THE HISTORY OF HUMAN INVENTIONS

The difference between Man and beast is his ability to invent things.  So, this is his report card so far ...

Fire                           7000 BC

Wheel                       3200 BC

Alphabet                   2700 BC

Clock                        1090                                by Su Song of China

Printing Press          1440        by Johannes Gutenberg of Germany

Steam Engine          1769                        by James Watt of Scotland

Electricity                 1831                by Michael Faraday of England

Telephone                1876       by Alexander Graham Bell of Canada

Automobile               1889               by Gottlieb Daimler of Germany

Powered Flight         1903                by The Wright Brothers of USA

Television                 1925               by John Logie Baird of Scotland

Computer                  1936                       by Alan Turing of England

Mobile Phone            1973                        by Martin Cooper of USA

Internet                      1989              by Tim Berners-Lee of England

ALIENS - Are they real? If so, can we meet them?

 

Are they real?

The Universe came into being in the Big Bang 13.7 billion years ago and is expanding relentlessly ever since.  Therefore, the Universe is vast, containing at least a hundred billion galaxies.  If each galaxy has a few million to many trillion stars, each with several planets; we can safely say that there are many trillions of planets in the Universe. 

We definitely exist. Earth definitely exists, so does the sun, the other planets in our Solar system and the Milky Way galaxy.  If one planet called Earth contains intelligent life, it stands to reason that life as we know it should also exist elsewhere throughout the Universe because of the sheer vast numbers of possible similar planets of the same age.

So, aliens should quite probably exist.

In 1961, the astrophysicist Frank Drake formulated the Drake Equation to estimate the possible number of aliens technologically advanced enough to cross the vast void of space that may exist in our galaxy. 

The Drake equation states that:

       N = R*. fp . ne . fe . fi . fc . L

where:

N = the number of civilizations in our galaxy with which communication might be possible;

R^* = the average rate of star formation per year in our galaxy

f_p = the fraction of those stars that have planets

n_e = the average number of planets that can potentially support life per star that has planets

f_ℓ = the fraction of the above that actually go on to develop life at some point

f_i = the fraction of the above that actually go on to develop intelligent life

f_c = the fraction of civilizations that develop a technology that releases detectable signs of their existence into space

L = the length of time for which such civilizations release detectable signals into space

He estimated that there should be 10,000 alien civilizations in our Milky Way alone!

Can we meet them?

 

But, since the Universe is so vast, there is very little chance of meeting them. Carl Sagan calculated that if you were to just spontaneously appear in the Universe, the odds of you being anywhere near another planet, let alone one with life on, would be less than one in a billion trillion trillion or 10 to the power of 33!

THE VARIETIES OF SOCIAL JUSTICE

What is justice in a society? How can there be fairness in the allocation of scarce resources in a country?

There are 4 schools of thought:

1.  Egalitarianism = "Justice is equality!"

This view posits that the fairest way to allocate rewards is to aim for equality for all. However, a distinction must be made between equality of opportunity, which is laudable; and equality of outcome, which is impractical.

2. Sufficientarianism = "Justice is when the weakest have enough!"

The thinking behind this view is based on the realization that the real objection to a widening income gap is not so much the outrageous lifestyles of the super-rich nor the size of the gap itself; but rather the deplorable condition of the poor, which might continue unabated even if the gap is made smaller. So, the real problem is not that the poor have less than the rich, but rather that the poor do not have enough resources to be provided with a decent standard of living. This doctrine of sufficiency holds that the aim of social justice is to maximize the number of people who have enough to lead decent lives.

3. Prioritarianism = "Justice is when priority is given to maximize the well-being of the worst-off!"

The prioritarian's focus is on well-being and its augmentation.  The priority doctrine can be seen as a version of welfarism, aiming to boost as much as possible the well-being of the least well-off.  The priority given is inversely proportional to the pre-existing level of well-being, that is, the lower the original level of well-being, the higher the priority given.  Also, the higher the quantum of well-being thus enhanced, the more the doctrine is seen to be successful.

4. Desert = "Justice is when people gain rewards according to what their virtues deserve!"

Here, the desert principle presupposes that an individual's virtues can be easily measured. A further difficulty lies in defining what counts as a virtue and whether different virtues are qualitatively different and therefore people possessing such virtues in different proportions or combinations deserve different levels of rewards. Nonetheless, the aim here is to transfer rewards from those who got more than they deserve to those who deserve more than what they already got.  The drawback of the desert principle is that in a scenario where there is a great disparity in people's virtues, trying to adhere to this principle may possibly mean transfering rewards from the worse off to the better off!  The ludicrous result would then be an increase in inequality.

PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS

In most societies, justice is not based on any one principle as above, but a combination of them.  By what proportion and in which situation is one principle favored over another - that is the perogative of the government of the society in question.

But one fact stands out: most social scientific research seem to indicate that by any measure, the well-being of a society is almost invariably enhanced if pure egalitarianism (first principle) is increased.   

WORLD VIEWS

What is a world view?

A world view is an assumed model of the world which guides our thoughts and actions.  

Different world views give rise to differences between peoples and cultures.  Therefore, it is important to know them to fully appreciate the essence of diversity in our increasingly pluralistic societies.

Eight Basic World Views:

1.  Spiritism and Polytheism

Thousands of ancient religions are of the world view that the world  is populated by rampant spirit beings responsible for all "natural" events and associated with real material things. The gods created all the creatures on earth, including Man. Truth about the natural world is elucidated by the divine visions of shamans. Taboos are things that irritate or anger various spirits and are the surrogate moral values. It is important to avoid irritating the spirits and gods as they have the power to protect or punish any tribe or race associated with them. 

2.  Christian Theism

This is the belief that there is an omnipotent personal God who created the universe and Man in His image. Given free will, Man chose to sin against God resulting in eternal separation from Him at death unless Man accepts salvation and eternal life through Jesus Christ. Reality is both material and spiritual. The universe had a beginning and will have an end. Knowledge about the material world is gained not only through our sensory perceptions and rational thought, but also through divine revelation.  God is the source of our moral values.

3. Deism

Popular during the eighteenth century, this world view believes in God, but supposes that God created and then abandoned the universe. This is now an uncommon world view.

4. Naturalism

This world view started in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.  Preaching the irrelevance of God, this is the world view of science being the basis of knowledge and morality, bringing progress and inevitable evolutionary change. The material universe is all that exists and all phenomenon can be explained on the basis of natural law.  Man is autonomous and will fulfill his potential through education and free application of his intelligence. Truth is derived from observations with our five senses. Values or morals are subjective and are merely the reflection of our individual preferences or socially useful behaviors.

5. Existentialism

The existentialist sees the absurdity of life, yet sees absolute freedom to best make meaning for himself through free choice and personal responsibility in the face of this absurdity.

6.  Nihilism

This extremely skeptical and pessimistic world view, popular among the young and the intellectual, sees only the absurdity of life and denies all real existence or any objective truth.  So, nothing can be known or communicated. A true nihilist believes in nothing, has no loyalties nor purpose in life; and therefore is susceptible to destructive impulses.

7. Postmodernism

In this view, reality is socially constructed, and therefore can only be interpreted in particular linguistic and cultural paradigms.  Autonomy and freedom are myths.  Truths and values are therefore only relative to one’s own culture. Belief in tolerance, freedom of expression, inclusion, and uncertainty are common features.

8. Pantheism/Eastern Mysticism/New Age Movements

Beginning in the 1950s, this world view denies the distinctions between humans, animals, or the rest of creation. Only an eternal, impersonal, and unknowable spiritual reality exists. Therefore, all is one and all is god. There are indefinite cycles of birth, death, and reincarnation that are affected by 'karma'.  Morality is not seen in black and white or as good and evil but as grey and uncertain. Man needs to change his consciousness to experience the truth of oneness with the universe which cannot be rationally described.


So, how does one choose one's worldview?

Perhaps, this flow-chart created by FEVA Ministries may help.



Or, does it?  It looks too complicated.

Perhaps a better way would be to decide how you are making that choice in the first place.  Basically, there are four ways of deciding:

1. Through the tenacity of holding on to your original view come what may.

2. Through deference to authority.

3. Through dependence on intuitive feelings.

4. Through a diligent and disciplined application of the scientific method.

The choice is yours, really!