Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for December, 2008

Recently, I had a discussion here with a friend of mine. I held that it is perfectly coherent to publicly support basic equal rights for ethnic, racial, and sexual minorities, while still making privately jokes about their ways of life. My friend accused me of hypocrisy.

Now here’s a quote from Bhikhu Parekh:

“In most societies libel is an offense. Broadly speaking it consists in making public, untruthful damaging remarks about an individual that go beyond fair comment. Libel is an offense, not so much because it causes pain to, or offends the feelings of, the individual concerned, for the damaging and untruthful remarks made in private do not constitute libel, as because they lower him in the eyes of others, damage his social standing, and harm his reputation” (bold emphasis mine; italic emphasis in original).

[source: Bhikhu Parekh, “The Rushdie Affair: Research Agenda for Political Philosophy”, in: Will Kymlicka (ed.), The Rights of Minority Cultures, OUP, 1995, p. 314]

The legal distinction between private and public shows that there are things you can do in private, but not in public. So it is perfectly coherent to publicly support, say, the rights of gays, while still be able to have a good laugh when you hear, in private, a good joke about homosexuals. But is it also a moral thing to do both? I think so. A simple joke is something which is not serious: neither in its content, nor in its purpose. This is why a joke cannot be considered as “libel”: it does not intend harm (it does not intend to demean the social status of a gay person). We “just” joke (now we’re laughing at you as a gay, and then probably we’ll be laughing at me as a blonde). Of course, this is totally different from taking a stance in mass-media and saying that homosexuals are ill, disgusting, etc.

Read Full Post »

Apologies

 The articles posted below (dated December 1-2, 2008) were written in the last year. They are imported from my personal blog (in Romanian).

This is why there might be some inconsistency between what some posts say and the date when they were written. Please do accept my apologies for this. Although they are not actual anymore, I thought what they say may still be interesting: this is the reason why I imported them here.

Things are a bit messy right now, because this blog was born very recently. I promise the quality of the blog will increase in time.

Read Full Post »

Whaaaaaat? Half of Cambridge students admit that they practice plagiarism????!!!! 64 % of the Law School students already did that?!!!!! Herr Rambu must be happy now… Read the article in The Daily Telegraph, here.

Read Full Post »

According to this study, “Grandparent Caregivers Cut Kid’s Injury Risk in Half”. A short and nice analysis of the study (written by Summer Johnsom for blog.bioethics.net) here. No news, indeed. If you don’t have grandparents, you should buy some… I know this better than anyone!

Read Full Post »

[UPDATE. The post was moved from my previous blog]

In the year 2000, Romania confronted itself with a very nasty political situation: in the second tour of elections for the Romanian Presidency, we had to choose between a former communist leader (Ion Iliescu) and the leader of the far-right party (Corneliu Vadim Tudor). The situation was awful indeed: we hated them both, but we still had to vote for one of them. So we elected the one that seemed, at that time, the lesser wrong: we elected the former communist leader. Cynical as it were, many people who suffered under the communist regime were then obliged to vote for a communist, because of the fear of the far-right policies.

The USA seems to be in the same political situation now. On the one hand, there are Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama – who are better suited to be TV stars, showmen or whatever – but not presidents! They look so weak, a sort of “crash test dummies”, or actors begging for audience. Now, in the actual context, where Russia is going to be governed in the next 10 years, in a way or another, by the same unmerciful and strong “Tzar” Putin; where terrorism has become a real threat to all of us; where extremism and xenophobia undergo a strong revival all over the world; where USA must continue to be the guardian of liberal values and individual rights in the world – in this context, the president of the USA must be a strong person – not a crash test dummy. USA needs a new Margaret Tacher – not a Hillary Clinton. USA needs a new Ronald Reagan – not a Barack Obama.

On the other hand, there is John McCain. He is not a TV star – on the contrary, it seems that he lacks a lot of charisma. He seems – at least prima facie – to be a strong person (well, he fought in Vietnam, right?). But just take a closer look at his political opinions. He strongly opposes gay marriages. He strongly opposes abortion. So McCain (and many republicans, as a matter of fact) don’t give a damn on liberal rights: he denies to some people the right to marry whomever they wish; and he denies others the right to do with their bodies whatever they wish. The USA led by John McCain cannot be the guardian of human rights. It cannot be the champion of democracy and liberalism in the world.

So it seems to me that the USA undergo this year a process of “Romanianization”: the Americans have to choose between two wrongs: Clinton or Obama, on the one hand, and McCain, on the other hand. Ho is the lesser wrong? What will the Americans choose, between the Muppets show and the potential dictator? I’m afraid this time the answer is not that easy anymore…

Read Full Post »

For English readers, here. For Romanian readers (a better account of how the crisis affects ordinary people, and how Romanians and Serbians take advantage of the Hungarian crisis), here. And a political-economical analysis here. And Csaba Astalosz’s analysis here.

Read Full Post »

These are my two dogs:

Helga (Arizonai Almodozok Faviola, b. 14. 02. 2001, Hungary):

helga1 helga3 helga4 euhelgacodrut

Olga (Chaitan Legend Chow Charisma, b. 24. 10. 2002, Bucuresti, Romania):

olga5 olga4 olga11 helgasiolga1

Here are some puppies born in my kennel (The “Heliotropium” Kennel, recognized by The Fédération Cynologique Internationale):

Bozo Blue Bear (Bozo) (b. 26.08.2004) (owner: Irina Amariei, Iasi, Roamania). The first picture was shot at the CAC Braila, Romania, 2006. The second picture was shot at the CACIB Targu Mures, Romania, 2006
bozo-2 bozo

Battina Blues (Rania) (b. 26.08.2004) (owner: Marcela Coldea, Cluj-Napoca, Romania)

rania

Heliotropium Codrut (Codrut) (b. 21.04.2006) (Owners: Mihaela Asavei and Dany Bourdet, Lille, France):

codrut04 codrut08

Only for Romanian readers: I also wrote a lot about how to raise a Chow here.

Finally, a nice picture of Helga:

helga-fata

Read Full Post »

Volkswagen Beetle in Wikipedia here. Some pictures:

broscutarosie2 broscutaneagra1 broscutalila

broscutagalbena3 broscutaalbastra broscutaalba51

broscutaalba4 broscutaalba1 img_2225

img_2297 img_23171 img_2316

img_2881

More Old Volkswagen Beetle here.

Strange / odd / queer Old Volkswagen Beetle here.

Dan Blanaru’s photography blog (in which you can find lots of VW Beetle and Bulli), here.

And a very nice present from Stefan and George (chocolate rules!):

broscuta-ciocolata-2 broscuta-ciocolata-3 broscuta-ciocolata-1

Read Full Post »

In English:

1. “I disagree with what you say; but I will defend until my last breath your right to say it” (Voltaire, my translation)

2. “Deficiency in judgment is properly that which is called stupidity; and for such a failing we know no remedy. A dull or narrow-minded person, to whom nothing is wanting but a proper degree of understanding, may be improved by tuition, even so far as to deserve the epithet of learned. But as such persons frequently labor under a deficiency in the faculty of judgment, it is not uncommon to find men extremely learned who in the application of their science betray a lamentable degree this irremediable want” (Immanuel Kant, Critique of Pure Reason)

3. “The dog respects the man, the cat swindles him, only the pig considers him as an equal” (Confucius – my translation)

4. “Dangerous tools should be taken away from the fool’s hands. Let’s start with pens” (Frank Llyod Wright, my translation)

5. “True human goodness, in all its purity and freedom, can come to the fore only when its recipient has no power. Man­kind’s true moral test, its fundamental test (which lies deeply buried from view), consists of its attitude towards those who are at its mercy: animals. And in this respect mankind has suffered a fundamental debacle, a debacle so fundamental that all others stem from it” (Milan Kundera, “The Unbearable Lightness of Being”)

6. “… This above all: to thine own self be true,

And it must follow, as the night the day,

Thou canst not then be false to any man”

(William Shakespeare, Hamlet, Prince of Denmark)

7. “I never think of the future: it comes soon enough” (Albert Einstein)

8. “Look in my face: my name is Might-have-been” (Dante Gabriel Rosetti)

9. “… an animal, at the end of a few months, is what it will be all its life; and its species, at the end of a thousand years, is what it was in the first of those thousand years. Why is man alone subject to becoming an imbecile? It is not that he thereby returns to his primitive state, and that, while the animal which has acquired nothing and which also has nothing to lose, always retains its instinct, man, in losing through old age or other accidents all that his perfectibility has enabled him to acquire, thus falls even lower than the animal itself?” (Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Discours on the Origin of Inequality)

10. “The most beautiful experience we can have is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion that stands at the cradle of true art and true science. Whoever does not know it and can no longer wonder, no longer marvel, is as good as dead, and his eyes are dimmed. It was the experience of mystery — even if mixed with fear — that engendered religion. A knowledge of the existence of something we cannot penetrate, our perceptions of the profoundest reason and the most radiant beauty, which only in their most primitive forms are accessible to our minds: it is this knowledge and this emotion that constitute true religiosity. In this sense, and only this sense, I am a deeply religious man… I am satisfied with the mystery of life’s eternity and with a knowledge, a sense, of the marvelous structure of existence — as well as the humble attempt to understand even a tiny portion of the Reason that manifests itself in nature.” (Albert Einstein, The World As I See It)

In German:

1. “Philosophieren heisst eigentlich nicht leben, leben heisst eigentlich nicht philosophieren” (Fichte)

2. “Wir sind nichts; was wir suchen, ist alles” (Holderlin, Hyperion)

In Romanian:

1. „O data pentru totdeauna, exista multe lucruri pe care eu nu vreau sa le stiu. Intelepciunea pune limite pina si cunoasterii” (Friedrich Nietzsche, Amurgul idolilor)

2. “Ceea ce creste-n singuratate e doar ce-aduce fiecare cu sine, chiar si bestia din el. De aceea eu nu recomand prea multora singuratatea […]

Iar daca marea lovitura ati ratat-o, oare sunteti si voi niste ratati? Iar daca insiva voi v-ati ratat, e oare omul pentru-aceasta-un ratat? Iar daca omul e ratat, ei bine: inainte! Inainte! […]

Cu cit ceva e mai de pret, cu-atit e mai greu de obtinut. Voi, oameni superiori, ce va aflati aici, nu sunteti toti – niste ratati?

Fiti voiosi, ce-are-a face! Mai sint atitea lucruri cu putinta! Deprindeti-va sa rideti de voi insiva, asa cum trebuie sa rideti!” (Friedrich Nietzsche, Asa grait-a Zarathustra, p. 370)

3. “Eu spun deci: orice fiinta care nu poate actiona altfel decit sub Ideea de libertate este, tocmai de aceea, din puct de vedere practic, intr-adevar libera, adica pentru ea sunt valabile toate legile care sunt unite inseparabil cu libertatea” (I. Kant, Intemeierea metafizicii moravurilor)

4. “Din pacate, si analiza stiintei – ‘filosofia stiintei’ – este aenintata sa degenereze intr-o moda si sa devina o chestiune de specialitate. Dar filosofii nu trebuie sa fie specialisti. In ce ma priveste, ma intereseaza stiinta si filosofia numai fiindca doresc sa invat ceva despre enigma lumii in care traim si despre enigma cunoasterii acelei lumi de catre om. Si socot ca numai o renastere a interesului nostru pentru aceste enigme poate salva stiinta si filosofia de specializarea ingusta si de credina obscurantista in calificarea speciala a expertului, in cunoasterea si autoritatea lui personala; o credinta ce se potriveste, din pacate, asa de bine erei noastre ‘post-rationaliste’ si ‘post-critice’ care se dedica cu mindrie distrugerii traditiei filosofiei rationaliste si a gindirii rationale insasi” (Karl Popper, Logica cercetarii)

5. “Ti-am mai spus-o si alta data, jupine, fiecare cu raiul lui. Pentru tine, raiul va fi ticsit de carti si de mari damigene de cereala. Pentru altul, va fi plin cu butoaie de vin, de rom, de coniac. Pentru altul, cu teancuri de lire sterline. Pentru mine raiul inseamna asta: o odaita parfumata cu rochii baltate, sapunuri de toaleta, un pat foarte lat cu arcuri si, linga mine, o muiere” (Nikos Kazantzakis, Alexis Zorba)

6. “O noua vrere ii invat pe oameni: sa-si stie drumul si sa-l vrea cu dinadinsul, cel strabatut de ei orbeste, sa simta ca e drumul bun, sa nu-l mai paraseasca pe furis, asemenea bolnavilor si muribunzilor!” (Friedrich Nietzsche, Asa grait-a Zarathustra)

7. “Viata noastra nu este un vis – dar ea trebuie sa devina si va deveni poate unul” (Novalis, Intre veghe si vis)

8. “Atit omul, cit si animalele, au aceleasi senzatii si impresii, pasiuni, impulsuri si emotii similare, unele chiar mai complexe cum ar fi gelozia, ambitia, recunostinta, vanitatea […] posedind aceleasi capacitati de imitatie, atentie, ratiune, alegere, memorie, imaginatie, asociatie de idei, inteligenta desi in grade diferite” (Charles Darwin)

Read Full Post »

60196881 229612543

(copyright Mark Cox; source)

I am not hypocrite. I do not hold that it is ok to kill pigs for food, but it is not ok to kill dogs or dolphins with the same aim. “Superior” flesh-eating animals (humans included) always kill in order to feed themselves. This is nature’s food chain. Moreover, what we eat is determined by nature in case of non-human animals, and by culture in case of humans. So probably an Indian is equally outraged by the thought that I eat cow, as I am outraged by the idea that Chinese people eat dogs.

The problem is not so much the fact that we kill for food – the problem is rather what we eat and how we treat those animals before eating them. I hold it is immoral to kill animals from endangered species for food; and it is immoral to treat animals with cruelty before or in the course of killing them. Moreover, to mistreat and kill animals just for fun (as toreros do in Spanish bullfighting) reveals (at least for me) something very ugly about human being as such.

But toreros are not the only mean exponents of human nature. There are also the inhabitants from the Faroe Islands. They kill every year hundreds of whales and dolphins, and they really seem to find a lot of fun in this show. Indeed, everything looks like a popular festival. What kind of festival? You can read the story and watch some pictures (don’t look if your heart is weak!) here. You can find out more about the history of whaling in the Faroe Islands here. And the proof that they also kill dolphins is to be found here.

Of course, they defend their practice by saying that this is their tradition. But tradition alone, tradition in itself can never be a good argument. The human being must adapt itself and change its habits, if these habits have disastrous physical and moral consequences. But probably I’m too naïve.

[By the way: aren’t whales and dolphins endangered species?]

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »