In this short memoir, I recount my own encounters with racism on several countries and historical periods that were turbulent due to migrations and revolutions. My tale starts in the vibrant but intricate fabric of Mozambique’s society, and it revolves around the backdrop of the Portuguese Revolution on April 25.
Mozambique
Despite the ongoing colonial war’s shadow, I lived my youth and adolescence in Lourenço Marques, today known as Maputo, where I was born. Mozambique’s social fabric was made up of a mosaic of Black, White, and Indian people who coexisted peacefully despite their differences. But with a parent who was socialistally inclined and the war escalating, I started to see the fundamental cracks in our mutual peace.
I have a really particular memory from this time period of watching a movie in the long hallway of the building where my parents used to live. We were split by colour, with servants on one side and whites on the other. Laughter filled the air until it was shattered by violence; a friend’s father, rumoured to be affiliated with the PIDE (the secret police), because he believed the blacks were looking at the intimacy parts of the white women’s legs (which they couldn’t because they were watching the movie on the other side of the blanket serving as a screen), attacked a Black child, a boy who was like a brother to me. The brutality of this incident left me in shock, and it was a grim illustration of the oppressive regime under which we lived.
Return to Portugal and the Stigma of the “Retornados”
Following the revolution, I returned to Portugal, a land that was supposed to represent liberation and new beginnings. However, the reality was starkly different. We were seen not as war refugees, but as “retornees” and often with disdain. At public demonstrations, angry exclamations such as “kill the retornados” could be heard (I heard), and at one point, several people began condemning other people who were watching in the margin of the crowd in motion: “That guy is a retornado!” “Look at his colour!”, simply because Whites arrive in Europe with a paler complexion, possibly due to the malaria they frequently contract, highlighting the deep-seated bigotry and misunderstanding. But, happily, I need to mention that this time in my life went well since I got along well with the other adolescents. The hostility was more restricted to select adults, who viewed the “retornees” with suspicion and contempt, frightened that they would take their jobs, and so on, highlighting the different levels of racism that may exist both inside and beyond one’s ethnic group.
Facing Discrimination in France
Seeking a new beginning, I travelled to France to further my studies, I was still a kid 17 years old, but the shadows of discrimination followed. At my first student party, I was reminded of my outsider position. Discussions during the gathering showed racist undercurrents, with some people labelling the Portuguese as inferior people. How could it happen in a country that proclaims to the world, “Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité”? It was a disturbing event that taught me that racism and bigotry have no borders; they mutate and thrive wherever ignorance exists.
In conclusion, through these encounters in three nations, as a White, I’ve experienced the various manifestations of racism. It is not limited by geography or history; it is a widespread poison that infiltrates communities under numerous guises. My trip from Mozambique to France taught me the value of challenging biases and working towards a society where diversity is valued rather than ridiculed.
Who isn’t annoyed by the news that constantly recurs in the global media, repeating itself to the point of exhaustion, with only a few topics receiving focused attention? Does this pose a threat to Democracy? This article discusses the agenda-setting theory, which contends that the media instructs us on what topics to consider rather than what ideas to pursue. In fact, media organisations’ and the media ecosystem’s larger underlying ideologies or prejudices can be reflected in the restricted coverage and recurrence of particular themes. Are we living in a Democracy or in a Mediocracy? Numerous elements have a role in this phenomenon:
Editorial Bias:The editorial position of the media outlet, which can be impacted by political, cultural, or economic prejudices, has an impact on decisions regarding which news stories are covered and how they are presented. This may result in an emphasis on specific themes or storylines that suit the values and interests of the medium or its audience.
Economic Pressures: Because they have to make money, media corporations tend to give priority to stories that they think would draw in the greatest number of readers, viewers, or listeners. The emphasis on dramatic or conflict-driven news at the cost of other significant but somewhat less instantly attractive topics might result from this economic pressure.
Cultural Hegemony: News coverage may be considered within the umbrella of the idea of cultural hegemony, which is the perpetuation of the values of the dominant culture in society. By concentrating on topics that appeal to their main audiences, media from nations with substantial worldwide influence (such as the United States or several European countries) frequently sets the tone for international news and shapes the agenda for news coverage worldwide.
Access and Resources: Significant resources are needed to cover worldwide news, such as interpreters and foreign reporters. There may be disparities in coverage around the globe as a result of media outlets focusing on regions where they have more access to resources.
Echo Chamber Effect: The abundance of information sources in today’s digital media environment hasn’t always translated into a more diverse range of news coverage. Instead, echo chambers are frequently produced by social media algorithms, where users are given content that confirms their own opinions and interests, reinforcing the coverage’s constrained reach.
Both media outlets and readers must work together to increase the variety of news coverage. Media organisations should make an effort to invest in reporting on a greater range of issues and to expand their coverage internationally. By looking for and interacting with news sources that present a variety of viewpoints and coverage of underreported areas and subjects, consumers may help to encourage this. Initiatives that support media literacy can also assist viewers in assessing news sources critically and stimulate the desire for thorough and diversified news coverage.
Exploring the Depths of News Diversity: A visual metaphor of the global media landscape, depicting the contrast between mainstream media’s focus on major events and the rich tapestry of stories navigated by independent outlets. Created by the author with the assistance of DALL-E.
Global news coverage’s restricted scope has a negative impact on society and our comprehension of the globe as a whole. Raising our level of criticism of this occurrence brings to light more serious problems and possible losses for humanity:
Loss of Diversity: News uniformity restricts people’s access to a wider range of cultures, viewpoints, and narratives. This creates a world viewed through a limited lens and limits our capacity to comprehend and value the diverse fabric of global communities. Diverse perspectives and experiences lose significance and exposure when global news stories take precedence over local and cultural tales.
Misrepresentation and Stereotyping: A distorted image of particular places and peoples is created when they are solely associated with poverty, violence, or natural disasters. This leads to misconceptions and prejudices. This can have an impact on immigration laws, international relations, and intercultural relationships by sustaining prejudices and stigmas that are difficult to overcome.
Neglect of Important topics: A lot of important but less dramatic topics get unreported.
Neglect of Crucial Issues: A lot of important but less dramatic stories don’t get enough attention. Underreported issues include environmental catastrophes, social injustices, health inequities, and cultural accomplishments that are not part of the mainstream media. Neglect can prevent resources from being mobilised, slow down international responses to urgent problems, and reduce awareness of good progress and solutions that are being made globally.
Democratic Deficits: The basis of democracy is an informed public. Focusing just on a small number of stories can result in a population that lacks knowledge of many significant topics, which lowers the standard of democratic participation and debate. Citizens’ capacity to hold power institutions responsible and participate in informed decision-making is undermined when they lack a comprehensive understanding of local and global processes.
Erosion of Empathy and Solidarity: Experiencing a range of narratives and viewpoints is essential in cultivating empathy and a feeling of worldwide unity. Media coverage might unintentionally reduce our empathy by emphasising a small number of stories, which makes it more challenging to rally support for international crises and cooperate solutions to common issues.
All things considered, the effects of a limited media focus go much beyond a simple deficiency of diversity in news reporting. They touch on broader social concerns that have an impact on our perceptions of one another and the outside world, how we interact with one another locally and globally, and ultimately how we tackle the difficult problems that mankind faces. Including a wider range of stories and viewpoints in media coverage is crucial to creating a more knowledgeable, compassionate, and cooperative global community.
Both media producers and consumers must work to promote a more diversified media environment and combat the narrowness of global news coverage. The following tactics and activities can assist in reaching this objective:
For Consumers:
Seek Out Diverse Sources: Actively look for news outlets, journalists, and platforms that offer varied perspectives, especially those focusing on underreported regions or issues. This could include international news services, independent media, and platforms dedicated to niche topics.
Support Independent Media: Many independent media organizations strive to cover stories overlooked by mainstream outlets. By subscribing to, donating to, or simply sharing their content, you can support their mission and help diversify the news ecosystem.
Use Social Media Wisely: Social media can be a double-edged sword, offering both echo chambers and gateways to diverse perspectives. Follow a broad array of accounts from different cultural and geopolitical backgrounds to ensure a wider range of viewpoints in your feed.
Engage with Content Critically: Develop media literacy skills to critically evaluate the news you consume. This includes understanding the source’s perspective, questioning biases, and considering what might be missing from the coverage.
Demand Better Coverage: Audiences have power. By engaging with media outlets through social media, feedback forms, or viewership choices, you can demand more comprehensive and diverse coverage.
For Producers:
Invest in Global Reporting: News organizations should invest in correspondents and bureaus around the world, especially in underreported regions, to capture a broad spectrum of stories.
Promote Diversity Within: Media companies can strive for diversity among their staff and leadership. A diverse team is more likely to produce a variety of perspectives and stories.
Ethical Reporting Practices: Adopt practices that ensure fair, accurate, and respectful coverage of different cultures and communities, avoiding stereotypes and sensationalism.
Collaborate Across Borders: Media outlets can form partnerships with international and local news organizations to share resources, stories, and perspectives, enriching their coverage.
Leverage Technology for Discovery: Use algorithms and platforms to highlight diverse news stories and sources, counteracting the echo chamber effect of social media.
Broader Efforts:
Education and Media Literacy: Incorporate media literacy into educational curriculums to equip future generations with the skills to navigate the media landscape critically.
Foster Independent Journalism: Support policies and initiatives that protect press freedom, fund independent journalism, and encourage reporting on undercovered issues and regions.
Both producers and consumers may help create a more varied and representative global media environment by implementing these actions. By ensuring that everyone has access to the abundance of narratives our planet has to offer, this initiative may contribute to improving our comprehension and appreciation of the intricately linked, complicated world we live in.
The coupling between the Political System and Media
The relationship between political power and media bias is a well-studied topic that demonstrates how the media may affect public opinion and political results. Here are some salient findings from pertinent research:
Framing Bias in Media and Power Distribution: Entman (2007) discusses how media bias, through mechanisms such as framing, priming, and agenda-setting, impacts the distribution of political power and democracy. This comprehensive view suggests that bias in media can significantly influence which political issues are highlighted, shaping public discourse and opinion in ways that may benefit certain political classes (Entman, 2007).
Biased Media and Voter Welfare: Wolton (2019) explores the effects of biased media on democracy and voter welfare, indicating that while biased media outlets can inform voters, they may also skew perceptions in ways that benefit specific political interests. This complexity underscores the nuanced role media plays in democratic processes (Wolton, 2019).
Types of Media Bias and Political Preferences: Eberl et al. (2017) categorize media bias into visibility, tonality, and agenda biases, showing how each influences party preferences. Their findings suggest that media bias can alter the political landscape by reinforcing or challenging partisan identities, which has implications for political campaigns and voter alignment (Eberl, Boomgaarden, & Wagner, 2017).
Persistent Media Bias and Political Influence: Baron (2004) presents a theory where media bias persists due to journalists’ preferences and the profit motives of news organizations, suggesting that bias can shape the political agenda and affect regulatory policies. This perspective highlights how media bias can serve the interests of political classes by influencing public opinion and policy decisions (Baron, 2004).
Perceptions of Media Bias and Political Polarization: Barnidge et al. (2020) discuss how perceptions of media bias contribute to political polarization, demonstrating that individuals who engage in selective media consumption may perceive “the media” as biased, reinforcing their political beliefs and contributing to a polarized political environment (Barnidge et al., 2020).
Together, these studies highlight the substantial impact of media bias on voter behaviour, political discourse, and power dynamics. They also imply that media bias actively shapes political realities, reflecting the interests of certain political classes at the expense of an informed and democratically engaged public.
Mechanisms of Influence: An illustration of the complex relationship that exists between the media and the political system, shown as a complex system of interconnecting gears. The dynamic link between politics and public communication shapes and is moulded by digital landscapes, as symbolised by this graphic, which was developed with the help of DALL-E.
Conclusion
If we wish to strive towards a democratic system—that is, an impartial, free, and just way of living in society—then there should be a critical discourse in political communication and theory continuing in our cultures. Parties and democratic movements (not necessarily from the Left, Right, or Centre) should vigorously explore the extent to which media dominance undermines the fundamentals of democratic government. The genuine character of democracy is called into question when the media, swayed by different political and economic interests, significantly shapes public opinion and sets agendas.
Some opponents use terminology like “mediocracy” to characterise the current system of government in cultures where media dominance seems to trump real public conversation and informed decision-making. This phrase, which blends the words “democracy” and “media,” suggests a kind of government that is more heavily influenced by the media than by the ideal of pure democracy—government by the people, for the people.
“Mediocracy” presents an account of a situation in which media organisations, by virtue of their ability to set agendas and shape public opinion, have a disproportionately large impact on the democratic process. This could potentially eclipse informed citizens and direct public engagement as the main forces behind democratic governance.
Furthermore, debates centred on these ideas frequently lead to an examination of “manufactured consent,” a phrase coined by Noam Chomsky and Edward S. Herman. They contend that the media and influential elites work together to discreetly undermine the fundamental democratic tenet of an educated and free public by influencing public perception and opinion to an extent that serves elite interests.
Although these criticisms are convincing, they also call for a more thorough examination of the need for media literacy, varied media environments, and legal frameworks that guarantee media independence and pluralism. Taking care of these problems is essential to preserving democratic institutions and making sure that the media promotes rather than erodes democracy.
In the modern discourse of global challenges, the fight against climate change has taken center stage, signifying a collective awakening to environmental preservation. However, beneath the layers of these ecological endeavors lies an equally pressing, yet often overlooked issue – the pervasive influence of the military-industrial complex.
This complex, a formidable union of defense contractors and armed forces, wields significant power, shaping policies and priorities that often escalate global tensions. The narrative of national security is frequently used to justify immense military expenditures, overshadowing urgent humanitarian and environmental needs. Wars and conflicts, fuelled by this complex, ravage landscapes and societies, leaving lasting scars on both humanity and the environment.
Balancing Our Priorities: Saving the Planet, Seeking Peace.
What’s alarming is the stark contrast in global mobilization. While initiatives against climate change see worldwide support and action, efforts to dismantle or even challenge the military-industrial complex are sporadic and marginalized. This discrepancy in global focus raises critical questions about our priorities and the forces that shape them.
As we navigate the threats of climate change, it’s crucial to broaden our scope and confront the less-discussed yet profound implications of the military-industrial complex. Reducing its influence is not just a matter of policy reform; it’s a step towards a more peaceful, sustainable future, where resources are channeled towards constructive, life-affirming activities rather than destruction and warfare.
The real question we face is not just how to save our planet from environmental degradation, but how to reshape our global structures and systems to prioritize peace, sustainability, and the well-being of all inhabitants of our world. It’s time to bring this conversation to the forefront, to ensure a holistic approach to our planet’s and humanity’s future.
In this chronicle, we talk about the philosophical transition from Nietzsche’s “death of God” in the 19th and 20th centuries to the 21st century’s human endeavor to control the climate, overshadowing cosmic influences. This reflects a Quixotic ambition, paralleling the shift from divine dependence to human autonomy, as advocated by thinkers like Camus, Sartre, and Feuerbach. However, despite the information age, we struggle to discern truth from falsehood, a consequence of not being taught critical thinking. We emphasize the need to balance our technological and environmental aspirations with humanistic values and critical thought.
In the 19th and 20th centuries, philosophers like Friedrich Nietzsche, Arthur Schopenhauer, Albert Camus, and Jean-Paul Sartre grappled with the concept of the “death of God,” a profound shift in human thought that questioned the role and even the existence of a divine cosmic order. Nietzsche’s declaration that “God is dead” symbolized a radical departure from traditional religious beliefs, and it sparked a philosophical exploration into the nature of human existence and morality in a potentially godless world.
Furthermore, it is crucial to acknowledge that there is nothing inherently wrong with imagining a God and then rendering this entity powerless. Philosophers such as Albert Camus, Jean-Paul Sartre, and Ludwig Feuerbach, among others, did not merely endeavor to dethrone a divine figure. Instead, their work was a clarion call for human beings to assume responsibility for their own existence, their actions, and the world around them. This was a call to awaken from the slumber of divine dependence and to embrace the empowerment and accountability that come with human autonomy.
Yet, this project remains unachieved. While we have made strides in recognizing our ability to shape our world, including our climate, we seem to have overlooked the holistic responsibility that comes with this power. In our eagerness to claim dominion over nature, we have often neglected the fundamental aspects of our humanity: compassion, empathy, and the pursuit of collective well-being. The challenge laid down by these thinkers was not just to take control but to do so with a keen awareness of our interconnectedness and interdependence.
As we stand at the crossroads of technological advancement and environmental stewardship, we must revisit these philosophical foundations. Our responsibility extends beyond environmental concerns and encompasses a broader spectrum of human values and ethics. The true test of our era is not merely in how effectively we can control the climate or replace cosmic forces but in how well we can balance these endeavors with a commitment to peace, justice, and human dignity. It is in this balancing act that the true realization of the project envisioned by Camus, Sartre, Feuerbach, and others lies—a project calling for responsibility, not just for ourselves but for the world and for each other.
Now, in the 21st century, we seem to witness a new chapter in human audacity. This era can be likened to a Quixotic tale where humanity, much like Cervantes’ famed character, imagines itself capable of replacing the cosmic forces that have long been deemed untouchable and beyond our control. Central to this narrative is the belief that humanity can and should control the planetary climate, downplaying or even dismissing the role of cosmic factors in this intricate process.
From Nietzsche to Now: The Evolution of Thought from Divine to Human Dominance in the Age of Technology and Climate Change
It strikes me as absurd that, amidst this ambitious quest to control the climate, many of humanity’s most pressing issues are left in the shadows. Wars ravage nations, poverty, and hunger persist, the drug crisis deepens, and human misery continues unabated. In our fervent pursuit to master the climate, have we lost sight of the need for peace, well-being, and the fundamental dignity of all people?
Moreover, this modern-day crusade often lacks the depth of reflection and dialogue that characterized the philosophical discourses of the past. Arguments are frequently fragile, opinions echo in chambers of like-minded thinkers, and the capacity for genuine dialogue diminishes. As we forge ahead in our quest to become cosmic contenders, we must pause and consider the wisdom of those who questioned our place in the universe.
In this era of information abundance, we find ourselves at a peculiar crossroads. Never before have we had such unfettered access to knowledge and data; yet, paradoxically, discerning truth from falsehood has become a Herculean task for many. This dilemma largely stems from a critical gap in our educational and societal structures – the lack of emphasis on teaching individuals how to think critically.
The issue is not merely the overwhelming volume of information but the ability to navigate it with a discerning eye. We live in a time where information is readily available, but wisdom is scarce. The skill to critically evaluate information, to question its sources, and to analyze its content is not an innate trait but a learned one. Unfortunately, this is a skill that is often underemphasized in our educational systems and societal discourse.
The thinkers of the past, like Camus, Sartre, and Feuerbach, not only challenged the existing paradigms of their time but also implicitly championed the cause of critical thinking. They urged individuals to question, to reason, and to take responsibility for their beliefs and actions. Yet, in our current age, despite the vast reservoirs of information at our fingertips, we seem to have drifted further from this ideal.
The consequence is a society where misinformation can spread unchecked, where opinions are often formed on the basis of bias rather than evidence, and where the ability to engage in thoughtful, reasoned debate is becoming a rarity. In a world brimming with information yet starving for wisdom, the need to foster critical thinking skills is more urgent than ever.
As we continue to advance technologically and grapple with complex global challenges, we must also commit to nurturing critical and independent thinking in our educational institutions, our public discourse, and our personal lives. Only then can we hope to not just survive in this age of information but to thrive with discernment and wisdom.
Have we, in our pursuit to control the climate, inadvertently stepped into the shoes of Don Quixote, challenging windmills in a world that requires far more than just environmental stewardship? The 21st century calls for an integrated and compassionate approach to humanity’s problems, one that balances our ecological ambitions with the urgent need to address the social, political, and ethical challenges that define our human experience.
In our eagerness to play a cosmic role, however, let us not forget the humanistic values that ground us. They make us cosmic beings. As we contemplate our place in the universe, it is imperative that we remember the lessons of the past while courageously facing the complexities of the present. Only then can we hope to chart a course that is both environmentally responsible and deeply attuned to the myriad challenges that define our shared human journey.
Disclaimer: The thoughts and views shared here are purely my own and are presented with the utmost respect for differing opinions. I value and appreciate the diverse perspectives that make our community rich and vibrant. Remember, every opinion has its unique merit, and while I stand by mine, I wholeheartedly respect and understand the viewpoints of others.
The group of nations commonly referred to as the “West,” known for their emphasis on education, freedom, and a history of renaissance, must continuously evolve to foster environments conducive to interpersonal development and well-being. On the other hand, the BRICS nations, while having their own unique strengths, tend to prioritize different values and systems, some of which lean towards autocratic governance. The question then arises: Can these regimes, with their distinctive approaches, truly appeal to individuals who aspire to emigrate to them? Moreover, can they contribute to the advancement of humanity? Recognizing the essential need for educational evolution, this paper offers an outline for an “Educational Renaissance: A Thorough Exploration of the New Pedagogical Paradigm Bridging Classroom and Industry.”
Introduction
In the swift evolution of the global landscape, educational systems must innovate to remain relevant. While traditional pedagogical methods have proven their value, they often fall short of adequately preparing students for the real-world needs of the industry. A groundbreaking new educational model offers a solution: a comprehensive program that seamlessly merges theoretical learning, hands-on projects, and entrepreneurial collaboration.
The Holistic Concept
At the heart of this pedagogical proposal is project-based learning. Students engage in tangible projects reflecting real-world challenges, thereby bridging the gap between abstract theories and their practical applications. Such projects might range from assembling models of airplanes, submarines, or vehicles to drafting business proposals or devising solutions to genuine engineering problems. The key takeaway is that these projects aren’t confined to one academic discipline; they blend knowledge from multiple fields, fostering an integrated learning experience. They could be implemented in the university curriculum transversally: in one discipline, such as mechanics and waves they could make calculations on the limit of the height of a building, or the seismic structures need to be at the base of constructions, make the project of fast constructions of habitation in must need for people, while in another discipline at the same grade, for example, first year, in calculus they could be made calculations that complement the necessary knowledge in such a way that each grade year they would contribute to a major project with importance to the economy, to fulfill needs of the population, to learn themselves to do, to prepare themselves to participate in the great plan of a nation, serving humanity.
Real-world Exposure and Entrepreneurial Collaboration
The program further blurs the line between education and industry, championing entrepreneurship and industrial collaboration. Student projects serve as potential springboards for startups and new ventures, granting them early exposure to the practicalities of entrepreneurship. Close collaboration with industry partners not only enriches students’ learning experience but also provides companies with fresh perspectives and potential future employees.
Enhancing Interdisciplinary Learning
One of the program’s most innovative aspects is its emphasis on interdisciplinary learning. Instead of compartmentalizing subjects, students learn to view problems through various lenses—an essential skill in today’s interconnected world. For instance, building a vehicle model requires an understanding of engineering principles, material science, energy systems, and more. This comprehensive approach to learning can foster innovative thinking and problem-solving skills.
Organization and Structure
Such an ambitious program demands a robust structure for successful implementation. A dedicated coordinating body within the educational institution is paramount. This entity would liaise with industry partners, organize resources, manage timelines, and guide students throughout their projects. Faculty members, too, would play pivotal roles by mentoring students and helping them relate academic knowledge to real-world contexts.
Challenges in Implementation
Transitioning to a new pedagogical paradigm isn’t without its hurdles. Academia, like many institutions, is deeply rooted in established traditions and practices. There’s significant inertia that can be tough to overcome. Radical shifts like this might encounter resistance from various stakeholders within the institution.
Some faculty might perceive this change as a threat to their autonomy and the status quo. Convincing the academic staff about the necessity and viability of this shift could be challenging. It will necessitate concerted efforts to engage faculty in discussions and planning, underscoring the benefits of the interdisciplinary approach for both students and the institution itself.
Further challenges might arise from existing bureaucratic structures not geared to support this integrated learning approach. Overcoming these barriers might necessitate organizational restructuring, policy changes, and possibly revisions to existing curricula.
It’s vital to remember, however, that despite the inevitable challenges, implementing such an innovative proposal has the potential to revolutionize students’ learning experiences, equipping them more effectively for the job market and contributing to the advancement of the local economy and industry.
Conclusion
In conclusion, while this proposal is primarily tailored for engineering courses, its underlying philosophy has the potential to revolutionize the broader educational landscape. Integrating financial compensation into academic projects not only emphasizes the importance of students’ contributions but also lays the groundwork for a sustainable model for education across various disciplines. This approach merges immediate professional recognition with long-term financial prudence (including credits for retirement), suggesting a future where academia is both attuned to contemporary needs and forward-thinking. As we champion this integration in engineering, it’s worth considering its application across all academic fields. In such a reimagined system, students aren’t just passive recipients of knowledge; they become vital contributors to societal progress, empowered to shape the world while concurrently securing their personal futures.
This article reflects my personal viewpoint. Recognizing the diversity of opinions and experiences, I believe that open dialogue is essential for growth and understanding. It is my sincere hope that my perspective is taken in the spirit of thoughtful discourse and contributes to the democratic societal dynamics that shape our world. Multilateralism is the future, yet we remain one world, one people.
In the grand theater of global politics, history often repeats itself, but never in the exact same manner. The shadow of a potential World War III has loomed large in the minds of political analysts and appears in the news with disconcerting frequency. However, the nature of this perceived conflict is drastically different from its predecessors. We aren’t looking at a conventional war of nations and territories. Instead, we are witnessing the crystallization of a new form of conflict: one that is franchised, decentralized, and predominantly social. Citizens want to have a say about it, but everything unfolds in front of them as the world was made for the ones in power. We may wonder if, in the past, some similar situations happened, and they did. Just before the two (franchised) great (why great?!) wars.
The period leading up to World War II was indeed marked by profound intellectual and artistic fervor. This era, primarily the 1920s and 1930s, saw a flurry of activity in literature, philosophy, science, art, and other cultural domains, which was especially notable given the backdrop of the devastation of World War I. Some key highlights include:
Literature and Philosophy: The works of writers like F. Scott Fitzgerald, Ernest Hemingway, T.S. Eliot, and James Joyce captured the zeitgeist of the era. Philosophers like Martin Heidegger, Walter Benjamin, and Jean-Paul Sartre began exploring existentialism and other groundbreaking theories.
Art: The period saw the rise of surrealism with artists like Salvador Dalí and René Magritte, and the continuation of modernist movements led by figures like Picasso.
Science: The theory of relativity by Albert Einstein and the pioneering works in quantum mechanics were reshaping our very understanding of the universe.
Music: Jazz blossomed and spread, becoming a significant cultural force. The period also saw the maturation of classical composers like Igor Stravinsky and Béla Bartók.
Architecture: Modernist and Art Deco styles took prominence, showcasing a move away from traditional forms and toward functionalism and new aesthetic principles.
However, despite this incredible proliferation of ideas and creativity, the political and socioeconomic landscape was more tumultuous:
Economic Hardship: The Great Depression of the 1930s led to widespread unemployment, poverty, and social unrest.
Political Extremism: This period saw the rise of extremist ideologies, with Fascism in Italy, Nazism in Germany, and militaristic expansionism in Japan.
Nationalism: Rising nationalism and a desire to rectify the terms of the Treaty of Versailles contributed to aggressive policies by Germany and its allies.
Failures of Diplomacy: The inability of the League of Nations to prevent conflicts, combined with appeasement strategies by some Western nations, allowed for unchecked aggression by Axis powers.
Cultural, artistic, and intellectual movements often act as both reflections and critiques of their times. The outpouring of creativity before WWII can be viewed as a response to the upheavals of the age, but art and culture, no matter how profound, operate in a different sphere from the geopolitical and economic forces that drive nations to war. It’s a tragic dichotomy of human history that periods of profound intellectual advancement can sometimes exist alongside, or be followed by, times of great violence and destruction. So, what happens to the social system in order that, suddenly, the course of history turns irrational? Do some people get the power to control their minds, making them irrational?
The phenomenon is indeed complex and multifaceted. Throughout history, there have been instances where certain figures, ideologies, or movements have gained significant influence, often driving large sections of populations toward behaviors or beliefs that may seem irrational or extreme in retrospect. This influence is generally the result of a combination of factors:
Socioeconomic Conditions: Times of economic hardship, such as the Great Depression leading up to WWII, can create feelings of disillusionment, citizens feel disrespected, making people more susceptible to radical ideologies that promise change or restoration of past glories.
Charismatic Leadership: Charismatic leaders can have a profound influence on the masses and maybe Mahatma Gandhi is the only one that did some good. Leaders like Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, and others combined captivating oratory with masterful propaganda to inspire devotion and obedience.
Propaganda and Media Control: Effective control of media and the propagation of a singular narrative can play a significant role in shaping public opinion. Propaganda can heighten emotions, simplify complex issues, and create an “us vs. them” mentality. We live in times of intense propaganda.
Fear and Nationalism: Fear, whether of external threats or internal subversion, can be a powerful tool. Coupled with intense nationalism, it can result in a population more willing to accept extreme measures for perceived security.
Dehumanization of the “Other”: Creating a narrative where certain groups are less than human or are seen as threats makes it easier for the masses to accept or even participate in atrocities against them.
Groupthink and Conformity: There’s a natural human tendency to conform to the beliefs and behaviors of those around us, especially when dissent is discouraged or punished. That’s a characteristic of our times, here and there.
Dissolution of Checks and Balances: In many cases, the mechanisms or institutions that might check the rise of autocratic power get eroded. This could be due to political maneuvering, coercion, or genuine popular support. For the well-aware citizens, this is the case.
It’s essential to note that while these factors can influence large numbers of people, they don’t render individuals entirely powerless or without agency. Throughout even the darkest periods of history, there have been individuals and groups who resisted, dissented, or worked against prevailing ideologies and actions. It happens now. Therefore, understanding these dynamics is crucial in recognizing the signs and preventing the rise of such extreme influences in the future.
The Age of Information Warfare
The First and Second World Wars were largely physical wars, defined by territory, alliances, and firepower. Today, in the age of information, wars are not just fought on battlefields but on the digital frontier. With cyberattacks, misinformation campaigns, and the weaponization of social media, the very definition of warfare has evolved. Nations no longer need battalions; a group of skilled hackers can cripple a country’s infrastructure overnight. So, why wage a physically destructive war? Too many people on the boat?
The Franchise Model
Unlike traditional wars, where nation-states hold clear alliances and enemies, the modern conflict operates on a franchising model. Independent groups, though inspired by larger ideologies, can wage wars on behalf of these ideologies without official affiliations. This is similar to how terrorist organizations operate globally, pledging allegiance to larger causes but acting independently. This franchised nature makes it incredibly difficult for traditional diplomacy and conflict resolution to be effective.
The Rise of Social Wars
Parallel to this is the rise of social wars. Societal divisions are growing, fueled by inequalities, racial tensions, and ideological differences. These internal conflicts, evident in protests, civil unrest, and even revolutions (that the majority of the times tend to be propitious to those with guns, the men of power), pose as much of a threat to global stability as external conflicts do. Unlike traditional wars which had clear beginnings and ends, social wars are continuous, with flare-ups occurring sporadically and unpredictably.
Where Do We Go From Here?
Recognizing the evolving nature of conflict is the first step in addressing it. Diplomacy needs a reboot. We need new international norms and treaties that address cyber warfare, misinformation, and the role of non-state actors in conflicts. Additionally, addressing the root causes of social unrest – be it economic disparity, systemic racism, or political repression – is crucial. It is urgent! Only by healing these internal divisions can nations hope to present a united front externally.
The specter of World War III’ might not manifest as we expect it to. But the threats posed by franchise conflicts and social wars are just as grave. As the lines between physical and digital, external and internal, and state and non-state blur, our approach to peacekeeping and conflict resolution must evolve accordingly.
The Timeless Reflections in Thomas Mann’s “Magic Mountain”
Thomas Mann’s “Magic Mountain” is a masterpiece of modern literature, a sweeping exploration of ideas, sickness, and time. Set against the backdrop of a sanatorium in the Swiss Alps, Mann weaves a dense tapestry of European intellectual history, especially as it pertains to the onset of World War I. At its core, the novel is a reflection of the nature of time, life, death, and the human condition. In today’s turbulent times, a reexamination of “Magic Mountain” reveals astounding parallels. The current socio-political environment, full of divisions, polarization, and seemingly irrational outbursts of anger, feels like a haunting echo of the sanatorium’s psychosis-laden ambiance that Mann so deftly portrayed. In Thomas Mann’s novel ‘The Magic Mountain’ (‘Der Zauberberg’ in German), the sanatorium is set in the picturesque locale of Davos, Switzerland. Intriguingly, the town later became the chosen venue for the World Economic Forum (WEF) Annual Meeting, where global leaders and business magnates convene.
The Sanatorium as a Microcosm
The sanatorium in “Magic Mountain” is a microcosm of the broader European society of its time. The patients, hailing from different backgrounds and cultures, bring with them their national prejudices, intellectual ideas, and personal neuroses. This secluded world, hanging above the plains of everyday life, is a space where time seems to stand still and where existential and philosophical debates take center stage. However, beneath the intellectual exchanges lies a palpable tension. As Mann leads us closer to the outbreak of World War I, the sanatorium becomes a pressure cooker of emotions. Irrational irritations, unexplained animosities, and a pervasive sense of dread envelop the place.
Ideas as Masks
What’s striking about Mann’s portrayal is his suggestion that lofty ideas—whether about nationhood, culture, or morality—often serve as mere excuses or masks for deeper, darker, more primitive urges. The conflicts and debates among the sanatorium’s inhabitants are, at their heart, not truly about the ideas themselves but about the primal, aggressive urges that lurk beneath the surface of civilized discourse.
Relevance Today
Today, as divisive ideologies and ‘us vs. them’ narratives gain traction globally, “Magic Mountain” feels remarkably prescient on the verge of WWI. Social media echo chambers, with intentional divisive political rhetoric, and rising nationalism mirror the sanatorium’s atmosphere of heightened emotion and reduced rationality. Once again, ideas are being weaponized, not for the sake of the ideas themselves but to further tribal instincts and aggressive postures.
Moreover, the global pandemic has, in many ways, created a scenario where societies, much like the sanatorium’s patients, were/are isolated, introspective, and grappling with concepts of time, mortality, and purpose. “Magic Mountain” may have been penned nearly a century ago, but its insights into human nature, society, and the interplay of ideas and emotions are timeless. Mann’s genius lies in his ability to capture the undercurrents of societal change and the human psyche’s complexities. Today, as we stand at our own crossroads, his novel serves as a cautionary tale and a mirror, reflecting our deepest fears and hopes and the eternal human condition, to live in uncertainty.
The Illusion of Ideas: Insights from Thomas Mann and Milan Kundera
The intellectual domains of Thomas Mann and Milan Kundera, although distinct in their narrative styles and thematic concerns, converge on a fundamental insight: ideas, no matter how profound or compelling, are not the primary drivers of human action. Instead, the two authors suggest, that beneath the veneer of intellectual discourse lie deeper, often irrational forces that truly shape our behaviors and destinies. History books are keeping records written by the winners. The truth was erased. We live in fake civilizations and every historian is ashamed.
In “The Magic Mountain,” Mann paints a rich tableau of characters, each representing a distinct worldview. They engage in lofty debates about art, politics, science, and philosophy. Yet, as the story unfolds, it becomes clear that these intellectual exchanges, while fascinating, are not what truly propels the characters’ actions. Instead, it’s their emotions, desires, fears, and personal histories that play a decisive role. The looming shadow of World War I further accentuates the novel’s exploration of the limits of reason and the unpredictable, chaotic nature of human behavior. It is shocking that some not yet well-known mechanism interferes with human nature.
Milan Kundera’s Insights
Milan Kundera, in his literary explorations, often delves into the intricate dance between ideas and emotions. In his semi-autobiographical works, he underscores the point that intellectual posturing often masks deeper emotional and existential struggles. Ideas, Kundera seems to suggest, are sometimes a defense mechanism, a way for individuals to shield themselves from the raw pain of existence or the chaos of a changing world.
Kundera’s characters, much like Mann’s, are often intellectuals. Yet their lives are not governed by their intellectual convictions but by their passions, insecurities, and personal histories. Ideas become, in many ways, a backdrop, a stage set against which the real drama of human emotion plays out. Therefore, when people asked Kundera if he was a communist, or from the left or the right, Kundera always replied, “I am a novelist.”
The Fragility of Intellectualism
Both Mann and Kundera, in their respective ways, highlight the fragility of intellectualism. While ideas undoubtedly have power, they are not immune to the complexities of the human psyche. Emotions, personal experiences, societal pressures, and primal urges often overshadow even the most compelling of ideas.
In today’s world, where ideological battles are increasingly fierce and where intellectual positions often seem rigid and absolute, the insights of Mann and Kundera are particularly poignant. They serve as a reminder that beneath every ideological stance, there is a human being, with all its complexities, contradictions, and vulnerabilities.
Conclusion
Ideas, while powerful and transformative, do not exist in a vacuum. They are intertwined with the unknown complexities of human emotion and experience. Both Thomas Mann and Milan Kundera, through their literary masterpieces, offer a deep dive into this intricate relationship, urging readers to look beyond the surface and recognize the profound interplay between the intellectual and the emotional, the rational and the irrational.
But, is this tension leading us to a franchised WWIII, defined by grand strategies, coalitions, and set battle lines? The world has certainly seen an upswing in nationalistic fervor, competitive geopolitics, and power plays reminiscent of the Cold War era. Yet, the greater likelihood seems to lean towards social wars. Our societies, globally, evolve on the verge of divisions and disruptions. They evolve irreversibly. Economic inequalities, racial and ethnic tensions, political polarization, and ideological schisms threaten to pull us apart from within. This internal fragmentation, fueled by rapid information dissemination and echo chambers and gate-keepers, has the potential to erupt into large-scale civil unrest. In such a scenario, the battle lines are blurred, and the enemy is not across the border but within it. The struggles are not merely for territory but for the hearts, minds, and the soul of societies.
In reflecting on these possibilities, it becomes evident that the need for dialogue, understanding, and bridge-building has never been more crucial. Just as Mann’s characters grapple with their own turbulence, so too must we navigate our global challenges, ideally without succumbing to the extremes of conflict.
In sharing my thoughts on the seven capital vices prevalent in the West, I wish to emphasize that this article reflects my personal viewpoint. Recognizing the diversity of opinions and experiences, I believe that open dialogue is essential for growth and understanding. It is my sincere hope that my perspective is taken in the spirit of thoughtful discourse and contributes to the democratic societal dynamics that shape our world.
In a world brimming with complex challenges, the Western world finds itself grappling with a series of pressing issues that demand attention and solutions. As we navigate these turbulent times, it’s essential to reflect on the areas where our societies may be falling short. The foundation of the Western world rests on a heritage inherited from the Greeks, enriched by the Christian religion, and illuminated by the Renaissance. These values form the very essence that shapes its historical narrative and ideals. Built upon principles of freedom, the pursuit of truth, and societal progress, this legacy has propelled the West forward. The prospect of relinquishing these values is alarming, invoking a harrowing vision of a potential new dark age. The loss of these guiding principles could usher in an era marred by uncertainty, ignorance, and regression. The West’s adherence to these principles remains pivotal in safeguarding its legacy of enlightenment and ensuring a future founded on the foundations of wisdom, liberty, and cultural advancement.
The current state of Europe is often seen as perplexing and influenced by a combination of factors. This complexity can partly be attributed to a perceived absence of responsible and visionary political leadership. Challenges arise from a potential dearth of comprehensive strategies and a lack of awareness regarding the existing crises. This can sometimes lead to a sense of deliberate manipulation or negligence in addressing the issues at hand.
The issue of intent underlying the crisis is complex and subject to varying interpretations. Some contend that specific economic or political interests could stand to gain from the destabilization or fragmentation of Europe. Geopolitical dynamics, economic rivalries, and ideological tensions on both regional and global scales might conceivably wield influence over unfolding events. Equally significant is the monumental clash between two divergent forces: the BRICS and the Western world.
Could it be that strategists in the West are actively pursuing measures to curtail the fossil fuel-driven energy foundation of the BRICS nations by leveraging the discourse on climate change? Is there a concerted effort to drive the adoption of solar, wind, and nuclear power as renewable energy sources, thereby reshaping the global economic landscape to align with this novel arena of conflict, all in the hopes of preserving their prevailing influence?
First Sin: Climate Change Obsession and Alarmism
The prominence of climate change as a global concern in the West is undeniable, with many scientists asserting that human activity plays a significant role. However, it’s essential to acknowledge that a minority of experts still doubt the extent of anthropogenic influence or the alarmism that permeates the West. History reminds us that climate changes have occurred naturally, transforming once-tropical regions into deserts and vice versa. While recognizing the importance of addressing climate change, in particular the huge amount of pollution and CO2 caused by the Industrial Revolution, we must avoid tunnel vision that detracts from other crucial issues demanding our attention.
It’s essential to strike a balance between concern and practical action [1]. The creation of a climate change narrative could serve as a pretext for governments and international bodies to impose stricter regulations, exert more control over industries, and influence individual behaviors. We can additionally speculate if the military isn’t using it for warfare [2] or as a means to reduce the economic importance of countries producing gas and oil belonging to the rising bloc known as BRICS. The reality is that about 80% of the energy sources needed to maintain societal progress in the world are based on fossil fuels, and the BRICS have plenty of them (!) despite their political regimes living at the border of instability and not knowing what human rights are.
«Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa have invited six other countries to join the BRICS grouping next year to create a geopolitical counterweight to the G7 and potentially a framework to reduce dependence on Western financial systems. The expansion of BRICS could have important implications for energy investment and trade, since it brings together large mineral resource holders and major oil producers, as well as some of the fastest growing energy consumers.»
On the other side, the US, the Western superpower does not enough for this development, nor Europe:
«With regard to oil, the main component in gasoline, the U.S. consumes more than it produces, and has for decades. Flatly stated, the United States is not oil-independent, and hasn’t been since the early days of oil production. There has been a big increase in U.S. oil output since 2008, due largely to the advent of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking. Fracking has downsides, including possible environmental damage from toxic chemicals used in the process and intrusive drilling operations in areas where there had never been oil or gas operations before. Still, it has catapulted the United States into pole position as the world’s top oil producer.»
Historical Climate Changes: The Earth’s climate has experienced significant shifts throughout history, long before human industrial activity. For instance, during the Eocene epoch, Antarctica was covered in lush vegetation, and Greenland was once much warmer than it is today.
Variability and Natural Cycles: Climate scientists acknowledge that natural variability and cycles play a role in temperature fluctuations. The Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age are examples of past climatic shifts driven by natural factors.
Diversity of Scientific Opinion: While the consensus on anthropogenic climate change is strong, there is a minority of scientists who express skepticism about the extent of human influence. This diversity of opinion within the scientific community underscores the complexity of the issue.
Balancing Priorities: The intense focus on climate change may inadvertently divert attention and resources from other pressing challenges, such as poverty, healthcare, and education. An integrated approach is necessary to address multiple societal issues simultaneously.
Policy Implications: Policymakers must consider the broader socioeconomic implications of climate policies. Overzealous regulations may inadvertently harm economic growth and job creation, particularly in vulnerable communities.
Watch this pledge to stop climate change misinformation by Steve Koonin, former Undersecretary for Science in the Obama Administration.
So, we may ask: Aren’t politicians and strategists demolishing the West?
Second Sin: Lack of Overreaching Ideologyand extreme susceptibility to losing its Values
Other pressing matters also warrant our attention. The chasm between the wealthy and the underprivileged persists, despite being a critical concern. The healthcare system requires bolstering, and social safety nets must be expanded to accommodate vulnerable populations. While young voices and progressive movements embrace the climate cause, it’s crucial to remember that a balanced approach encompasses multiple challenges faced by society, not just one. Between the protests and movements of May 1968, which were centered around social justice and cultural change, and the current activism focused on addressing climate change, much of civic activism changed.
However, I believe that it’s imperative to move beyond merely focusing on the economic interests of large corporations or the singular objective of addressing climate issues. Europe’s vision must encompass a broader perspective that nurtures a sense of identity beyond the corporate landscape and the climate agenda. Europe’s trajectory should prioritize the well-being of its citizens, offering pathways toward freedom of expression, economic empowerment, and the realization of individual aspirations. Europe must return to a period of creativity and citizen empowerment via economic leverage. In a period of outstanding richness, where did the money sink?
The implications of the actual reductionist (and not scientific) doctrine’s dominance are:
Single-Issue Perspective: The overwhelming emphasis on climate change, war in Europe, and a sense of panic created by the so-called BRICS-themselves ab initio tied up on a tight system of ropes due to the ultra-reductionist nature of their political regimes—as the primary concern can overshadow other urgent issues such as poverty, inequality, healthcare, and conflict resolution, the core or West problems.
Neglect of Socioeconomic Challenges: It’s crucial not to neglect the socioeconomic challenges faced by a significant portion of the global population. Diverting resources solely toward climate initiatives could exacerbate existing inequalities.
Representation and Advocacy: The climate change movement is often championed by the young and the left, leading to the potential marginalization of other critical voices. The traditional focus of the left on income distribution and social justice should not be overshadowed by the climate narrative.
Policy Fragmentation: Overemphasis on climate change could lead to fragmented policy approaches that ignore the interconnectivity of challenges. An integrated approach is necessary for sustainable development.
Global Perspective: While the West often dominates climate discussions, it’s essential to consider the viewpoints of developing countries that may have different priorities due to immediate challenges like access to clean water and basic healthcare.
Amid the challenges of declining education, erosion of civil discourse, and rising polarization, another concerning aspect emerges: the absence of a unifying and empowering ideology that can provide citizens with a sense of purpose and direction. Throughout history, societies have often been driven by overarching ideals that guide collective actions and inspire individuals to work together for a shared vision. However, in recent times, the lack of such an ideology has left a void that can be detrimental to societal cohesion and progress.
Third Sin: Income Inequality
The Western world struggles with a persistent and troubling income gap. The concentration of wealth among a select few remains a stark reality, while countless individuals grapple with financial instability. Addressing this issue necessitates concerted efforts to reevaluate economic policies and enact meaningful reforms that foster equitable prosperity.
Addressing income inequality is not only a matter of fairness but also critical for social stability and economic progress. Here’s a closer look at the consequences of failing to adequately address income inequality:
Wealth Concentration: A significant portion of wealth is concentrated in the hands of a tiny fraction of the population, perpetuating a cycle of economic disparity. The top 1% often possess a disproportionate share of resources.
Economic Mobility: High-income inequality can hinder upward mobility, trapping individuals and families in generational poverty. Limited access to education, healthcare, and opportunities further exacerbates this issue.
Social Cohesion: Income inequality strains social cohesion and trust within communities. Disparities in living conditions and access to basic services can create divisions and hinder cooperation.
Health and Education: Those at the lower end of the income spectrum often lack access to quality healthcare and education. This not only affects individuals’ well-being but also impacts society’s overall productivity and potential.
Political Influence: Wealthy individuals and corporations wield considerable political influence, potentially shaping policies in ways that favor their interests. This can lead to policies that perpetuate inequality rather than address it.
Economic Growth: Extreme income inequality can lead to reduced consumer spending and lower demand for goods and services, hindering overall economic growth.
Social Unrest: Widening income gaps have historically been associated with social unrest and instability. The lack of opportunities and the feeling of exclusion can lead to protests and demonstrations.
Global Impact: Income inequality is not confined to national borders. Global economic disparities can lead to migration, conflicts, and inequalities in international trade and development.
Policy Solutions: Addressing income inequality requires a combination of policies such as progressive taxation, social safety nets, quality education, and fair labor practices.
Long-Term Consequences: Failure to address income inequality can lead to intergenerational poverty, limiting future generations’ potential and perpetuating a cycle of inequality.
Balancing economic growth with efforts to reduce income inequality is crucial for sustainable development and the well-being of societies. Recognizing the importance of a fair distribution of resources and opportunities is essential for social harmony and progress.
Imagine a scenario where not just 1% but a larger segment of the population could be categorized as “wealthy.” A society with a higher percentage of its population enjoying higher income and wealth can bring forth numerous positive outcomes. These include diminished income inequality, increased consumer spending, improved quality of life, enhanced social mobility, augmented tax revenue for public services, and more philanthropic endeavors. Additionally, a larger group of financially secure individuals can foster innovation, and entrepreneurship, reduce social tensions, and bolster social cohesion. Nonetheless, the realization of these benefits is out of the debate, the West turned reductionist for the benefit of a very few, only focusing on the wildfires, climate change, and the Ukrainian war (notwithstanding the horrendous drama involved since its inception).
Fourth Sin: Widespread Corruption
A corrosive undercurrent of corruption permeates societies, with a small segment holding undue influence over the destiny of nations. While a privileged few wield substantial power, many individuals struggle to make ends meet. Tackling corruption is pivotal for restoring faith in institutions and creating an environment of fairness and justice.
Corruption, often hidden behind closed doors, has far-reaching consequences that extend beyond financial losses. It erodes trust in institutions, undermines economic growth, and perpetuates inequality. Here’s a closer look at the impact of widespread corruption:
Inequality Amplification: Corruption tends to benefit a small elite who can exploit their positions for personal gain, widening the gap between the rich and the poor. Those with access to resources and connections benefit, while the rest suffer.
Impaired Development: Corrupt practices divert funds away from essential public services such as healthcare, education, and infrastructure. This hinders overall development and leaves the most vulnerable without access to basic needs.
Economic Distortion: Corruption distorts the economy by favoring well-connected individuals and businesses over those that are more deserving. This discourages fair competition and innovation, hindering economic growth.
Political Manipulation: Corrupt officials can manipulate political processes, stifling democracy and preventing genuine representation of citizens’ interests. This can lead to policies that perpetuate inequality and serve the interests of the elite.
Loss of Trust: Widespread corruption erodes trust in institutions and governments. Citizens become disillusioned, feeling that the system is rigged against them. This can lead to apathy and a lack of engagement in civic activities.
Brain Drain: In countries with high levels of corruption, skilled individuals may seek opportunities elsewhere, leading to a “brain drain.” This further hampers a country’s potential for growth and development.
Social Instability: Corruption contributes to social unrest and instability. When citizens perceive that the system is unfair and benefits only a few, they may resort to protests, demonstrations, and even violent uprisings.
Global Impact: Corruption is a global issue that affects international trade and cooperation. It hampers economic partnerships and can lead to unequal negotiations between countries.
Barriers to Investment: Investors are hesitant to commit resources to countries with rampant corruption, as they fear that their investments will not be protected. This can hinder foreign direct investment and economic progress.
Rule of Law: Corruption weakens the rule of law, making it difficult for citizens to access justice and equality before the law. This further perpetuates a sense of injustice and inequality.
Collective Action Needed: Combating corruption requires collective efforts from governments, civil society, and international organizations. Transparent governance, accountability mechanisms, and anti-corruption legislation are crucial steps.
Long-Term Consequences: Widespread corruption can lead to a cycle of poverty, where resources are siphoned away from the most vulnerable. This can hinder intergenerational upward mobility.
Fifth Sin: Perpetual Wars
The West’s involvement in protracted conflicts raises questions about the motivations and repercussions of permanent warfare. As the world grapples with the looming specter of nuclear conflict, it’s imperative to reevaluate our approach to international relations and prioritize diplomacy, cooperation, and peaceful resolutions. Not being neutral about the Ukrainian war may sound propagandistic, may help to hide from the public view dangerous liaisons, not allowing watch the channel Russia Today is an action from the past, when fascist regimes were destroying the world and substantially the West.
However, beneath the surface, a palpable undertone resonates—the West’s struggle to find a unifying purpose. This sentiment is interwoven with various elements, ranging from a sole pursuit of financial prosperity in the market to an unwavering fixation on the realm of sexual freedom, characterized by minutious categorizations of human desire. Simultaneously, critiques against notions of inspiration and the propagation of misinformation reverberate, leading to an environment where all perspectives seem open to condemnation.
The persistence of conflict and the prevalence of wars across the globe are deeply concerning issues that warrant attention. The consequences of ongoing conflicts are far-reaching and impact societies on multiple levels. Wars destroy the environment. Those in the West involved in the exclusive combat against human-induced climate change should all have a say against the permanent wars and the warlords. The theme should be present in their public actions. And human conditions. It is not the poor or the common citizen that is human-inducing the change in climate. And who doubts that it was the West that caused the majority of the “human-induced pollution”?
Humanitarian Catastrophe: Prolonged wars result in humanitarian crises, displacing millions of people and causing immense suffering. Civilians, especially women, and children, bear the brunt of these conflicts.
Economic Drain: Wars drain resources that could be invested in development, education, and healthcare. The costs of warfare divert funds from critical public services, perpetuating poverty and inequality.
Regional Instability: Ongoing conflicts often lead to regional instability, creating a cycle of violence that spills across borders. Neighboring countries can become entangled in the conflict, exacerbating tensions.
Disruption of Development: Wars disrupt the progress of developing countries. Infrastructure is destroyed, agricultural production is disrupted, and businesses struggle to function, hindering economic growth.
Cycle of Revenge: Prolonged conflicts can create a cycle of revenge and hatred. When violence becomes the norm, it can be difficult to transition to peace, and grievances can span generations.
Loss of Cultural Heritage: Cultural heritage, including historical sites and artifacts, can be irreparably damaged during conflicts. This loss not only impacts a nation’s identity but also its global cultural heritage.
International Relations: Perpetual wars strain international relations, making it difficult to engage in diplomacy and cooperation. Trust between nations erodes, leading to isolation and further conflict.
Militarization: Societies at war often become militarized, with the military-industrial complex gaining influence. This can lead to a prioritization of defense spending over social welfare, exacerbating inequality.
Social Disintegration: Wars can lead to social disintegration as communities fracture along ethnic, religious, or political lines. Social cohesion is undermined, making post-conflict reconciliation challenging.
Human Rights Violations: Conflicts are often accompanied by human rights abuses, including indiscriminate violence, sexual violence, and forced displacement. These violations have long-lasting consequences.
Lack of Resources for Solutions: Resources that could be used for conflict resolution and peacebuilding are diverted to sustain warfare. These resources are desperately needed to address the root causes of conflict.
Mental and Emotional Trauma: War leaves lasting psychological scars on survivors, soldiers, and entire communities. Healing from trauma takes time and resources, which are often in short supply during conflicts.
Environmental Degradation: Wars have severe environmental impacts, including deforestation, pollution, and the destruction of ecosystems. This further exacerbates the challenges of post-conflict recovery.
Hope for Future Generations: Ending perpetual wars is essential for creating a hopeful future for coming generations. Peaceful societies can invest in education, healthcare, and sustainable development.
Sixth Sin: Disintegration of Europe
Once heralded as a beacon of unity, Europe now confronts disintegration as divisions emerge among member states and its de-industrialization [3] (If only! Rulers and politicians wish for their economies to be based not on fossil fuels, but on a technology that is not yet entirely prepared). The challenges of migration, economic disparities, and cultural differences threaten the European project’s coherence. Fostering a united front demands a concerted effort to bridge divides and preserve the values that underpin the continent’s identity.
The disintegration of Europe, characterized by rising nationalism, populism, and religious divisions [4,5], for example, with the Islamic Party wanting to transform Belgium into an Islamic state and challenges to the European Union’s unity, poses significant threats to regional stability, cooperation, and progress. This sin encompasses a range of interconnected issues:
Nationalism and Populism: The resurgence of nationalism and populism in various European countries has led to the rise of leaders and parties advocating for closed borders, anti-immigrant policies, and a rejection of international cooperation.
Brexit: The United Kingdom’s decision to leave the European Union (EU) has marked a significant turning point. Brexit reflects the challenges of maintaining unity within the EU and has implications for trade, economic relationships, and the future of the bloc. You may read the book Butler to the World: The book the oligarchs don’t want you to read – how Britain became the servant of tycoons, tax dodgers, kleptocrats and criminals” [8].
Economic Disparities: Economic disparities between EU member states have strained relations within the union. Countries with struggling economies often face skepticism about their ability to contribute to the collective welfare.
Erosion of Trust: The erosion of trust among EU member states has hindered decision-making and cooperation on issues ranging from migration to climate change. This lack of cohesion weakens the EU’s global influence.
Challenges to Democracy: The rise of illiberal democracies and autocratic tendencies in certain EU countries undermines democratic norms and institutions, leading to concerns about the erosion of human rights and freedoms.
Fragmented Responses: Challenges such as migration, climate change, and security require coordinated responses. The disintegration of Europe can lead to fragmented approaches that are less effective in addressing these global challenges.
Economic Uncertainty: Disintegration and uncertainty can have negative impacts on the economy, affecting trade, investment, and job growth. Businesses may hesitate to invest in an unstable environment.
The strain on International Relations: The disintegration of Europe can strain international relations, impacting partnerships and alliances that have contributed to peace and stability.
Weakened Regional Identity: The concept of a united Europe, which was intended to prevent future conflicts, is challenged by the disintegration. This weakens the sense of a shared European identity.
Loss of Soft Power: The EU’s position as a leading advocate for democracy, human rights, and diplomacy on a global scale is in danger due to internal disagreements and neglect of their fundamental values. This diminishes the EU’s capacity to make a positive impact on global events.
Seventh Sin: Decline in Education and Universities, Erosion of Civil Discourse and Polarization
Education has long been a cornerstone of societal progress. However, the Western world witnessed a decline in educational standards and university quality. Investing in education is not just an investment in individuals; it’s an investment in the collective future, nurturing critical thinking, innovation, and the advancement of society [4].
The West is witnessing a troubling erosion of civil discourse and increasing polarization. Instead of fostering constructive debates and seeking common ground, society is becoming more divided along political, ideological, and cultural lines. Look at the divide in huge countries such as the US, France, Spain, and even the UK with Brexit. This polarization hinders effective problem-solving and prevents collaboration on pressing issues. It also perpetuates an “us versus them” mentality that obstructs meaningful progress in areas such as social justice, economic inequality, and global cooperation [5].
Young people in the West often face significant challenges when seeking employment due to a convergence of factors. Economic downturns, technological advancements leading to automation, and global competition can restrict job opportunities. Mismatched skills resulting from educational systems struggling to keep pace with evolving industries, coupled with the high costs of higher education, contribute to the issue. The job market’s demand for experience can hinder entry for young job seekers, who also contend with age-related biases. Instability in the job market, characterized by gig economy roles and temporary work, further complicates securing stable positions. Limited professional networks and the prevalence of hidden job markets disadvantage younger individuals. High living costs, particularly housing expenses, can strain the financial feasibility of relocating for jobs. The psychological toll of extended job searches exacerbates the challenges [7].
This sin encompasses several interconnected aspects:
Educational Quality: The quality of education in many places is under threat with inadequate funding, outdated curricula, and a lack of resources for educators. This affects the preparedness of future generations to navigate complex societal challenges.
Diminished Investment: Decreased investment in education can lead to overcrowded classrooms, outdated technology, and limited extracurricular activities. A lack of investment undermines the holistic development of students.
Critical Thinking: A decline in education can hinder the development of critical thinking skills, leaving individuals susceptible to misinformation and manipulation. This impacts their ability to make informed decisions and participate in constructive discussions.
Erosion of Research: Universities are often hubs of innovation and research. However, a decline in funding and support for higher education institutions can hinder their ability to conduct groundbreaking research that addresses pressing societal issues.
Polarization and Echo Chambers: The erosion of civil discourse has contributed to increasing polarization in society. Individuals are retreating into echo chambers where their beliefs are reinforced, inhibiting the exchange of diverse perspectives.
Fake News and Misinformation: The decline in critical thinking and the erosion of civil discourse have facilitated the spread of fake news and misinformation. This undermines trust in institutions and the media.
Political Divisiveness: Polarization and the erosion of civil discourse have seeped into political discourse, hindering collaboration and bipartisan solutions. Political leaders may prioritize ideological agendas over the well-being of the population.
Threat to Democracy: The erosion of civil discourse weakens democratic institutions. When constructive dialogue is replaced by inflammatory rhetoric, democratic decision-making processes are undermined.
Suppression of Dissent: A decline in civil discourse can lead to the suppression of dissenting opinions and the stifling of voices that challenge the status quo. This limits societal progress and innovation.
Loss of Empathy: Polarization can lead to the dehumanization of individuals with differing views. This erodes empathy and understanding, preventing meaningful dialogue and collaboration.
Escalation of Conflicts: Polarization can escalate conflicts, both online and offline, leading to hostility, division, and even violence.
Threat to Rational Discourse: A society devoid of civil discourse loses its ability to engage in rational and evidence-based discussions. This hampers problem-solving and collaborative efforts.
Impact on Youth: The decline in education and civil discourse disproportionately impacts young people, who are shaping the future. They may become disillusioned by the state of affairs and disengage from civic life.
Intellectual Stagnation: Universities play a pivotal role in advancing knowledge and fostering intellectual growth. A decline in their resources and influence can lead to intellectual stagnation.
Remedy through Education: Strengthening education and universities can be a remedy for these challenges. Investing in quality education and promoting a culture of civil discourse can help counter polarization and misinformation.
In Conclusion
In a world where challenges are multifaceted and interconnected, the power to address these “sins” lies not only with governments and institutions but also with the collective aspirations of citizens. By embracing the responsibility to be informed, to challenge the status quo, and to collaboratively imagine alternative futures, individuals can transcend the role of passive observers and evolve into active agents of positive change. In doing so, they can reshape the trajectory of Western societies and revive the nature of their democracies, infusing them with the vitality of diverse thought, purposeful action, and a renewed sense of shared destiny. The path forward is not predetermined; it is a canvas upon which the ideas and actions of citizens have the potential to paint a new narrative—one that defies the grip of passivity and ushers in a renaissance of thought, unity, and progress.
A little over ten years ago, Mike Hulme, Professor of Human Geography at the University of Cambridge, in his book, Climate Change isn’t Everything: Liberating Climate Politics from Alarmism, introduced the term “climate reductionism,” which revolved around relying solely on climate science predictions to envision the future, inadvertently limiting the scope of possibilities. However, in recent times, Climatism has taken this reductionist approach to a more profound level, not only narrowing our outlook on the future but also potentially constricting the scope of contemporary political action.
Climatism poses a concern, as it endeavors to prioritize the achievement of net-zero carbon emissions by specific deadlines, relegating other crucial political goals to a secondary position. Consequently, our political, social, and ecological well-being faces the risk of being overshadowed by an overly myopic focus on climate change. The excessively myopic focus on climate change might inadvertently divert attention from addressing other pressing societal issues, such as the alarming wealth gap between the rich and poor and various social inequalities. While the possible human-induced climate change (in my opinion lacking scientific solid evidence, look out the previous post) cannot be understated, an exclusive concentration on this singular challenge risks overshadowing other critical matters that demand our attention and resources. Issues like poverty, healthcare disparities, education gaps, and social justice concerns require equal focus and concerted efforts from policymakers and communities alike. As the outstanding astronomer and public speaker Carl Sagan popularized (in 1979) the aphorism “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence”, the science of climate change needs extraordinary proofs, not weak forms of evidence.
Climate change is undoubtedly a complex and multifaceted problem that needs a serious scientific approach, not a political and ideological one. However, so are the various social, economic, and political challenges faced by societies globally. By maintaining a balanced approach, we can simultaneously tackle climate change, whether it is the manifestation of natural phenomena, the result of humans’ efforts to avoid another ice age [1], or the consequence of human malevolent action due to an unregulated form of capitalism. It is crucial to foster a holistic understanding of the interconnectedness of these challenges and implement policies and initiatives that comprehensively address the needs of society. By doing so, we can work towards creating a more just, equitable, and sustainable world for everyone, instead of perpetuating a form of mythology that favors only a few and abandons humanity to a servile form of life.
This ideology is prone to “naturalizing” global issues, attributing them solely to climate change. Thus, meteorological events such as hurricanes and heatwaves are perceived as mere reflections of human agency, disregarding the inherent natural aspects of these occurrences. It is essential, however, to acknowledge that while human actions can indeed influence the intensity and frequency of these events, they are also inherent features of our planet’s climate. Addressing such issues requires a more comprehensive approach, encompassing local social, economic, and political factors.
Allow me to emphasize that acknowledging Climatism does not negate the possible scientific evidence of human-induced climate change (again, in my present view, lacking strong scientific evidence) or the significance of mitigating its effects. Instead, it calls for a departure from narrow perspectives and the adoption of a more inclusive, contextually sensitive approach to confront the challenges of climate change in our daily lives.
Let us dispel reductionist ideologies and empower ourselves to address climate change (from a scientific and not ideological perspective) within its broader social and political context.
In this blog post, we present a pledge to teach science and philosophy of science at the University in the hope of cultivating a new breed of individuals capable of bringing about positive changes in our societies. By challenging existing paradigms and encouraging critical thinking, we aim to foster a deeper understanding of the complexities inherent in scientific inquiry and its broader implications. Our goal is to empower students, and citizens, with the knowledge and skills necessary to navigate the ever-evolving landscape of scientific thought and contribute to a more enlightened and progressive society. Do we need a MetaScience?
Galileo Galilei, a prominent physicist, mathematician, and astronomer of the 17th century, recognized the power and importance of mathematics in the language of science. He famously stated, “The book of nature is written in the language of mathematics.” Galileo believed that mathematics provided a unique and precise way to describe and understand the fundamental laws and patterns governing the natural world. Galileo’s view on the language of mathematics stemmed from his belief in the inherent order and regularity of the universe. He saw mathematics as a universal language that could express these underlying principles. According to him, by studying the physical world through mathematical models and quantitative measurements, scientists could uncover the mathematical laws that govern natural phenomena.
Science can be considered a language in a metaphorical sense, if you don’t understand what are groups, functions, wavefunctions, operators, Ricci tensors, and so on, you are at pair with a foreign in country speaking another language. Anyway, science is more accurately described as a systematic method of acquiring knowledge about the natural world. Language itself is a tool that humans use to communicate ideas, thoughts, and information, while science is a methodology that involves observation, experimentation, and the formulation of theories and models to explain natural phenomena.
In scientific practice, language plays a crucial role in documenting and communicating scientific findings and concepts. Scientists use a specialized vocabulary and specific terminology to describe their observations, experiments, and theories. This specialized language allows scientists to convey complex ideas and information precisely within the scientific community.
So, science is a kind of language that you understand, or not. However, quite interestingly, Humans communicate in their lives by means of “linear” and “nonlinear” languages. Those are their amazing differences:
Linear language refers to communication that follows a straightforward and logical structure. It moves from one point to another, with a clear progression of ideas. Some examples of linear language include everyday conversations, technical manuals, scientific papers (although they may have some non-linear elements in certain sections), and procedural instructions. Linear language relies on cause-and-effect relationships, logical reasoning, and clear explanations. The majority of languages are linear, for example, European languages, Chinese, and Japanese.
Nonlinear Language: Nonlinear languages don’t always follow a step-by-step or direct structure. Instead, they have a more lively and flexible way of organizing ideas. They can include repeating patterns, loops, or connections between ideas that don’t necessarily follow a straight line. Nonlinear languages focus on the connections and relationships between concepts, rather than just a linear progression. They can be more imaginative, metaphorical, and open to interpretation. Examples of nonlinear languages include poetry, literature, philosophical texts, storytelling, abstract expressions, and certain forms of artistic expression. Arabic and Mayan languages are often structured in a nonlinear way.
Of course, language is a versatile tool that allows for a wide range of expression, and it can incorporate linear and nonlinear elements depending on the context, purpose, and style of communication and that’s the main reason why we understand each other, no matter your origin.
But since WWII and Hiroshima and Nagasaki, or during the Nazi era, the Nazi regime employed pseudoscientific theories to support their racist ideology, including distorted notions of genetics, their understanding of genetics based on flawed interpretations and discriminatory beliefs, not genuine scientific inquiry, or the Lysenko case in the former Soviet Union, where the Lysenko’s ideas found favor with the Soviet government due to their alignment with Marxist ideology, which rejected the notion of genetic determinism and embraced the idea of environmentally influenced inheritance. We all sense that science may easily be manipulated, or misused for the benefit of itself as a “branch of knowledge” or for the benefit of ideological trends in History, or the people in power. The misuse is directly out of the machinery of the law of causality that, as a matter of fact, has a few potential dangers. Among a few:
A strict cause-and-effect approach can oversimplify complex systems and phenomena, disregarding the interplay of multiple factors, feedback loops, and emergent properties. In the 19th century, medicine embraced the theory of single-causation, or “mono-causality.” This theory attributed diseases to a single factor or agent, known as the “specific cause.” An example of oversimplification occurred with the Miasma Theory and Disease Transmission, where diseases like cholera, malaria, and the bubonic plague were believed to be caused solely by foul odors or “bad air” from decomposing matter, sewage, or stagnant water. This oversimplification ignored other important factors involved in disease transmission [1,2].
Reductionism is the exclusive focus on cause-and-effect relationships, which can lead to oversimplification of complex phenomena. It overlooks the interconnectedness of various factors, limiting our understanding of holistic systems. In the field of genetics in the early 20th century, there was an example of reductionism regarding inheritance and gene expression. George Beadle and Edward Tatum proposed the “one gene, one enzyme” hypothesis, suggesting that each gene is responsible for producing a specific enzyme. Their experiments with Neurospora crassa supported this hypothesis by demonstrating the loss of enzymatic activities due to mutations in specific genes. While their hypothesis provided valuable insights, it also oversimplified the complexity of gene expression and biological systems [3,4].
Ignoring Feedback Loops: Many systems involve feedback loops, where the effects of an action loop back influence the initial cause. Neglecting these feedback loops can lead to an incomplete or misleading understanding of the overall dynamics and behavior of a system. For example, the pendulum experiences resistance due to factors like air resistance or friction at its pivot point. This feedback loop involving damping can significantly influence the pendulum’s behavior. If a scientist neglects the feedback loop of damping, they may draw the wrong conclusion.
Numerous natural systems exhibit nonlinear behavior, where small changes in initial conditions can lead to large or unexpected outcomes. Linear cause-and-effect thinking may not capture or predict the behavior of such systems. Chaos theory, which emerged in the late 20th century, focuses on studying nonlinear systems, especially those highly sensitive to initial conditions. An example in the context of chaos theory is the weather system and the butterfly effect. Mathematician and meteorologist Edward Lorenz discovered the butterfly effect in 1963 while studying weather patterns. It suggests that small changes in initial conditions can have significant and far-reaching effects on dynamic systems like the weather. Lorenz observed that even minor alterations in the initial conditions of a weather model could lead to drastically different predictions over time. This sensitivity to initial conditions is a characteristic of nonlinear systems [5].
Complex Interactions: Cause and effect thinking may struggle to capture the complexity of interactions and relationships within complex systems. In many cases, the behavior of a system cannot be solely explained by individual cause-and-effect relationships but arises from the collective interactions and interdependencies of multiple elements. One historical example of complex interactions in science can be found in the study of ecosystems and biodiversity. Understanding the intricate relationships and interdependencies within ecosystems has challenged simplistic cause-and-effect thinking and emphasized the importance of considering complex interactions. The study of trophic interactions, or the feeding relationships among species in an ecosystem, provides an example of complex interactions within ecological systems. Historically, simplified models often focused on linear cause-and-effect relationships in trophic interactions. For instance, it was assumed that increasing the population of a predator species would lead to a decrease in the population of its prey species. However, as ecological research progressed, it became evident that the relationships between species within food webs are far more complex. Factors such as indirect effects, feedback loops, and cascading impacts can significantly influence species dynamics and ecosystem stability. One historical example highlighting complex interactions is the case of the gray wolf (Canis lupus) reintroduction in Yellowstone National Park. The absence of wolves for several decades disrupted the natural balance in the ecosystem. When wolves were reintroduced in the 1990s, it led to a series of unexpected cascading effects [6].
Unintended Consequences: Focusing solely on immediate cause-and-effect relationships may overlook the potential for unintended consequences or secondary effects. It may fail to account for the broader and long-term impacts of actions or interventions within a complex system. One historical example in science that illustrates unintended consequences resulting from a failure to consider broader impacts is the case of the introduction of the cane toad (Rhinella marina) in Australia. In the 1930s, cane toads were introduced to Australia with the intention of controlling sugar cane pests, specifically the cane beetle (Dermolepida albohirtum). However, this introduction had unforeseen and adverse consequences on the Australian ecosystem [7].
The above historical examples illustrate clearly how the systematic use of the Law of Causality in thinking may lead astray anyone [1-4,8-10]. The power of the law of causality, so Westerner as it can be, didn’t impeach that there have been philosophers and scientists who have criticized certain aspects of the structure of scientific thought. These criticisms often focus on limitations, assumptions, or biases within the scientific method and its underlying philosophical foundations. Here are a few notable examples:
Thomas Kuhn: Kuhn was a philosopher of science who proposed the concept of “paradigm shifts” in his influential book “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.” He argued that science does not progress solely through the accumulation of knowledge but undergoes revolutionary shifts in which old paradigms are replaced by new ones. Kuhn highlighted the role of social, cultural, and historical factors in shaping scientific thought, challenging the notion of science as a purely objective and cumulative enterprise [11,11a].
Paul Feyerabend: Feyerabend was a philosopher of science known for his book “Against Method.” He criticized the idea of a universal scientific method and argued for “epistemological anarchism,” which advocated for the inclusion of multiple methodologies and approaches in scientific inquiry. Feyerabend emphasized the importance of creativity, imagination, and methodological pluralism in scientific progress [12,12a].
Bruno Latour: Latour, a sociologist, and philosopher of science, has criticized the idea of a clear demarcation between science and society. He argues that scientific knowledge is constructed within complex social networks and that scientific facts are not separate from social and cultural influences. Latour’s work questions the objectivity and neutrality often attributed to scientific knowledge [13,13a].
Feminist and Postcolonial Critiques: Various feminist and postcolonial scholars have criticized science for its alleged biases, exclusionary practices, and the marginalization of certain perspectives. They argue that scientific knowledge has historically been shaped by dominant cultural, social, and gendered norms, leading to the underrepresentation of diverse voices and experiences in scientific discourse [14,14a].
Because the Law of Causality can be the origin of a thought trap that can result from not being able to handle complex interactions is oversimplification or seeking single causes for complex phenomena. Because when faced with a complex system or issue, individuals might attempt to reduce it to a single cause-and-effect relationship, disregarding the intricate web of interactions at play. For instance, consider the issue of obesity. In a simplified cause-and-effect mindset, one might attribute obesity solely to individual behavior, such as overeating and lack of exercise. However, this oversimplification neglects the numerous complex interactions and factors involved in the development of obesity. Biological factors, genetics, socio-economic status, access to healthy food options, cultural norms, mental health, and systemic influences all contribute to the complexity of the issue. By falling into the thought trap of oversimplification, individuals may overlook the need for multifaceted solutions and interventions that address the interplay of these various factors. They might place excessive blame on individuals without considering the broader social, economic, and environmental contexts that influence behaviors and health outcomes. Recognizing the complexity of interactions and embracing a more holistic perspective allows for a deeper understanding of the issue. It opens up avenues for comprehensive interventions, policy changes, and systemic approaches that take into account the interconnectedness of factors and promote more effective and sustainable solutions.
The misuse of the Law of causality can also bring trouble to our societies, immersed in a kind of primitive form of “civilization”. The systematic violation of immigration-related regulations can encourage prejudice, reinforce negative stereotypes, and impede the growth of inclusive and egalitarian societies. It may thwart efforts to address the difficulties of immigration and prevent the contributions and humanity of immigrants from being acknowledged. Fostering inclusive societies that celebrate diversity and uphold human rights requires promoting accurate and comprehensive understandings of the factors that contribute to immigration as well as the effects it has.
But there is hope on the horizon. Another view brought to Science is “synchronicity”, a concept developed by Swiss psychiatrist Carl Jung. It refers to meaningful coincidences that cannot be explained by conventional causality. According to Jung, synchronicity involves the occurrence of events that are not causally connected but are still meaningfully related. In synchronistic experiences, two or more events or elements converge in a way that seems to defy traditional notions of cause and effect. These events often share a common theme, pattern, or symbolic significance, creating a sense of meaningful connection or resonance. Jung believed that synchronicity is significant because it suggests the existence of a deeper, interconnected reality beyond the limitations of linear cause-and-effect relationships. He proposed that synchronistic events arise from the interplay between the collective unconscious (a shared reservoir of archetypal symbols and experiences) and an individual’s personal experiences or thoughts. Synchronicity should not be confused with mere coincidences. While coincidences are chance occurrences that lack apparent meaning, synchronicity implies a meaningful connection that resonates with an individual’s psyche or experience. Among examples of synchronicity, we might include instances where you think about a long-lost friend, and they suddenly contact you out of the blue or encounter a series of unrelated events that all revolve around a particular theme or symbol in your life.
Synchronicity is a topic that continues to generate discussion and debate, both within the field of psychology and in broader contexts. Some consider synchronicity as a manifestation of meaningful connections in the universe, while others approach it with skepticism and seek alternative explanations rooted in cognitive processes or statistical probability [17].
Sure, science itself is a self-correcting and self-reflective endeavor, scientists actively engage in critical analysis, peer review, and replication of experiments to ensure the reliability and validity of scientific findings. Furthermore, interdisciplinary approaches, such as systems thinking, complexity science, and the integration of qualitative research, are increasingly being embraced to address the limitations of purely linear thinking. But by recognizing the potential limitations and dangers of a linear understanding of cause and effect, scientists can strive for a more holistic and nuanced approach that considers the complexity and interconnections of natural phenomena. This ongoing refinement and evolution of scientific methodologies and perspectives help address concerns and contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of the world.
But the risks of the actual, Westerner, linear science to be misused or manipulated by individuals or groups despite the inherent nature of scientific inquiry itself, the systematic and evidence-based process that aims to understand the natural world objectively, the outstanding method that involves observation, experimentation, peer review, and the pursuit of knowledge through rigorous inquiry, are too huge to disregard the underlying philosophy. Promoting scientific integrity, transparency, and open access to research findings, peer review, independent verification, and replication of studies are critical for maintaining the reliability and credibility of scientific research, but are not enough, I believe. It is necessary to bring to the scene, in Academia and laboratories, the integration of Eastern and Western perspectives and achievements.
As an interesting thought experiment, we might consider how the development of science might have differed if it had originated primarily in Asia rather than the Western world. It is important to note that science is a collective human endeavor that has been influenced by diverse cultures, civilizations, and historical contexts. However, to help enlighten the discussion, we can speculate on some potential aspects that could have characterized an Asian-centric development of science:
Holistic and Integrative Approaches: Many traditional Asian philosophies and belief systems, such as Taoism, Buddhism, and Confucianism, emphasize a holistic view of the world and interconnectedness between various phenomena. In an Asian-centric science, there might be a greater emphasis on integrative approaches that seek to understand the interconnectedness of nature, including the mind-body relationship and the interplay between humans and the environment.
Emphasis on Contemplation and Meditation: Asian cultures have a rich tradition of contemplative practices and meditation techniques. These practices often involve introspection, mindfulness, and the exploration of subjective experiences. In an Asian-centric science, there might be greater integration of contemplative methods as a means of understanding consciousness, perception, and subjective phenomena.
Harmony with Nature: Traditional Asian cultures often have a strong emphasis on living in harmony with nature. An Asian-centric science might place greater importance on ecological sustainability, the preservation of biodiversity, and a deeper understanding of the interdependence between humans and the natural world.
Symbolism and Artistic Expression: Asian cultures have a rich tradition of symbolic representations, calligraphy, and artistic expression. An Asian-centric science might incorporate a greater appreciation for metaphor, symbolism, and artistic forms of communication to convey scientific ideas and concepts.
Long-Term Perspectives: Asian cultures have a historical perspective that extends back thousands of years. An Asian-centric science might emphasize long-term thinking, intergenerational considerations, and sustainable development as essential aspects of scientific inquiry.
The Eastern view also got some adepts in the West, for example, the renowned German writer and polymath, Goethe, had a unique approach to science that aligned with some of the aspects mentioned earlier, particularly a holistic and integrative perspective. Goethe’s scientific worldview, often referred to as “Goethean science” or “Goethean methodology,” rejected reductionism and emphasized the interrelationships and interconnectedness of natural phenomena. He believed that understanding nature required an intuitive and holistic engagement with the subject, rather than a strict analytical approach. Inbrreded by this spirit, Goethe’s scientific pursuits extended across various fields, including botany, optics, and geology. He approached scientific investigation through direct observation, careful attention to detail, and a deep appreciation for the beauty and interconnectedness of nature. One of Goethe’s notable works related to science is “Theory of Colors” (“Zur Farbenlehre”), in which he explored the subjective nature of color perception and questioned the prevailing Newtonian understanding of light. Goethe’s approach focused on the human experience of color and emphasized the interaction between light, darkness, and the viewer’s perception. So, no doubt that Goethe’s scientific contributions were interdisciplinary in nature, as he sought to bridge the gap between science and the humanities. His exploration of natural phenomena was often intertwined with his literary, philosophical, and artistic endeavors. He saw science as an integral part of a comprehensive humanistic education and sought to merge objective scientific inquiry with subjective human experiences. While Goethe’s approach was not widely accepted by the scientific community during his time, his work has since gained recognition for its unique perspective and its emphasis on the aesthetic, emotional, and qualitative aspects of scientific exploration. His holistic approach and appreciation for the interconnectedness of nature continue to inspire interdisciplinary dialogue and contribute to discussions on the philosophy of science [16,16a].
The approaches associated with Asian philosophies and Goethean science can be seen as attempts to embrace a more nonlinear understanding of the natural world and move beyond strict cause-and-effect chains. These perspectives emphasize interconnectedness, holistic thinking, and the recognition of emergent properties that cannot be solely explained by linear causality. In Asian philosophies, such as Taoism and Buddhism [17], there is often an appreciation for the interdependence and interconnectivity of all phenomena, the emphasis on systems thinking, balance, and harmony with nature challenges a purely linear understanding of cause and effect and encourages a more holistic perspective. Similarly, Goethean science, with its focus on subjective experience, qualitative observations, and the integration of art and science, seeks to capture the richness and complexity of natural phenomena. By recognizing the importance of context, intuition, and holistic engagement, Goethean science moves beyond rigid linear causal chains and embraces a more nuanced understanding of the world.
Of course, we may say that these approaches might not be explicitly labeled as “nonlinear science,” but they do offer alternative frameworks that challenge the strictly linear understanding of cause and effect prevalent in traditional scientific methodologies. They encourage a more inclusive and expansive view that considers the interplay of various factors, the interrelationships between different elements, and the recognition of emergent patterns and properties. By embracing these perspectives, scientists can explore phenomena with a more open and flexible mindset, allowing for a deeper appreciation of the intricacies of the natural world and potentially uncovering new insights and understanding beyond linear causality.
From the Asian perspective, mathematics can be used to describe and analyze complex systems and interconnections. For example, network theory and graph theory provide mathematical frameworks for understanding the interconnectedness of elements in a system, such as social networks or ecological webs. Nonlinear mathematics, including chaos theory and fractal geometry, can capture the self-similar patterns and nonlinearity found in natural phenomena.
In Goethean science, mathematics can be seen as a tool for exploration rather than a strict framework for explanation. Goethe himself acknowledged the value of mathematical concepts but also emphasized the importance of direct observation, qualitative descriptions, and subjective experience. Mathematics can be used to support and enhance the qualitative understanding gained through observation and engagement with nature, rather than being the sole arbiter of truth.
In a sense, we may sustain that some branches of mathematics already integrate these perspectives to describe patterns, interconnections, and emergent properties, among them: Fractal Geometry (Fractals are mathematical objects that exhibit self-similar patterns at different scales. They can be used to describe natural phenomena such as coastlines, trees, or clouds. Fractal geometry provides a mathematical framework for understanding the intricate and complex structures found in nature); Network Theory (Network theory, including graph theory, provides a mathematical language to analyze and describe the interconnections and relationships between elements in complex systems. It can be used to study social networks, ecological webs, or neural networks, capturing the interdependencies and flow of information within these systems); Chaos Theory (Chaos theory deals with nonlinear dynamical systems that are highly sensitive to initial conditions. It can describe systems that exhibit seemingly random and unpredictable behavior, such as the weather or population dynamics. Chaos theory utilizes mathematical equations, such as the famous Lorenz system, to capture the complex and emergent behavior of these systems); Mathematical Models in Biology (Mathematical models are frequently used in biology to describe and understand the dynamics of biological systems. For example, differential equations can be employed to model population growth, predator-prey interactions, or the spread of infectious diseases. These models provide insights into the patterns, interconnections, and emergent properties of biological systems); Symmetry and Group Theory (Symmetry is a fundamental concept in mathematics and plays a crucial role in describing patterns and relationships in nature. Group theory provides a mathematical framework for studying symmetry and its applications across various disciplines, including physics, chemistry, and crystallography).
Science is an ongoing process of exploration, revision, and refinement, it evolves as new evidence emerges, and critical evaluation is fundamental to its advancement. But by embracing diverse perspectives, considering complexity, and promoting critical thinking, we can work towards a more comprehensive understanding of the world, while also addressing concerns and ensuring the responsible use of scientific knowledge. We could go towards MetaScience, a new kind of Nonlinear Science.
REFERENCES:
[1] Book: Pearl, J., & Mackenzie, D. (2018). The Book of Why: The New Science of Cause and Effect.
[2] Karamanou M, Panayiotakopoulos G, Tsoucalas G, Kousoulis AA, Androutsos G. From miasmas to germs: a historical approach to theories of infectious disease transmission. Infez Med. 2012 Mar;20(1):58-62. PMID: 22475662.
[8] Pearl J. Statistics and causality: separated to reunite-commentary on Bryan Dowd’s “separated at birth”. Health Serv Res. 2011 Apr;46(2):421-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2011.01243.x. Epub 2011 Feb 9. PMID: 21371028; PMCID: PMC3064911.
[9] Cartwright, N. (2007). Causality: Objectives and Constraints. [Title of Journal], [Volume number](Issue number), [Page range].
[10] Cartwright, N. (2004). Causality and Modern Science: Third Thoughts on Second Order Causation. [Title of Journal], [Volume number](Issue number), [Page range].
[11a] Before the Copernican Revolution, the prevailing paradigm in astronomy was the geocentric model, which placed the Earth at the center of the universe. This model had been accepted and supported by various scientific and religious authorities for centuries. However, Nicolaus Copernicus, a Polish astronomer, proposed a heliocentric model in the 16th century, which placed the Sun at the center of the solar system with the planets orbiting around it.
Copernicus’ heliocentric model challenged the existing paradigm and posed a significant shift in scientific thought. It questioned the widely held beliefs about the position of the Earth and the nature of celestial motion. However, the acceptance and adoption of the heliocentric model did not happen smoothly or instantaneously.
Kuhn argued that scientific revolutions occur when anomalies and challenges to the existing paradigm accumulate to a point where the old framework becomes untenable. The Copernican Revolution was not solely driven by the accumulation of new observations and evidence but involved a profound shift in the conceptual framework and the underlying assumptions of astronomy.
The acceptance of the heliocentric model required not only new empirical evidence but also significant changes in scientific thought, social dynamics, and religious and philosophical beliefs. It involved debates among scholars, clashes with established authorities, and the reevaluation of fundamental notions about the nature of the universe.
Kuhn’s perspective emphasizes that scientific progress is not a linear and cumulative process, but rather occurs through paradigm shifts that redefine the boundaries of scientific knowledge. These shifts are influenced by social, cultural, and historical factors, challenging the notion of science as an entirely objective and cumulative enterprise.
[12a] Quantum mechanics, a fundamental theory in physics, emerged in the early 20th century and revolutionized our understanding of the microscopic world. Traditional scientific methods, based on classical physics, were inadequate for explaining the peculiar behavior of particles at the quantum level.
Feyerabend would argue that the development of quantum mechanics involved the incorporation of various methodologies and approaches that deviated from traditional scientific methods. For instance, the development of matrix mechanics by Werner Heisenberg and wave mechanics by Erwin Schrödinger involved different mathematical frameworks and conceptual foundations.
These methodologies were initially met with skepticism and resistance from the scientific establishment, which adhered to the belief in a universal scientific method. However, the creative and imaginative use of multiple methodologies, along with the inclusion of thought experiments and intuitive leaps, eventually led to the formulation of a coherent quantum mechanical framework.
Feyerabend’s critique of a universal scientific method would highlight that the progress in quantum mechanics was achieved not by adhering to a single methodology but by embracing a diversity of approaches and allowing for methodological pluralism. The inclusion of creativity, imagination, and the exploration of alternative methodologies played a significant role in advancing our understanding of quantum phenomena.
By advocating for epistemological anarchism and methodological pluralism, Feyerabend aimed to challenge the rigid adherence to a single scientific method and promote the exploration of different approaches in scientific inquiry. He emphasized that scientific progress can be enhanced by embracing the inherent creativity and diversity of human thought, rather than conforming to a standardized methodology.
[13a] Latour argues that scientific knowledge, including the understanding of climate change, is not simply a collection of indisputable facts but rather a social construct that is influenced by various social, cultural, and political factors. He contends that scientific knowledge is shaped by the interactions between scientists, policymakers, interest groups, and the general public within complex social networks.
In the context of climate change, Latour points out that scientific findings are often subject to interpretation and contested by different groups with vested interests. The debate surrounding climate change involves scientific research, but it is also entangled with political and economic considerations. For example, industries reliant on fossil fuels might challenge climate change research to protect their economic interests, while environmental activists may use scientific evidence to advocate for policy changes.
Latour’s work emphasizes the need to understand the social and cultural contexts in which scientific knowledge is produced and disseminated. He highlights that scientific facts are not solely the result of objective observations but are also shaped by social processes, power dynamics, and value systems. This perspective challenges the traditional view of scientific knowledge as universally objective and neutral.
By questioning the objectivity and neutrality of scientific knowledge, Latour encourages a more nuanced understanding of the relationship between science and society. His work prompts a critical examination of how scientific knowledge is constructed, communicated, and used in decision-making processes, ultimately highlighting the social dimensions inherent in scientific inquiry.
[14a] Feminist scholars have pointed out how medical research and healthcare practices have historically been influenced by patriarchal norms and gender biases. For instance, women’s health concerns and experiences were often neglected or dismissed, resulting in limited research on conditions specific to women and inadequate healthcare services. This bias is evident in areas such as cardiovascular health, where symptoms and risk factors for women were overlooked or not properly understood, leading to misdiagnoses and inadequate treatment.
Additionally, postcolonial scholars have highlighted the ways in which colonial legacies continue to shape scientific knowledge production and dissemination. Colonial histories and power dynamics have influenced what topics are prioritized for research, whose knowledge is considered authoritative, and which regions and populations are marginalized in scientific discourse. This has resulted in limited representation and recognition of indigenous knowledge systems, traditional healing practices, and the health concerns of marginalized communities.
By raising these critiques, feminist and postcolonial scholars argue that scientific knowledge can perpetuate and reinforce existing power imbalances and inequalities. They advocate for more inclusive and diverse approaches to scientific research that value different perspectives, prioritize underrepresented voices, and challenge the biases and exclusionary practices within the scientific community.
[15] Robert G. Sacco. (2020). Dynamical and Statistical Modeling of Synchronicity: A Probabilistic Forecasting Framework. International Journal of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, 9(1), 16-24. doi:10.5923/j.ijbcs.20200901.03
[16] Farrell, R. P. (1998). Feyerabend’s Epistemological Anarchism and Values-Based Rationality (Unpublished doctoral thesis). Australian National University.
[17] Taoism and Buddhism are two distinct philosophical and spiritual traditions that originated in Asia. While both share some similarities, they also have notable differences in their core beliefs, practices, and philosophical perspectives. Here is a brief characterization of each:
Taoism: Taoism, also known as Daoism, is an ancient Chinese philosophy and religion attributed to the sage Lao Tzu. It centers around the concept of the Tao, which can be translated as “the Way” or “the Way of Nature.” Taoism emphasizes living in harmony with the natural flow of the universe and seeking balance and simplicity in life. Key characteristics of Taoism include:
Tao: The Tao is the fundamental concept in Taoism, representing the underlying principle that governs the universe. It is ineffable, formless, and beyond human comprehension.
Wu Wei: Wu Wei is the concept of effortless action or non-action. It involves aligning oneself with the natural course of events, letting go of control, and allowing things to unfold naturally.
Yin and Yang: Taoism incorporates the concept of Yin and Yang, representing the complementary and interconnected nature of opposites. Yin represents darkness, passivity, and the feminine, while Yang represents light, activity, and the masculine.
Nature and Spontaneity: Taoism emphasizes living in harmony with nature, appreciating its rhythms, and embracing spontaneity. It encourages individuals to cultivate a sense of simplicity, humility, and detachment from worldly desires.
Buddhism: Buddhism originated in ancient India and was founded by Siddhartha Gautama, who later became known as Buddha. Buddhism encompasses a vast array of beliefs and practices but is centered around the Four Noble Truths and the Eightfold Path. Key characteristics of Buddhism include:
Four Noble Truths: The Four Noble Truths are the foundational teachings of Buddhism. They address the reality of suffering (dukkha), its causes, its cessation, and the path to liberation from suffering.
Rebirth and Karma: Buddhism holds that beings are subject to a cycle of rebirth based on their actions, known as karma. The aim is to break free from this cycle by attaining enlightenment (nirvana).
Middle Way: Buddhism advocates for the Middle Way, avoiding extremes and finding a balanced approach to life. It encourages practitioners to avoid indulgence in sensual pleasures and self-mortification.
Meditation and Mindfulness: Buddhism places great emphasis on meditation as a means of cultivating mindfulness, awareness, and insight. Various meditation techniques are used to develop concentration and deepen understanding.
Compassion and Non-harm: Buddhism promotes compassion, loving-kindness, and the practice of non-harm (ahimsa) towards all living beings. This includes the adherence to ethical principles and the avoidance of causing harm to oneself and others.
While this description gives a broad overview of both Taoism and Buddhism, it is important to understand that both have developed over time and comprise a variety of schools of thought and practices. Depending on regional and cultural influences, the beliefs and practices may change. Several notable scientists have been influenced by Taoism and Buddhism, among them, Albert Einstein (The renowned physicist and Nobel laureate, Albert Einstein, was deeply influenced by Eastern philosophies, including Taoism and Buddhism. He often expressed admiration for the teachings of Lao Tzu and the concept of interconnectedness); Fritjof Capra (was a physicist and systems theorist who has written extensively on the integration of science and spirituality. His influential book, “The Tao of Physics,” explores the parallels between modern physics and Eastern mysticism, particularly Taoism and Buddhism); Francisco Varela (was a Chilean biologist and neuroscientist known for his work on cognitive science and the study of consciousness. He incorporated Buddhist principles into his research, particularly in the field of neurophenomenology, which explores the relationship between subjective experience and brain activity).
As I age, I find myself speaking much more than I used to when I was younger. I feel a need to exchange ideas with others, to try to understand how they think, what lies within them, and what they can teach me. At times, I stop to listen, and I could listen for a long time, were it not interrupted by the discomfort of appearing inert. This feeling, this need is even greater with my younger students. It’s as if I were trying to say, “Listen! I know I won’t be here much longer. I want to tell you this. It was the cold winds, the difficult paths I walked, and the strange and complicated experiences that led me to speak to you this way.”
I was talking about the Theory of Relativity in the last class, and the students listened more attentively than I ever imagined possible. Because not only was I “explaining” the theory, if one could imagine someone who hasn’t built a line of reasoning on their own explaining something, but I was mixing the theory with Einstein, the young man who wanted to understand the world but ended up enslaving his own wife, possibly even the creator of the Theory of Relativity, Mileva Einstein.
It later occurred to me, and I said: “How could this genius, a brilliant and imaginative man in his second marriage, marry his cousin? And all the other women he could have met outside his family circle? Why did and still do geishas exist in Japan? Because man was made to know the delicacy of a woman, all her nuances, feelings, expectations, and the ability to romanticize her life.”
Indeed, today I tend to talk a lot, but I am bothered by the current world, on the brink of unparalleled transformation, with AI and the possibility of instant communication opened up by recent discoveries in Quantum Mechanics. So much knowledge and potential wisdom and yet when we look up at the world, we see a veil of corruption, a world that’s apathetic and dominated by the worst.
We must discover how to be human again. Perhaps that process also involves speaking a lot. With others and ourselves.
The Soul of Matter 