AND HATE DESTROY UNDERSTANDING AND KILL HOPE.

Understanding all of that requires training in ethics, political science and history. To make sure that our soldiers fight morally appropriate wars, we need better liberal arts education – not less of it.

Indeed, a liberal arts education is likely part of the long-run solution for the war on terrorism. The root cause of war and terrorism is, after all, bad philosophy. Extremism, demagoguery, ignorance and moral blindness are cured through education. The best cure for bad ideas is better ones.

A broad liberal arts education produces critical, virtuous and responsible citizens. Science grounds us in facts about geography, biology and the physical world. History provides context for understanding current events, while reminding us that progress can be made. Music, literature and poetry deliver transcendent joys that unite us despite our differences. The study of the world’s religions shows us that there are diverse paths to a meaningful life. Ethics teaches us to distinguish good from evil. And philosophical training reminds us to be curious, courageous, compassionate and modest about what we know.

Good education helps to create good people. In order for society to function, we need welders – fast food cooks, lawyers, and even politicians – who are honest, trustworthy and kind. No matter the trade or profession, we need citizens who understand that war, terror and hate destroy understanding and kill hope.

It is true that there are very few paying jobs for full-time philosophers. But welders, cooks, and politicians – indeed all citizens – benefit from philosophical insight and broad education. We need better thinking and more enlightened citizens – more liberal arts and less hot air.

Read more here: http://www.fresnobee.com/living/liv-columns-blogs/article46737230.html#storylink=cpy

November 15, 2015November 16, 2015

Random violence, education, and hope

Random acts of violence raise important questions about our culture

Fresno Bee, November 15, 2015

There are reasons for hope in the face of atrocity
Cultural violence may contribute to violent acts
Moral education provides a cure

Stories of random violence continue to shock. Gun control would decrease the carnage. But when they don’t have guns, violent young men attack with knives, as happened recently at UC Merced. The technology of murder is only partly to blame.

The deeper problem is cultural and psychological. We need to understand the seductive power of anger and aggression. And we need to remember that violence is as rare as it is stupid.

First, let’s admit that violence can be exciting. Some people enjoy shooting guns. Young men, it seems, are often fueled by a volatile mix of aggression, anger, pride and fascination with blowing stuff up.

The good news is that most of us grow out of it. Violent outbursts are remarkable because they are anomalous. Most normal people learn to sublimate aggression. Rather than hurting a stranger, we play football or video games. If we want to see things explode, we go to fireworks shows.

We also learn that moral arguments are won with words instead of weapons. We learn that violence proves nothing. Violence disrupts rational discourse, undermines mutual understanding, and destroys love and community. Proper moral development moves us beyond the childish compulsion to smash things toward the adult interest in building them.

WE OUGHT TO TEACH OUR CHILDREN THAT THERE ARE REASONS FOR HOPE, EVEN IN THE FACE OF SENSELESS ATROCITY.

Unfortunately, some parts of our culture remain focused on adolescent aggression. Violent video games, movies and music are popular among the youths. In some cases, the ideas and images of violent culture get ahold of vulnerable young minds and mayhem ensues.

No one is born a mass murderer. Destructive ideas are discovered in scripts and models found in culture. Of course, pop culture is not entirely to blame. Lots of people witness lots of violence on TV or in video games without becoming violent. But we are cultural beings. Ideas and behavior are shaped by images and education.

A growing body of research points to a correlation between violent culture and violent deeds. The American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry explains: “The typical American child will view more than 200,000 acts of violence, including more than 16,000 murders, before age 18.” The American Academy of Pediatrics concludes: “The strength of the association between media violence and aggressive behavior … is nearly as strong as the association between cigarette smoking and lung cancer.” The American Psychological Association concludes that there is a “consistent relation” between violent video game use and aggression.

WHILE THE CAUSES OF YOUTH VIOLENCE ARE MULTIFACTORIAL AND INCLUDE SUCH VARIABLES AS POVERTY, FAMILY PSYCHOPATHOLOGY, CHILD ABUSE, EXPOSURE TO DOMESTIC AND COMMUNITY VIOLENCE, SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND OTHER PSYCHIATRIC DISORDERS, THE RESEARCH LITERATURE IS QUITE COMPELLING THAT CHILDREN’S EXPOSURE TO MEDIA VIOLENCE PLAYS AN IMPORTANT ROLE IN THE ETIOLOGY OF VIOLENT BEHAVIOR.

American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry statement by Eugene Beresin

The good news is that despite all of this, mass murder remains rare. Cultural violence may provide a catharsis, which allows people to satisfy the urge to destroy in virtual reality without really hurting anyone. The problem is that one person’s catharsis may be another person’s inspiration. Culture works that way. There is no singular meaning of any image or idea. This is why we need education: to teach us moral meaning.

Without proper interpretation and moral education, violent images can give the wrong message. “Romeo and Juliet” ought to be viewed as a cautionary tale about violent feuds – not as a recipe for teen suicide. Darth Vader and Hitler are villains, not heroes. And war is tragic and horrible – not a fun game. Those conclusions may seem obvious. But without education and interpretation, these lessons can be lost.

The need for moral interpretation applies to stories of recent carnage. These stories can leave us feeling that the world is a dangerous and ugly place and that the bad guys are winning. This fear can cause even normal people to want to escalate violence as we feel the need to fight fire with fire.

Education about atrocity can help to calm our reactionary impulse. The reality is that mass shootings and terrorist attacks remain rare. More people are killed in car accidents than are murdered by strangers.

The most important lesson of random violence is the outrage of the majority and the courage of the survivors. The vast majority is appalled by violence. We understand that aggression is absurd, violence proves nothing, and the cure for hate is love.

We ought to turn off the TV, find ways to channel youthful aggression, and keep guns away from madmen. We also ought to teach our children that there are reasons for hope, even in the face of senseless atrocity.

Read more here: http://www.fresnobee.com/living/liv-columns-blogs/article44767614.html#storylink=cpy

October 31, 2015November 1, 2015

Don’t be afraid of no ghost

The Fear of Ghosts

Fresno Bee, October 31, 2015

A recent survey from Chapman University found that more than 40 percent of Americans believe in ghosts. The study also found that those who believe in ghosts tend to be generally more fearful.

It stands to reason that seeing a ghost may make you paranoid. But paranoia also can open the door to paranormal beliefs. The cure for the fear of phantoms is to cultivate tranquil mindfulness, a life of virtue and a reasonable approach to ghosts.

For example, it is not clear how ghosts could harm us. Ghosts are supposedly immaterial beings. They pass through walls and rise out of graves. A ghost’s spiritual nature makes it difficult to conceive a ghost physically harming us. That 1990 movie “Ghost” makes this clear: Patrick Swayze’s ghost has trouble making contact with the material world.

This problem undermines the claims of those who say that ghosts show up in photographs or on recordings. If ghosts have no material reality, they can’t be photographed or recorded. Phantom photos and spooky sounds are best explained in natural terms as shadows, echoes or glitches in recording devices.

Naturalists explain ghosts as projections of the mind. Charles Darwin, for example, suggested that the animal imagination gives birth to ghosts. Animals are ever alert to the presence of threatening agents.

Swirling dust or flickering light can prompt us to see a phantom presence and prime the fight-or-flight response. Darwin explained that his own dog tended to react to unexpected movement as if there were an unseen spiritual entity at work – growling fiercely and barking when a parasol was moved by a breeze.

Of course, a ghost’s most terrifying power is not physical. Ghosts are spiritual beings who can invade our minds and trouble our dreams. Consider the great ghosts of literature. The specters that haunt Hamlet, Macbeth or Scrooge assault the mind, planting seeds of doubt and despair.

Such ghosts can be explained as psychic creations, frightening figments of the imagination – unconscious anxieties brought to life and projected on the world. Even so, the dread is real whether we actually are haunted by spectral beings or merely are afflicted by the eerie emanations of the subconscious.

Behind all of this may be the fear of death, which Freud supposed was the source of the experience of the uncanny. The thought of death and the presence of dead bodies can send shivers down the spine. Those shudders can feel like a haunting. But the tickle on the neck and the hair-raising shudder is really the body pumping adrenaline, tuning up the senses, getting ready to fight or flee.

The dread of the uncanny can lead to dizziness and a feeling of unreality. The familiar seems suddenly foreign. The senses tingle. Panic and paranoia arise as the imagination runs wild. And ghosts may appear.

Walk down a dark and desolate street late on Halloween night. Your breathing becomes shallow. Your eyes open as you search the gloom. Odd images flicker in the corner of the eye. Rustling leaves hint that something is lurking. In the frisson of fear, shadows appear as spooks and specters.

On Halloween, we are told that the door between the living and the dead opens a crack. I doubt that the dead really do come back to haunt us. But there is no doubt that the mind can be visited by phantoms and figments, including vivid memories of the dead.

The experience of being haunted is as real as the experience of fear, guilt, sorrow and shame. The living often are afflicted by grief, remorse, anguish and regret. Our minds are haunted by memory and loss. Beneath much of this is the uncanny recognition that we, too, will someday slip through the crack of death into that undiscovered country, from which no traveler returns.

We should give due respect to the dead. But good people have nothing to fear from ghosts or from death. Tranquil mindfulness cures the anxiety, guilt and shame that ghosts exploit. Mindfulness helps us live in peace with our memories of the dead. And a virtuous life provides stability in the face of the uncanny fact that each of us will someday shuffle off this mortal coil and exit through the ghostly gate.

Read more here: http://www.fresnobee.com/living/article41953935.html#storylink=cpy