Etikettarkiv: Philosophy

Black Swan Theory as a Means To Reinvigorate Art Criticism

Is art a Black Swan?

In my new article in Expressen I make the case for connecting the cultural criticism of late with the almost seamless expansion of science and other knowledge systems of today. I use Nassim Nicholas Taleb’s Black Swan Theory in order to argue for a greater diversity in analysis and interpretation within the field of art criticism, but without a doubt this is a reasoning that should infiltrate all cultural, philosophical and political criticism.

Art rascal Lars Vilks comments and briefly dismisses my points as ”already been tried” and misses his own point that art today must gather its raison d’être from without the art field. Thus, to best analyze the expanding field of art, critics should at least try to develop their limited and one-sighted experience and knowledge. Art really creates black swans all the time, I can just mention some recent examples in Marcel Duchamp, Warhol and Cindy Sherman. The entire field of art has been forced to re-examine its paradigm because these individuals found new ways of looking. So today, I predict that science, economics or ethnology will strong allies in the next game change.

Nassim Nicholas Talebs recently wrote this beautiful piece about the human and natural economic worlds. Read it!

Taggad , , , , ,

Obama to Replace Bush’s Bioethics Posse


Members of the President’s Council on Bioethics were told by the White House last week that their services were no longer needed and were asked to cancel a planned meeting, a council staff member said Wednesday to The New York Times.

The rumour has it that the bunch was dismissed due to the inherent design by GW Bush in 2001 as an advisory group on philosophical issues of bioethics and behavioral sciences issues. Basically he instated them to advise him on the controversial stem cell debate that blossomed at the time. The One President Obama will appoint a new bioethics commission shortly, one that surprisingly is meant to offer more ”practical policy options”, as told by The White House.

Bush’s council was first led by Leon Kass of the University of Chicago and, since 2005, by Edmund Pellegrino of Georgetown University. Kass has been famous for his conservative views on stem cell research, cloning and euthanasia, and consequently got lots of flak for being an ideologue under Bush.

My vote for its new chiarperson goes to Jonathan Glover, philosopher and professor at the Centre of Medical Law & Ethics at King’s College London, great thinker in the field, althouth he is not American so for the moment all bets are off.

Taggad , , ,

Obama to Jump Back on The Stem Cell Wagon

Meistre Obama creates goodwill as well as uproars around the world with the announcement that he is reversing the Bush administration limits on federal financing for embryonic stem cell research as part of his thrust forward for science. Stem cell research is an uncontroversial issue in the world few secular societies but have been a severe controversy not least in the USA since  scientists Martin Evans, Matthew Kaufman, and Gail R. Martin in 1981 derived mouse embryonic stem cells and coined the term ”Embryonic Stem Cell”. This concept is not to be mistaken for ”Adult Stem cells”, which can be retracted out of the bone marrow of adult humans, alas, the quality of these cells are inferior to that found in embryos, therefor the controversy. Pope John Paul II in a famous speech on July 2001, addressed to GW Bush, asked for fall back of American support to stem cell research:

Experience is already showing how a tragic coarsening of consciences accompanies the assault on innocent human life in the womb, leading to accommodation and acquiescence in the face of other related evils such as euthanasia, infanticide and, most recently, proposals for the creation for research purposes of human embryos, destined to destruction in the process. (An excerpt from the Pope John Paul II’s address to President Bush at Castel Gandolfo, Italy, July 23, 2001. )

stem-cell-research1Obama now fulfills a mission started in 2005 with his vote for the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act, which proposed the conducting and supporting of research that utilizes human embryonic stem cells, regardless of the date on which the stem cells were derived from a human embryo. The controversy, basically an ontological issue has two sides as reported by the medical doctor Robin Cook: 1. how embryonic cells are created and harvested, and 2. the point at which an embryo becomes a human life. The controversy is a truely a matter of pragmatism and deontology, utilitarianism and moral faith, basically it surrounds the blastocyst, an embryo at an early stage of development, comprising around 120 undifferentiated stem cells. These cells can differentiate into any cell type, including other so called totipotent cells. So while for some the human life enters this world right after conception, for some it starts about 14 days after fertilization, when they become individualised, before that time they can develop into any sort of cell for any individual. When life actually starts, I am not the right person to argue, fo sho, but I am a certified pragmatist, thus embracing most research that develop social consequences toward the greater good – a truth as sure as anything when it comes to stem cell research.

What is important with Grandmaster Obama is not that he has philosophically more poignant arguments than had Bush for his policies (rhetorically, yes definitely!), but that after eight years, it is time to move to a different path, with more and more funding going to both the arts and science than it did during Bush. Very exciting times for the life sciences indeed let’s extract some undifferentiated stem cells and save some brains!

Reports by New York Times, Washington Post and me favorurite Scientific American

Taggad , , , ,
%d bloggare gillar detta: