{"id":6585,"date":"2019-06-10T13:28:53","date_gmt":"2019-06-10T11:28:53","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/cmc.deusto.eus\/enzuazua\/?p=6585"},"modified":"2022-03-21T07:28:22","modified_gmt":"2022-03-21T06:28:22","slug":"riding-the-flying-carpet-of-philosophy","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/cmc.deusto.eus\/enzuazua\/riding-the-flying-carpet-of-philosophy\/","title":{"rendered":"Riding the Flying Carpet of Philosophy"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

If an alien were to visit us\nit would see that our civilisation has evolved to an admirable degree.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Just how it would rate the \u201cstate\nof the art\u201d here would depend on how evolved its own civilisation was, because\neverything is relative, including progress.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Enrique Zuazua talks to Mari Carmen Gallastegi<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Its perceptions would be\nconditioned by its ability to identify life and to communicate in our terms: we\nshould not forget that our concept of life and intelligence is entirely\nconditioned by our own nature.  The same\nwould apply to us if we were to visit another world.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The well-known novel \u201cLa\nPlan\u00e8te des Singes<\/em>\u201d by French author Pierre Boulle (1912-2014) (filmed in\n1968 as Planet of the Apes<\/em> starring\nCharlton Heston and followed by several sequels) turns this situation on its\nhead. Human journalist Ulysse Merou, a crewman on a voyage to the star Betelgeuse<\/a> in the year 2500, lands on Soror, one of the planets orbiting the\nstar. There, he finds that apes are in control and humans live in a state of\nsavagery. Merou must show the apes that he is not an animal but an intelligent,\nrational being. He does so by sketching out Pythagoras\u2019 theorem for ape Dr. Zira.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In this, Boulle links with the\nidea put forward by Galileo Galilei (1564-1642) that mathematics is the\nlanguage of the universe.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Taylor (played by Heston) pointing to his sketch in the sand <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

An alien visitor to Earth\nwould see things differently depending on just where it landed. Arriving in a\nrural village in Sub-Saharan Africa where there is hardly any running water or\nelectricity would make a very different impression from landing atop a modern\nskyscraper in New York, Shanghai or Dubai. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Whenever we talk about\nglobalisation, the welfare state, progress and civilisation, we are\ninadvertently taking as our frame of reference the average social state built\nup in our own minds from images, sensory perceptions and stereotypes, out of\nhabit rather than on the basis of cross-checked quantitative data and critical\nthinking.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is why reading, thinking,\nstudying, conversing, debating and writing are useful: they help the brain to\npick up on all those (often contradictory) details that it needs in order to\nhone its limited perception of reality and develop the essential ability to\nthink critically. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

We live in a heterogeneous\nworld which we can often only visualise by oversimplifying it, for instance in\nthe improbable context of a meeting with a visitor from another world.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But what kind of world does that\ncreature actually encounter on landing? What kind of human beings does it meet?\nWhat is nature like in the area where it is located?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On imagining the scene we are\nhighly likely to be conditioned not just by our own perceptions of our\nsurroundings and our society but also by our studies and our reading of history\nor fantasy, or perhaps by remembered images from earlier experiences and, of\ncourse, from films. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The poem 37 Mugaz bestalde\ndudan lagun bakarrari<\/em> (published in English as \u201c37 Questions for my Only\nContact on the Other Side of the Frontier\u201d) by Basque writer Bernardo Atxaga is\na clear example. It sets out some of the paradoxical questions that might be\nasked at such a meeting; questions which are meaningful in themselves but go\nunanswered: \u201cOn the other side of the frontier [\u2026] Do deep fish have any notion\nof the sun?\u201d[1]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

My own opinion is that deep\nfish have no notion of the sun but can sense light.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Steven Spielberg\u2019s film ET (1982)\nprovides another example. Things would have gone very differently if the script\nhad started with the extraterrestrial arriving on our world and meeting not a sensitive,\naffectionate, curious, polite boy but some madman who hunted it down to show\noff its body as a trophy on social media (nowadays there is no need to waste\ntime stuffing prey animals for display above the mantelpiece of your\nmagnificent lounge).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As Basque writer and\nphilosopher Joxe Azurmendi recently said at the presentation of his book Gizabere\nkooperatiboaz,<\/em> \u201cInside every human being there still lives the ape that\nthey once were\u201d[2]<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We do not all live in the\nsame, single reality: our perceptions of it are coloured by our experience, by\nour critical mindset and by our capability for analysis. And all that is\nclosely linked to the education that we have received.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Reverse analysis<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Wherever our hypothetical\nalien lands and wherever it comes from, whatever the climate, the noise level\nand the pollution there, and whatever the company it keeps after its chance\nlanding, it will surely undertake a process of reverse analysis in an attempt\nto understand not just the current state of our civilisation but how we got\nhere, what foundations, what structure and what rules underlie the great web\nthat we have so laboriously woven. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

It would gradually begin a\nprocess of deconstruction to understand all the pieces in the construction set\nthat makes up our current civilisation and its workings, our social\norganisation, the technology that we use, etc.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Little by little it would\ndiscover the architecture of our cities and our infrastructures and, in a\nregression analysis, would trace them back to how they looked a century\nearlier, in black and white, smaller, as yet with few cars; then further back\nto the cities of ancient Rome and Egypt; and then still further to mere groups\nof huts occupied by the first hominids to leave the caves.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Its analysis of the\ntechnological world that now surrounds us would soon reveal that it is based on\ninformation technology and robotics, which are the noble descendents of the\nIndustrial Revolution and, ultimately, of mathematics. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

By following any of these\npaths back through time our alien would gradually discover the leafy tree of\nscience \u2013 physics, biology, chemistry, mathematics \u2013 and would eventually work\nits way to those ancient times when all knowledge grew out of a single root\nplanted in the fertile soil of humanity\u2019s insatiable thirst for knowledge; the\noutset of the great adventure of thought, based on ever more contradictory and\nimperfect models. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

It would come to understand\nthat our society rests largely on the social sciences and the humanities, which\nhave provided the foundations for our economic, political and justice systems.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It would also see that\nmorality, ethics, politics, law and religion all overlap in their attempts not\njust to give a structure to our society and establish limits, rules and rights,\nbut also in their efforts to provide a rational explanation for the impossible:\nfor the very existence of the universe and our role in it. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
The School of Athens by Raphael (1510-1512) <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

In that process of observation\nit would identify the great discipline of philosophy, from the Latin philosoph\u012da<\/em>,\nwhich in turn came from the ancient Greek \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03bf\u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03af\u03b1, which translates as \u201clove\nof wisdom\u201d, in the sense of the study of fundamental questions such as\nexistence, knowledge, truth, morality, beauty, the mind and language.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This reverse process, this\ndeconstruction or autopsy of our society would also reveal that from a\nhistorical perspective it came from nothing and gradually, over centuries,\nindeed millennia, rose to where we are today, still committing continual errors\nbut committing fewer and fewer and doing better.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It would also observe a\nsuspicious acceleration in our rate of progress, to the point where we risk\nsweeping away the very sustainability of our species on a planet on which we\nare inflicting more and more punishment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It could not help but note\nthat our level of process is by no means consistent, in terms not just of\nwealth, technology, health or what we colloquially refer to as \u201cquality of\nlife\u201d, but also of social organisation, rights and freedoms.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It would not find it hard to\nmake connections between the more visible levels of progress and the\nintellectual development of each culture, country or region.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And it would soon realise that\none of they key points that characterises and distinguishes our society and\ndetermines the positions of countries and regions in the ranking of\ncivilisations is their education systems.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Education<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Having come this far, our\nalien would see that in Spain we are in a reasonably good position, albeit well\nbehind the leading countries that guide the destiny of the world and shine the\nbrightest in the field of new technologies or indeed at the Olympics.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It would also see that in the\nfield of education opinions are widely divided and consensus is practically\nimpossible, though the need for it may be recognised publicly. Numerous\nsubsystems coexist even within systems where more cohesion, harmony and\nconsistency might be expected. That is the case with us here.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It would probably be surprised\nto see that there is still an ongoing debate in our schools and our education\nsystem as to what role subjects such as Religious Studies, Ethics or Philosophy\nshould play; and that they end up mixed together and pigeonholed as minor,\noptional subjects that students take only by choice.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This would strike our visitor\nas particularly paradoxical, because its careful deconstruction of society\nwould have clearly shown that philosophy is one of the cornerstone disciplines\nof our civilisation, in that it is a synthesis of the noble efforts of human\nbeings in a multitude of fields to make sense of the role of humanity in the\nuniverse and to structure our place in the world and, in short, our destiny.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
The Death of Socrates by Jacques-Louis David. French Neo-classical style. Oil on canvas. Metropolitan Museum of Art. 1787. 7.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Overall efforts to educate\npeople in what we already know must necessarily involve philosophy, which is\nthe traditional crossroads of all branches of knowledge.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Any subject can be taught in\nmany different ways, for instance in chronological order or retrospectively,\nand Philosophy is no exception. The way in which it is taught may be open to\ndebate, but the need to teach it should not be.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

One major difficulty\nencountered by teachers is that we are frequently constrained by official\nsyllabuses that drive us to present contents looking backwards from the present\ninto the past as if through a rear-view mirror. This distorts the picture given\nof our sciences and of how they have matured, and makes them harder to\nunderstand and assimilate because no obvious visible motivation is shown.\nIndeed, it is more and more widely assumed that a historical perspective is\nessential to awaken interest among students and enhance their skills in\nunderstanding and analysis. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is fine to argue about what\ncontent we should teach and in what order, but it is paradoxical for us still\nto have to defend the need for schools to reserve space for the sort of\nacross-the-board, unifying thinking that philosophy has brought to our\ndevelopment and to the formation of a critical mindset in the citizens of\ntomorrow.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As a mathematician I must\nstress that philosophy and mathematics are sister disciplines that come\ntogether in logic, the theory of knowledge and, in general, in abstraction. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

To train and develop knowledge\nit is necessary to accumulate data and structure information to enable each of\nus gradually to build up our own individual model of the world, so as to help\nus understand and transform it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Our education system should be\ndesigned to offer the best possible launching pad for the ambitious project\nthat is the life plan of each and every one of us. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

To that end, the system now\nrecognises mathematics, IT and statistics as essential in training us and\neducating us in deductive thinking, information processing, critical thinking\nand probability-based inference, but philosophy has been treated as the poor\nrelation of the family.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Surrounded as we are today by\nelectronic equipment and Wi-Fi, there is little room for critical thinking.\nHowever it is needed now more than ever.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Knowledge cannot be attained\nwithout a thirst for wisdom. On the path to that goal, which we must all take,\nit is essential to acquire perspective and be aware of what routes have already\nbeen explored in order to choose the best way forward. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ultimately, human beings are\ndestined to ask themselves the right questions (philosophy) by setting\nthemselves the right problems (mathematics). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In ancient Greece little\ndistinction was drawn between different branches of knowledge. Nowadays\nknowledge is compartmentalised, often artificially, so it is more necessary\nthan ever to teach subjects such as Philosophy, which can offer a holistic\noverview of all that we have built so far. This is the only way to point our\nsteps in the right direction in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is important to know that\nhowever much we oversimplify our model of the universe by making human beings \u2013\nor God, or nature \u2013 our sole point of reference, if we are to obtain an\nup-to-date, transformational view we must integrate all these subsystems into a\nsingle, overall model. And that calls for a workshop, a specific laboratory, which\nphilosophy can and must provide.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Being a Philosophy teacher is\nan exciting and at the same time extremely difficult job. Bringing together all\nthe landmark events in the history of thought and unravelling the tangled web\nof knowledge is certainly an almost impossible task. But that is no reason to\ngive up trying.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We need philosophy today more\nthan ever, whether it is presented in chronological, historical or reverse\norder.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We now know that it is\nimpossible to separate the concepts per\nse<\/em> of philosophy and science in all their versions and interpretations. We\ntherefore need to go back to the ancient sources, to the roots, when great\nthinkers recognised no boundaries between the different disciplines of\nknowledge.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But in that effort we are\nconditioned by a lack of consensus, and therefore run the risk that the\nregulatory belligerence of administrative authorities may end up marginalising the\nvery subjects that humanise us in the fullest sense of the word.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

It is certainly paradoxical\nthat today\u2019s great thinkers and scientists insist more and more that there is a\nneed to unify disciplines so as to bring overall coherence to knowledge, while\nday-to-day events are pulling us in just the opposite direction.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Let us then go back to the\nroots to reconstruct our history and look to the future with perspective and\nclarity.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

There is a verse in Basque by Joxean\nArtze that perfectly sums up this ongoing need: it translates as[1]<\/a>\n\u201cFrom the old source I drink, new water I drink, the water is always new, from\nthe source of always\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Acknbowledgements:<\/em><\/strong> Manuel de Le\u00f3n (ICMAT-CSIC), Marta Macho (UPV-EHU), Carlos Mart\u00edn-Vide\n(ERC), Javier San Mart\u00edn (Activa Tu Neurona), Roberto Rodr\u00edguez del R\u00edo (UCM),\nSoledad Rodr\u00edguez Salazar (UCM).<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

En defensa de la Filosof\u00eda [\u201c<\/em>In\nDefence of Philosophy\u201d], Artium, Gasteiz, 16 September 2016<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Agora Filosofia Elkartea<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Enrique Zuazua<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The publishing house EREIN has\npublished a book that brings together all the presentations from the seminar In\nDefence of Philosophy, held on 16 September 2016.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The book comprises a variety\nof short texts defending philosophy, arguing for the value of thought in the\nhuman condition and against the cutbacks that the planned new curriculum makes\nin History and Philosophy, which is to be relegated from a core to an optional\nsubject and maintained only in one upper-secondary itinerary.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The texts are by qualified\nrepresentatives of different branches of knowledge. The first chapter can be\ndownloaded in Spanish here.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The report on the\npresentations at the seminar which appeared in the daily newspaper GARA<\/em><\/strong> can be read in Basque here<\/strong><\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Basque newspapers El Diario Vasco<\/strong><\/a>, Berria<\/strong><\/a> and Noticias de Guipuzkoa<\/strong><\/a> also published articles on the seminar which can be downloaded via\nthe links provided here.
<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n

[1]<\/a> \u201cMugaz bestaldean\u2026 Arrain abisalek ba ahal dute aurresentipenik eguzkiaz\u2026?\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

[2]<\/a> \u201cIzan gine tximinoak bizirik dirau gure barruan\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

[3]<\/a> \u201cIturri zaharretik edaten dut, ur\nberria edaten, beti berri den ura, betiko iturri zaharretik\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

It is certainly paradoxical that today\u2019s great thinkers and scientists insist more and more that there is a need to unify disciplines <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":6592,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[489],"class_list":["post-6585","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-beyond-math","tag-philosophy"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/cmc.deusto.eus\/enzuazua\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6585","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/cmc.deusto.eus\/enzuazua\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/cmc.deusto.eus\/enzuazua\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cmc.deusto.eus\/enzuazua\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cmc.deusto.eus\/enzuazua\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6585"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/cmc.deusto.eus\/enzuazua\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6585\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":6593,"href":"https:\/\/cmc.deusto.eus\/enzuazua\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6585\/revisions\/6593"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cmc.deusto.eus\/enzuazua\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/6592"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/cmc.deusto.eus\/enzuazua\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6585"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cmc.deusto.eus\/enzuazua\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6585"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cmc.deusto.eus\/enzuazua\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6585"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}