Public persona vs Private persona

Yesterday we discussed: Do we have a right to privacy? Is the right to privacy a thing of the past?  Can anybody still manage to keep a personal secret while the internet is capable of detecting every movement of everybody?

Community spirit can sometimes feel like a community prison while everybody is being watched by everybody else.  Martin said it's like living in a insular little village wherever you go you are being spied upon by your neighbours peeping out of windows behind their curtains.

As a Buddhist converted to Christianity, Suk had an extraordinary dream in which she was reincarnated as a "Hebrew" woman but not a Jew.  She related this dream to a friend in a private email.  But soon after her email was sent to one person, she immediately received hundreds of HATE mails accusing her of anti-Semitism.  She found it incomprehensible as she was only telling a innocent dream to her friend.  How does this email spread to so many strangers?

Faut-il désobéir pour exister vraiment ?

Etienne Lécroart. Paru dans la revue Alternatives Non Violentes

Lors de notre Café Philo du Samedi 11 Juin, il a été argumenté que la question de la désobéissance était liée à la notion de respect de soin et donc de choix: puis-je garder mon intégrité personnelle ou encore une qualité de vie en obéissant? Exister, c'est s'affirmer comme le définit Shéhérazade. Bien sûr, cela dépend également à qui ou à quoi j’obéis.

Dans le cas d'une démocratie, c'est la puissance de la majorité qui a fait voter les lois qui nous régissent. Désobéir dans une société est le reflet de s’affirmer contre la pensée de la majorité. L'histoire a même vu que ce sont les gens qui se rebellent font avancer les sociétés, et qu’il faut que certains désobéissent pour qu'elles existent. Les lois n'ont-elles pas été crées pour assurer la cohésion d'un groupe d'individus, et rendre possible leur cohabitation?

La notion de désobéissance est liée dans nos sociétés au châtiment, à la punition, et comme Gaby l'a rappelé, Dieu a puni le serpent pour avoir encouragé Adam et Eve à croquer le fruit du savoir. Les sociétés ont besoin de ce dictateur, même s'il apparait sous la forme d'un dieu omnipotent.

Il serait faux cependant de considérer le conformisme comme une obéissance. En fait, certains sont déterminés à défendre le conformisme, et ne se contente pas de vivoter: ils sont actifs dans leur obéissance. A l'inverse, il y a le conformisme passif, celui qui ne se discute pas mais s'applique.

Alors que les régimes oppresseurs s'effritent les uns après les autres, on voit la mise en application de la possibilité de désobéir, décrite selon André Glucksmann comme « une forme de responsabilité et appelle à davantage de responsabilités ».

Some thoughts on Freedom of Information

Dear Philosophers,

We are told that rights should apply equally to all human beings, and if one of them is allowed an action it would be illicit to deny another the same action. Except, of course, that the people who are supposed to guarantee our rights government officials are the ones who claim exemption from this rule of universality. The Wikileaks affair reveals strikingly how rights don't apply equally. Forget taxes, pension differentials, life employment and impunity from prosecution in many countries, and other markers of the difference between government and the governed. It is now the most immaterial of goods, information, that is at stake. Governments collect it in all possible forms, requiring records of all bank transactions, credit card payments and airline reservations, ordering Microsoft and other companies to give them backdoor entries into software systems, tracking all phone and internet conversations, and making it illegal to protect your privacy by encrypting your correspondence or keeping your assets invisible.

The fury when the table is turned and when some people do to a government what it does to all of us (spying) is the great entertainment of these last days of 2010. And these could well be the first days of a new era.

Christian

A puzzling silence

I was hoping to recruit more co-bloggers but unfortunately most of our club members seem reluctant to join this forum. I wonder why there is only one follower, one co-blogger and one comment. Is this a Dead Loss? Am I wasting my time here? I am pondering at the reasons behind this silence. Several possibilities:

1.Perhaps a blog is too much of lowbrow information for some of our erudite “café-philosophers” who feed on the indoctrination of Aristotle, Descartes, Kant, Nietzsche, Wittgenstein, Maimonides, Alah, Jesus, Moses, Muhammad, Bodhisattvas, Tony Blair, George Bush, Osama bin Laden, David Beckham, Tiger Woods (more on request: I can go on name-dropping endlessly...)

2. Perhaps our friends at Café-philo South Ken harbour fears of the worldwide Internet Big Brother based on allegations of Google’s indirect links within the state machinery.

3. Technophobia: our philosopher friends have a special distaste of computers or any other technological gimmicks.

4. Perhaps there is one simple explanation: that I, as a non-native English speaker, a “non-philosopher” by “trade”, cannot be taken seriously by other more articulate members of the Club. In a sophisticated, male-dominated, exclusively European branch of knowledge, namely the Western philosophy, perhaps there is no entrance visible for others not from these shores.

In this instance, how do I set your mind at rest and try to persuade you to join the blog?

This blog needs some help from contributors or else it ceases to be of any particular relevance. If we decide that our weekly meetings and exchanges merit no further deliberations then we confirm we have achieved very little.  It is sad to know that in our society where trivia like the insane questions on the “Who wants to be millionaire?” rules our knowledge base, even a group of serious-minded “philosophers” are there just for a chat about anything insignificant and forget why we need to improve our minds. Is that our destiny to be rivals in some trivial pursuit ego match?

First of all, there is no need to feel threatened by the Big Brother on Internet at all as we are here to debate about Philosophy, not Politics. Even if politics touches the border of philosophy, this blog is not a platform for hot-headed revolutionaries, right-wing or left-wing extremist, religious nuts, or perverted politicians to make subversive propaganda. On the contrary, a blog is a fruition of a true democracy where everyone is entitled to make use of this Forum to make his opinion heard and to discuss with others.

In joining the blog as a co-blogger, there is no danger of compromising your privacy. Even if the blog server will require you to open a Google account with your existing email, it does not mean you have to reveal your secret password nor your real identity. All these can be made up specifically for this blog only.

As for the technological problems, a blog is really quite user-friendly (sorry for this clichéd jargon). Once the account has been opened, the blog server will prompt you what to do next and give you technical support in the “Help”. If in doubt, do not hesitate to email me and let me know the problem. Though not a computer “geek”, I have at least the basic knowledge of how to operate a few simple tasks on this relatively unsophisticated information tool.

As for what other people think of me, or whether there are any stereotyped preconceived ideas about me, I will not make any comment.
Sincerely,
xiaowei