Week 1: 

CLASSWORK:

1. Lecture: Introduction to Metaphysics  

2. Lecture: Materialism

3. Lecture: Idealism

4. Seminar: The Neutrino 

5. Seminar: Parallel Universes

6. Seminar: Reality of Corporations

7. Seminar: Do Our Brains Make Our Decisions Before We Consciously Make Them?

HOMEWORK:

1. Reading: Velasquez, On Hobbes & Berkeley, p.1-9

2. Reading: Hobbes, Leviathan, p.9-39

REVIEW QUESTION:

1. Do only sensations, perceptions, and minds exist, if we have no evidence for the existence of other things?

The Neutrino

The neutrino is perhaps the most bewildering of all the elementary particles known to physics and among the most philosophically provocative. It has no physical properties—no mass, no electric charge, and no mag- netic field. It is neither attracted nor repelled by the electric and magnetic fields of passing particles. Thus, a neutrino originating in the Milky Way or in some other galaxy and traveling at the speed of light can pass through the earth as if it were so much empty space. Can it be stopped? Only by a direct, head-on collision with another elementary particle. The chances of that are infinitesimally small. Fortunately, there are so many neutrinos that collisions do occur. Otherwise, physicists would never have detected them. Just think, even as you read this sentence, billions of neutrinos coming from the sun and other stars are passing through your skull and brain. And how would the universe appear to a neutrino? Eminent astronomer V. A. Firsoff provides a picture: 

The universe as seen by a neutrino eye would wear a very unfamiliar look. Our earth and other planets simply would not be there, or might at best appear as thin patches of mist. The sun and other stars may be dimly visible, in as much as they emit some neutrinos. . . A neutrino brain might suspect our existence from certain secondary effects, but would find it very difficult to prove, as we would elude the neutrino instruments at his disposal. 

Our universe is no truer than that of the neutrinos—they exist, but they exist in a different kind of space, governed by different laws. . .  The neutrino . . . is subject neither to gravitational nor to electromagnetic field. . . It might be able to travel faster than light, which would make it relativistically recede in our time scale. 

QUESTIONS:

1. How does V. A. Firsoff's description of a "neutrino eye" challenge our assumption that human sensory perception defines what is real about the physical universe?

2. If the earth appears as nothing more than a "thin patch of mist" to a neutrino, what makes one perspective of space and matter "truer" than another?

3. The text notes that neutrinos are subject to neither gravitational nor electromagnetic fields, interacting almost exclusively through head-on particle collisions. Does an entity that lacks physical mass, charge, and field interactions fit our standard definition of "matter"?

4. Given that billions of neutrinos pass through our bodies undetected every second, how does the realization of this invisible, parallel physical reality shift our understanding of our own presence in space?

_________________________________________________

Sources: V. A. Firsoff, Life, Mind and Galaxies (New York: W. A. Benjamin, 1967); Arthur Koestler, The Roots of Coincidence (New York: Random House, 1972), 63. 

Parallel Universes

Max Tegmark, a physicist/astronomer highly respected as an international expert on the nature of the universe, has argued that there must be parallel universes: other areas of space that are about the size of the universe that is visible to us and that are exact replicas of own visible universe. (The “visible universe” consists of a sphere around us whose farthest point is the longest distance from us that light has been able to travel during the 14 billion years since the Big Bang began everything.) Such a replica of our visible universe would have to contain “a person who is not you but who lives on a planet called earth, with misty mountains, fertile fields and sprawling cities. . . The life of this person has been identical to yours in every respect.” 

The idea that there must be another area of space that is an exact copy of our visible universe and that contains an exact copy of you is required by the fact that astronomers have concluded that the entire cosmos, that is, everything that extends beyond our visible universe is infinite and is uniformly filled with galaxies, stars, and planets like our own visible universe. A volume of space the size of own visible universe, if it were fully packed with matter, could contain only up to 10 to the power of 118 protons. In a different volume of space the same size, each of these protons may or may not, in fact, be present. Hence there are, at most, only 2 to the 10 to the power of 118 different possible arrangements of protons in a volume of space the size of our own visible universe. That means that, in a volume of space larger than 2 to the 10 to the power of 118 times the volume of our own visible universe, the arrangements of protons would have to start repeating. Beyond that huge volume, then, there would have to be a volume of space the size of our own visible universe that was, proton for proton, an exact copy of our own visible universe. Because observations of the cosmos indicate that it is infinite in volume, this means that somewhere in that infinite volume there must be an area of space the size of our own visible universe that is an exact replica of the volume of space we call our “visible universe” and that therefore includes an exact replica of you. 

QUESTIONS:

1. The Logic of Infinity: Tegmark bases his argument on the idea that in an infinite cosmos with a finite number of particle arrangements, repetition is mathematically inevitable. Do you find this probabilistic reasoning convincing, or does applying mathematical infinity to real-world existence feel like a logical leap? Why?

2. Identity and the "Copy": If a person exists in another region of space with an identical brain structure, identical memories, and an identical life history up to this exact second, should they be considered "you," or are they merely an identical twin? What truly defines individual identity?

3. Free Will vs. Determinism: If there are identical copies of you living across an infinite cosmos, does this imply that your choices are strictly determined by physical arrangements of matter? If your replica makes a different choice tomorrow, does that break the premise of an identical universe, or does it prove free will exists?

4. Scientific Fallibility vs. Speculation: Tegmark uses the physics of our observable universe (particle counts and cosmic inflation) to make claims about regions of space we can never visually observe or test. At what point does theoretical physics cross the line from testable science into philosophical speculation?

___________________________________________

Source: Max Tegmark, “Parallel Universes,” Scientific American, April 14, 2003; see also Joel Achenbach, “The Multiuniverse,” National Geographic, August 2003. 

Reality of Corporations

Several years ago the Department of Defense charged that a corporation had sold it computer parts without testing them properly and then had falsified records to cover up the fraud. The computer parts are now installed in ships, planes, weapons, and nuclear bombs around the world and cannot be tracked down. A government official commented that if a component malfunctioned, "We're talking about lives. You could have a missile that would end up in Cleveland instead of the intended target."

Although the corporation was indicted on criminal charges, no individuals were ever charged. The Department of Defense objected that because a "corporation acts only through its employees and officers." the individuals who make up the company should have been held responsible for the crimes. The company's president felt differently: "We totally disagree with the Defense Department's proposal. We have repeatedly stated that we accept responsibility as a company only and we steadfastly continue to stand by that statement. "According to the company president, corporations and not their members should be held responsible for such criminal acts. The position of the Department of Defense was defended by metaphysical individualists. Metaphysical individualism says that only individuals are real and that corporations are fictitious mental constructs; consequently, only individuals can be responsible for crimes. 

The position of the company's president was supported by metaphysical collectivists, who hold that corporations are as real as individual human beings. Metaphysical collectivism says that corporations are like living organisms that think, act, and direct the activities of their members and that, consequently, the corporation and not its members must be held responsible for its criminal acts. Legal experts are divided on this issue, some siding with individualism, others with collectivism.

QUESTIONS:

1. Corporate Entity vs. Individual Agency: In the defense contractor case, individual employees carried out the falsification, yet the president argued that only the corporate entity should be held responsible. From a moral standpoint, can an individual employee be excused from personal accountability when performing fraudulent actions on behalf of an employer?

2. Metaphysical Collectivism and Punitive Justice: Metaphysical collectivism claims that a corporation is like a living organism that thinks and acts. However, a corporation cannot be imprisoned or experience physical punishment. If a company is treated as a collectivist entity, what constitutes an effective or fair punishment for corporate crimes that put human lives at risk?

3. Application of Metaphysical Individualism: Metaphysical individualism asserts that corporations are merely fictitious mental constructs and that only real individuals can bear responsibility. If courts were to fully adopt this view, how might it alter corporate governance and the willingness of executives to take business risks if they personally face criminal liability for all corporate wrongdoing?

4. Systemic Pressure vs. Autonomous Choice: Corporate cultures often exert immense pressure on employees to meet targets or maximize profit, sometimes incentivizing unethical behavior. Does the existence of strong institutional pressure lend support to the collectivist view that the organization directs the individual, or does the individual always retain enough autonomy to be held criminally accountable?

____________________________________________

Source:  San Jose Mercury News, May 31, 1984, p. ,1 and June ,4 1984, p. 7

Do Our Brains Make Our Decisions Before We Consciously Make Them?

Four scientists found that your brain appears to deter- mine what you will do about seven seconds before you “freely” decide to do it. In their study, the four scientists found that brain activity indicating which hand participants would use to press a button near each hand was present in the brain seven seconds before the participants consciously decided which hand to use. They wrote: 

The impression that we are able to freely choose between different possible courses of action is fundamental to our mental life. However, it has been suggested that this subjective experience of freedom is no more than an illusion and that our actions are initiated by unconscious mental processes long before we become aware of our intention to act. We directly investigated which regions of the brain predetermine conscious intentions and the time at which they start shaping a motor decision. [Our] subjects carried out a freely paced motor-decision task while their brain activity was measured using functional magnetic resonance imaging [FMRI] machines produce images of the brain that show what parts of the brain are active when the image is made]. Subjects were asked to freely decide between [pressing] one of two buttons [and to indicate] when their motor decision was consciously made. We found brain regions encoded [indicated] with high accuracy whether the subject was about to choose the left or right response prior to the conscious deci- sion. . . .[One] region was in [the] frontopolar cortex. The predictive information in the FMRI signals from this brain region was already present 7 seconds before the subject’s [conscious] motor decision. This prior activity is not an unspecific preparation of a response. Instead, it specifically encodes how the subject is going to decide. The lead times are too long to be explained by any timing inaccuracies in reporting the onset of awareness. 

Some scientists have concluded from experiments like these that if our unconscious brain determines our decisions before we have even consciously made a deci- sion, then our feeling that we consciously and freely make our decisions is an illusion: Our unconscious brain, not our conscious mind, makes our decisions. 

QUESTIONS:

1. Conceptualizing Free Will: If our unconscious brain activity determines our choices several seconds before we feel we have consciously made them, is "free will" truly an illusion, or does it simply exist in a form we don’t fully understand yet?

2. Moral Responsibility and Accountability: If our actions are initiated by unconscious mental processes before our conscious mind is even aware of them, can people still be held ethically or legally responsible for their decisions and actions?

3. Conscious "Veto" Power: Does the presence of predictive brain signals 7 seconds prior to a decision mean the choice is entirely predetermined, or could the conscious mind still hold the ability to override or "veto" an action right before it happens?

4. The Evolutionary Purpose of Conscious Awareness: If the unconscious brain handles the actual decision-making mechanics beforehand, what evolutionary purpose or function might the feeling of conscious choice serve in our daily lives?

_____________________________________

Source: Chun Siong Soon, Marcel Brass, Hans-Jochen Heinze, and John- Dylan Haynes, “Unconscious Determinants of Free Decisions in the Human Brain,” Nature Neuroscience, April 13, 2008. 

Week 3:

CLASSWORK:

1. Lecture: Nature of God

2. Lecture: Arguments on Existence of God 

3. Viewing: Power of Myth: Message of the Myth 

4. Viewing: Power of Myth: Masks of Eternity

Questions:  Answer the following questions...

Message of the Myth 

1. Why should we have myths? (3:00)

2. How are myths clues? (04:00)

3. What is the meaning of life, according to Campbell? (05:00)

4. According to Campbell, what is god? (06:00)

5. What do myths refer to? (08:00)

6. What is the nature of everything within the field of time? (10:00)

7. What is the one problem of life? (10:30)

8. What caused us to move out of the mythological zone, in western thought? (13:00)

9. How does the relationship between god and nature differ between eastern and western religion? (14:00)

10. What are we looking for in myth and religion? (16:00)

11. How does the representation of snakes differ between western and eastern myth? (20:00)

12. What does Schopenhauer say about life? (23:00)

13. Explain “…everything you do is evil to someone”. (24:00)

14. What is the function of life? (26:00)

15. What does myth inspire? (30:00)

16. How are all myths and religions true? (31:00)

17. How is religion a literary problem? (32:00)

18. What is within us? (33:00)

19. What are myths metaphors? (34:00)

20. How is religion like software? (42:00)

21. Why can’t modern cultural myths develop in our own time? (44:00)

22. What are the 4 functions of myth? (45:00)

23. Which function are we focused on? (46:00)

24. Which function should we be focused on? (46:30)

Masks of Eternity

1. Explain what is meant by “…participating in divinity”. (5:30)

2. Complete the following statement.  “In most Oriental thinking the gods are…” (6:20)

3. According to Campbell life comes from what? (9:20)

4. What does Campbell mean by “…Christ in you”? (12:00)

5. What is the difference of an impersonal god and a personal god? (15:00)

6. Explain the meaning of the Latin word religio. (16:00)

7. What is the importance of the circle? (16:40)

8. What is the significance of the trickster god? (26:00)

9. Explain Jung’s statement “religion” is a defense against the experience of God? (29:00)

10. What is the difference between Laslow’s peak experience and James Joyce’s epiphany? (30:00)

11. What is Brahman, god, etc.? (40:00)

12. What is the purpose of poetry? (42:00)

13. According to Campbell, does life have a purpose? (46:00)

14. What is the function of art? (47:00)

15. What is the significance of Shiva’s dance? (49:00)

16. What did Goethe say? (50:00)

17. What are the 4 elements of AUM? (51:00)

HOMEWORK:

1. Submit Power of Myth answers