Royal Institute of Philosophy

One of the great treats of the lecture season in London is the annual offering of the Royal Institute of Philosophy, generally based on some grand over-arching theme.

Last year the Institute looked at a whole range of philosophical traditions that would be regarded as alien to the Western analytical tradition. The high points for me were two lectures on Japanese philosophy from slightly differing perspectives and an Iranian contribution.

These and others did not merely help understand where contemporary 'others' were coming from (a session on Iranian philosophy might help move peace forward in the Middle East) but demonstrated that these ways of seeing had merit in their own right. It was somehow right to include Nietzsche in the series.

This year's series is on identity - mind, self and person - and I will be sure to go to at least those this month through to Christmas. They are at the heart of my own interests.

I might add that the Institute is serious but not stuffy, the lectures are free (though come early for a decent seat) and the atmosphere friendly. Membership is recommended though my wife has taken the family position on this rather than me.

The Institute has promised podcasts of last year's series and you should look out for them.  Even if you are a thorough-going amateur like me, the Institute is such a mine of information and links that it would be hard not to engage with it. If you are at all serious about philosophy it is a 'must'.

Stephen Alexander

I want to recommend a hidden gem on Blogger - Stephen Alexander's short and to the point postings on his 'Torpedo the Ark' at http://torpedotheark.blogspot.co.uk

Stephen, with whom I often do not agree, is prepared to think radically about what he sees in the world and I refuse to describe him further. If you are sensitive to discussions of sexual matters and just want to hear the usual platitudes then you do not deserve to read him.

However, a good place to start is this excellent short explanation of what Nietzsche is and what he is not - http://torpedotheark.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/o-superman.html

A Conversation with Daniel Dennett in 'The Edge'

This is a thought-provoking 'conversation' published in 'The Edge' with the philosopher Daniel Dennett. I find I cannot fault the terms in which he frames his questions.

There are short thoughtful contributions here to cognitive science, the role of philosophy in relation to science, the question of free will, the transmission of culture, how bad ideas persist in society and the survivalist function of false ideas in a human crisis.

Many of the questions suggest something that I believe has long been lacking - an association of philosophy and cognitive science with social psychology and political science though I fear that this is the last thing authority wants. Serious questioning of the basis of our social compliance could be catastrophic to claims of legitimacy. As we have seen in Syria, speaking the truth as we see it may not improve conditions for the masses but may plunge hundreds of thousands of people into misery.

There is nothing here that I do not find to be a question of critical importance to our own determination of what is true in a culture that seems to be able to subsist only on the transmission of untruths. We have come a long way along the path set out by Howard Gardner in 'The Mind's New Science (1984, 1987) but Dennett is reminding us that there has been significant progress even if we do not yet know what we want to know.

http://edge.org/conversation/normal-well-tempered-mind