Do we need a sense of humour?
Life is absurd, and we can’t change that. But we can decide how to respond to that absurdity: with a wailing and gnashing of teeth, with steely defiance, with laughter, or some combination of all three.
ReadTag: Ethics
Must challenge mean confrontation?
The intellectual modus operandi in Britain is one of adversarial conflict. In the debating chambers of Oxbridge, the high courts, the nation’s parliament, and even news programmes, good, rigorous debate is equated with polarised, confrontational discussion. To argue well is to win, to agree is to concede, and to refuse to come down clearly on one side or the other is to be woolly and evasive. No wonder then that the typical Brit is unable to distinguish between a legitimate challenge that deserves consideration and an outright attack that needs to be repelled.
ReadHow free are we?
A necessary illusion is likely to contain an unavoidable truth. In the case of free will, that truth is that human beings do things for reasons and are able to modify their behaviour on the basis of argument and evidence. Is that free will? You decide.
ReadShould we fear the worst?
We can learn to see the world in any number of ways with relative equanimity. What’s disconcerting is the prospect of the view we have got used to being turned upside down. To use another metaphor, the prospect of having the rug pulled from under our feet is frightening but not because we can’t stand up perfectly well on floorboards.
ReadIs it better to focus on today or tomorrow?
Human beings ought to think in all three tenses. We are the product of our histories and what we go on to do will continue to shape our identities. Dwelling on or living in the past may be bad but reflecting on it is essential. Similarly, worrying too much about or living for the future is not the same as preparing for it. How we think about the different times of life matters, not simply which one of them we focus on.
Read