The Philosophy Takeaway Newsletter 68

My philosophy on reproduction
'Now is the time that face should form another...Die Single and thine image dies with thee.' William Shakespeare, Sonnet 3.

In this (post)modern society we hail from, I am truly flabber

asted by a stran e notion! ha"in children is no lon er in "o ue. #s a scientific materialist, I find this "iew $uite bi%arre. &ur species, Homo Sapiens Sapiens, (Wise, wise man we ha"e e"ol"ed to become doubly wise), is successful, after all, due to our se' dri"e. In my moments of $uiet reflection whether in the bath, or durin my (ourney to work I am often drawn towards an obsessi"e train of thou ht. )y thou ht process is as so! *) ++.+ , of all species that ha"e e"er li"ed on -arth are e'tinct. .) /umans are not e'tinct. 3) 0herefore, there is somethin different about humans, and there was somethin different about early humans, too. 1ecisions that early humans made ha"e lead to us bein how we are now. &ur bodies, our "oices, our brains and our lan ua e are the direct result of hundreds of thousands of years of human e"olution. It2s e'tremely fascinatin . We are, as of this moment, a link in a "ery lon chain. &ur e'istence is owed to choices made lon a o choices we ha"e no input towards. 3ike all other species, Homo Sapiens Sapiens li"es to reproduce. 0his, from a "ery narrow scientific e"olutionary perspecti"e, is our purpose. 4eople may think that this is a mechanical "iew of e'istence. I would contest this5 the whole process, from the wooin , to the act of se', from the pre nancy to the birth are all terribly profound. 0he science of conception, of the sperm2s .3 chromosomes meetin with the e 2s .3 chromosomes is (ust beautiful. #fter all, it contains the essence of man. 0he se' dri"e is so stron because it has e"ol"ed to be so. Se' is so en(oyable because it has e"ol"ed to be so. 3et2s be honest5 if se' wasn2t en(oyable, no one would en a e in intercourse. /owe"er, in these (post)modern times, we ha"e become too scientifically ad"anced for our own ood. We ha"e learned to separate se' for pleasure and se' for reproduction. 6ou must understand that e"olution is so cle"er that it e"ol"ed to catch us out. )any people, after all, are the result of an unplanned fumble (myself included). 1espite this, humans ha"e now in"ented contraception. 7ontraception allows humans to a"oid pre nancy, and therefore, fewer children are born. In 2

this "ery (post)modern world, humans ha"e de"eloped science which supersedes e"olution. It is a "ery stran e set of affairs. 0he capitalist system is responsible for many thin s, and moral decadence is one thin that is often heralded a ainst it. 7hildren, the most important link in the chain to our continuation as a species, ha"e been reduced to a financial cost. )any people don2t ha"e children because they are 8too selfish9 to be parents. /owe"er, they are also "ery selfish with re ard to their ancestral enetics too. :y not ha"in children, you are destroyin , killin stone dead, a enetic line which is hundreds of thousands of years old. 0hese are the followin people2s enetics you ha"e destroyed! *) 0wo 4arents. .) ;our <randparents. 3) -i ht <reat= randparents. >) Si'teen <reat ('.) randparents. ?) 0hirty=two <reat ('3) randparents. @) Si'ty=four <reat ('>) randparents. A) &ne hundred and twenty=ei ht <reat ('?) randparents Bow, I will admit, whereas your parent2s enetic le acy will die with you, it2s plausible that there are others to carry that le acy on. 0his becomes truer the further one oes back. 6our <reat('?) randparents may ha"e thirty=one other lines to o throu h...but if we all think like that, our species will become e'tinct. #lso, by endin your enetic le acy, you ha"e destroyed e"erythin your ancestors fou ht for. 3ife was far more challen in in the past than it is now. 0here was no central heatin 5 food was scarce5 nei hbourin tribes would be likely to murder all the men from your tribe and rape all the women such was the barbaric nature of man. We are the product of those who were successful. &ur ancestors li"ed under that duress so that we could li"e. 0hey fou ht a ainst sa"a es5 they farmed throu h ice and drou hts. 0hey sur"i"ed. 0hey had culture. We ha"e the enes and the memes of our ancestors. 7onse$uently, should we really espouse such thou htless se'ual hedonism as a philosophyC

I think the answer to that is a resoundin no. 0he oft mentioned $uote, which is attributed to Socrates, is as follows! '0he une'amined life is not worth li"in .'. 0he fact is that ha"in children forces the indi"idual to e'amine many thin s! philosophy, "alues, reli ion, and politics. 6ou ha"e to reconsider who you are as a human bein 5 only then can you help a new human bein self=actualise. Despect the ancestors. It is so profound to create life, and to nurture it. :ein a life= i"er is a truly beautiful thin . 6ou owe it to the past, the now, and the future. 0he choice is up to you! to be et, or not to be et, that is the $uestionE Samuel Mack-Poole

A sledgehammer blow against the animal's chains If you ha"e e"er obser"ed an ar ument in fa"our of "e
etarianism, you can be sure that somewhere alon the line there will be an accusation of 'emotionality'. 6ou will see the 'antis' poise the lance of ar ument at the 'bleedin hearts who ha"e watched one too many 1isney cartoons, and now proclaim their lo"e for all beastsE' Fe etarianism is, of course, (ust an immature emotional reaction to the rim nature of, well, nature. Fe etarians ha"en't $uite clocked on yet that animals must be slau htered because it is 'the way of thin s', and if only they were more 'rational' they would reali%e that animals bein killed for food is an unchan in law of the cosmos (insert lion huntin a%elle reference here). :ut, of course, slau hterin animals as part of your cultural practice is not the result of an emotional attachment. It is an entirely rational decision to or e on e"er=increasin $uantities of meat, resultin in e"er=worsenin conditions for the animals slau htered and (ust about e"erythin else. 0herefore, e'periencin as much sensory pleasure and dietary con"enience as possible would i"e one the rational hi h= round, ri htC 0he answer from my perspecti"e is an o"erwhelmin and horribly (aded 'no'. I propose a different concept of rational. 0his is to cause the least amount of sufferin and en"ironmental dama e for the ma'imum output of nutrition and "ariety, from here to an indefinite point in time. It is to consider the future of the earth, rather than (ust the present. It is to plan ahead to ensure the continued sur"i"al of our species = not to mention all of the others we mi ht e'tin uish before their time. It is not necessarily bene"olent, but it certainly is not domineerin and destructi"e. It is $uite simply lon =term sur"i"al and well=bein E 4

)ass "iolence a ainst harmless animals does not ha"e a rational basis. Fiolence is destructi"e to our well=bein , e"en when it is (ustifiable (i.e. in self=defence). If you a ree, then you a ree that it is also rational to free people from the barbaric task of animal slau hter. 0he meat=eatin ad"ocate (that is, anyone who condones or participates in the practice) is hidin from the fact that someone else has to do the dirty work. 7onsiderin the sheer scale of the meat industry, that is a lot of dirty work. I doubt the happy family at the table car"in a cow=corpse consider the psycholo ical welfare of the men who were tasked with the killin . 0hose men are as ob(ectified (a walkin blade and bolt un) as the innocent animal deemed unworthy of life (walkin flesh and food). -"en if one cared nothin for animals, could one say the same for menC 0he same men who must be desensiti%ed to the brutal task of transportin , stunnin and killin animals on a factory line. (In the case of halal or kosher slau hter, literally killin a conscious animal with a blade across the neck). 0he real emotionality is on the side of the meat=eaters. Sadly, it is the wron kind of emotion. It is an emotional need to belon to an archaic cultural practice. It is the la%iness of con"enience, to commit the most banal immorality known to our species. It is to habitually succumb to the darkest of desires, destroyin another life for the sake of fleetin pleasure. 0his fusion of emotional need to belon , combined with rampant desirin , is where the irrationality of meat=eatin synthesi%es. ;ortunately for meat=eaters, they ha"e a many=layered "eil to hide behind. 0he meat industry depends on sheer i norance to continue itself (a resource reliably supplied by our underachie"in speciesE) It hides the flesh=consumer from the brutal reality of how animals are raised and butchered. It hides behind ima es of happy cows and pleasant farms, utili%es serpentine lan ua e (ca e free, free ran e) or romantic lan ua e (callin the corpse of a (un le fowl a 'bird') to dis uise the sheer abuse that is necessitated so that we can continue the hi hly 'ci"ili%ed' practice of animal torture and murder. It is almost as if a lar e number of those in"ol"ed in the slau hter were ashamed of their role in it. :ut I won't o so far as to say this definiti"elyE Fe etarianism has its own ethical problems with farmed animals, but it does not depend on slau hter to continue itself. 0his makes it an order of ma nitude less "iolent and self=destructi"e, and an order of ma nitude more rational. #s for any o"erly emotional "e etarians, can you really blame themC -"en if it is a purely emotional reaction, it is a "alid one, and the ri ht one. 0his is the first of many sled ehammer blows a ainst the animal's chains. 0he ne't article will be askin the $uestion of whether an animal is a moral a ent = the predictable answer from this militant animal ri hts camp bein 'yes, I do think so'E Selim 'Selim' Talat

ebt The !ealisation o" #uman Potential

- We ha e !een !orn into de!t" - We ha e indeed" #ut we ha e also !een !orn into pu!licl$ owned hospitals" I was first introduced to currency reform nearly *G years a o by some of my )uslim friends who oppose the current bankin system lar ely on reli ious and ethical rounds. 0here were howe"er a number of purely lo istical complaints that after some thou ht I disco"ered simply didn2t make sense. I2d like to share the principle issue with you now as its omission seems to be a source of common confusion. What I2m talkin about is! Hdebt2. It2s a "ery emoti"e word, but is it really the rim spectre that is the talk of so much anti=capitalist dialo ueC Whether you oppose or support capitalism, it is necessary to understand that debt is a stren th of the system. ;ractional reser"e bankin , lo"e it or loathe it, first, it must be understood. 4ersonal "s 7orporateI<o"ernment 1ebt = #t the bottom of most concerned talk about capitalism is a faulty comparison between o"ernment debt and personal debt. 4eople ha"e a definite and limited lifespan within which to repay their debts, either the end of their workin life or the end of all of it. 7orporations and o"ernments, howe"er, ha"e no such loomin limit. # common ethical ar ument a ainst a debt based system is that national debt le"els are so hi h that they could ne"er be repaid. :ut this completely misunderstands the function of debt in a non=time restricted structure. It assumes the ob(ect of such debt is to repay it, and not (ust any i"en debt, but all of it. #s if the ob(ect of a o"ernment is to be debt free. :ut does that make senseC I don2t think it does and I think it2s $uite easy to show why. :orrowin # ainst #ssets #ssume that you are at the head of a company, (and maybe e"en that you like the ethos of your company and think it does ood in the world). 0hin s are oin well and you need a new office to house your e'pandin workforce, so you build an office block worth J*bn. Bow, you mi ht think that the money you used in construction has H one2. 0hat it has simply been spent, like the money spent on a ni ht out, or a holiday. :ut that isn2t strai htforwardly the case, because at any time you are able to sell the buildin and recoup the in"estment. 0hat buildin isn2t (ust a workspace5 it2s also a bi pile of Hpotential2 money. So what should you do about all this Hpotential2 moneyC What should you do about all that latent potential for doin thin s and buildin thin sC 0here2s so 6

many reat thin s that you could do, if only you hadn2t had to spend all that money on a new office. Well the current solution is to borrow money a ainst the "alue of the asset. 6ou o to your bank and say that you would like to borrow money for a certain use and if it all oes wron they can ha"e your buildin . 0he in"estor assesses what you want the money for, looks at the "alue of the asset and a deal is struck (or not). 1ebt is a stren th of the system because by borrowin a ainst assets you are able to use pre"iously inaccessible money for further "entures = such as buildin a second J*bn office block. 0wo office blocks for the price of one. )a ic. 1on't like office blocksC /ow about schools and hospitalsC <o"ernment pro(ects are often financed in the e'act same manner. <o"ernments don2t (ust spend money that they et from ta'es, they borrow a ainst their assets (and a ainst estimates of future producti"ity) in order to finance all those lo"ely pro(ects we ri htly demand of them. So should a o"ernment aim to be debt freeC 0he faulty analo y with personal debt makes it sound as if o"ernments are oin to a pay day loan company on )onday mornin ha"in spent too much at their mate2s birthday on ;riday ni ht. 0he reality is a lot more calculated. When you in"est in infrastructure, your output increases. In the current system, so lon as there are schools that need buildin or hospitals or roads, this kind of borrowin is not only a ood thin to do, it is the ri ht thin to do. ;ractional Deser"e :ankin 0he ne't part of the pu%%le is that if the total amount of capital a"ailable in the system was limited, as we build more and more thin s we2d run out of capital to lend a ainst their "alue. Want to build a new hospital, please take a ticket, the in"estment banker will be with you in ? years when her pre"ious in"estment pays off. #s such we operate under a system of H;ractional Deser"e :ankin 2. ;D: is the practice that a bank need only keep a fraction of its total deposits in reser"e and can then loan out the remainin sum. If they ha"e J*GGG of deposits from customers, and the o"ernment ha"e set the reser"e limit at *G,, they may loan out J+GG to a second customer. Bice and simple so far, but here2s where we step throu h the lookin lass. What would happen if the second customer deposited their J+GG at the same bankC 0hat2s ri ht, the bank will ha"e J*,+GG in deposits. We started with J*,GGG and now we ha"e J*,+GG. If you2re new to this idea, take a moment to think about it. Where did the e'tra J+GG come fromC

0he immediate answer (althou h I2ll come back to this later) is that it was created by the e"ent of lendin it out. Someone at the bank clicked a button and the money Hpop2 came into e'istence. 0he "ast ma(ority of all money in circulation today isn2t physical, it li"es on spreadsheets. In this way we are able to e'pand our economies. 1on2t think we need to e'pandC 0ry tellin that to all the people li"in in slums all o"er the world. 0ry tellin that to all the people workin on minimum wa e that dream of ettin a loan to start a small business. ;inance 0he Dealisation of /uman 4otential )aybe there2s another way, but it won2t do any harm to know what e'actly is oin on in the current system as well. 6ou see it2s "ery easy to o"erlook what happens when money is lent to a business. We2re all "ery focussed on the bankin system as bein about "oodoo economics all the stuff that doesn2t really seem to do anythin currency tradin , the futures market, de"ious accountin practices that channel money into ta' ha"ens. It2s "ery easy to for et the simple fact that the "ast ma(ority of bankin is about reco nisin a human potential and then usin finance to unlock that potential. Someone oes to an in"estor and says, HIf you i"e me the money to buy these tools and a "an, I will be able to start a successful plasterin company2. 0he in"estor will look at the "iability of the plan! 1o you ha"e e'perience of plasterin C 1o you ha"e any contacts that will pay you for workC /a"e you really thou ht this throu hC If they are a reed that this is a "iable business, the money may be lent and the business be ins. 3et2s assume the business is successful. Somethin really $uite brilliant has happened. Someone had the potential to be a self=employed plasterer and now they are a self=employed plasterer. 0hey used to earn J*.,GGG pounds a year and now they earn J.G,GGG a year. )a ic. Bo, not ma ic, human. :ut why did they ha"e to o to a bank, couldn2t they loan the money from a friend or relati"eC Bot e"eryone has this ability. I don2t. :ut there is a more important issue at stake. In a finite system, we didn2t need another plasterer. 0here was a limited amount of plasterin work that needed doin , and it was already bein done. :ut with a ;ractional Deser"e system there is e"er more money in circulation, there are more and more people in the position to H et that blown plaster in the li"in room ne't to the radiator2 fi'ed. 6ou see, that2s really where that e'tra J+GG pounds came from. 0hat J+GG that was ma ic2d (human2d) into e'istence is the realisation that there is a desire for more to be done and that it can be done. It2s the realisation that i"en the opportunity we really could do with some more stuff. #nd I don2t (ust mean trainers and diamond encrusted watches, I mean more train=tracks and "accines and smart phones and solar panels and houses and ni hts at the theatre and beer and...well I don2t really know what it2s called, but I2"e put it in my li"in room on the mantelpiece and I like lookin at it. 8

Bo 7riticisms of ;ractional Deser"e :ankin (not here anyway) 0here are a number of criticisms of ;ractional Deser"e :ankin , the key ones that come to mind are! the problem of interest, the problem of inflation, the corrupti"e influence of bein able to print money, boom and bust cycles, and what if there was a run on the bankC :ut they2re topics for another day. 0he only thin I would like to et across here is that in order to understand our economic system you must reco nise that there is, at least in theory, a way of understandin debt as bein a force for oodE Sadly, the "ast ma(ority of anti=capitalists that I ha"e e"er met really ha"en2t ot their head around these $uite basic ideas. 0here are also a lot that ha"e5 I know who I2d rather talk politics with. 0here are few thin s that are certain in philosophy, one of them is that before you can truly say that you are criticisin somethin you must first understand it. %oss &ullum

To continue this philosophical $ourney%%%

&ur website! www.thephilosophytakeaway.com 0his weeks artist was )ichal <robelny! http!IIm robelny.de"iantart.comI &ur ;acebook roup for contributors! http!IIwww.facebook.comIKEI roupsI*?..3G3A*?*A.G@I &ur twitter! http!IItwitter.comIKEIphiltakeaway