Žemlovka

"Slušnost, rozum, odpovědnost, upřímnost, kulturu a toleranci lze prosazovat - má-li být alespoň malá naděje na úspěch - jediným způsobem: slušně, rozumně, odpovědně, upřímně, kulturně a tolerantně.  Uznávám, že to není z hlediska každodenní politiky právě praktická cesta." - Václav Havel, Letní přemítání

"What I shall call 'true rationalism' is the rationalism of Socrates. It is the awareness of one's limitations, the intellectual modesty of those who know how often they err, and how much they depend on others even for this knowledge. It is the realisation that we must not expect too much from reason: that argument rarely settles a question, although it is the only means for learning - not to see clearly, but to see more clearly than before. Rationalism is therefore bound up with the idea that the other fellow has a right to be heard, and to defend his arguments. It thus implies the recognition of the claim to tolerance, at least of those who are not intolerance themselves.  One does not kill a man when one adopts the attitude of first listening to his arguments." -Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies

If we look far into the future of our science, what will it mean to say we ‘understand’ the mechanism of behaviour? The obvious answer is what may be called the neurophysiologist’s nirvana: the complete wiring diagram of the nervous system of a species, every synapse labelled as excitatory or inhibitory; presumably, also a graph, for each axon, of nerve impulses as a function of time during the course of each behaviour pattern ... [However] real understanding will only come from distillation of general principles at a higher level, to parallel for example the great principles of genetics — particulate inheritance, continuity of germ-line and non-inheritance of acquired characteristics, dominance, linkage, mutation, and so on. It seems possible that at higher levels some important principles may be anticipated from behavioural evidence alone. The major principles of genetics were all inferred from external evidence long before the internal molecular structure of the gene was even ...

"He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them. But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion… Nor is it enough that he should hear the opinions of adversaries from his own teachers, presented as they state them, and accompanied by what they offer as refutations. He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them…he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form." -John Stuart Mill, On Liberty

Originally published on my old blog -  link here. Why is it that the disgusting is so often moralised? And why is it that moral violations are found disgusting? Tybur’s  functional perspective draws upon principles of evolutionary psychology and provides possible answers to both of these questions.  Moral rules are ubiquitous across human societies, and their violations are condemned and punished, but for this to take place the rules have to be first established. Since the need for new moral rules arises rapidly as societies develop, people have to decide what is considered right or wrong before there is enough time to take into account all possible consequences of such decisions. Disgust, which unlike other emotions (e.g. anger) works devoid of conscious reflection, has a great intuitive appeal and as such it can be used as a tool for endorsement of moral rules. Therefore, actions that invoke pathogen and sexual disgust before they are considered imm...

Originally published on my old blog  link here. About a year ago, I watched an episode called "His Last Vow" in the third season of BBC's crime series  Sherlock ,  which, as the name hints, is a modern adaptation of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's stories about the famous detective from Baker Street. The show as a whole is a fairly watchable pastime as long as one ignores the once-in-a-while cringeworthy moments when Sherlock Holmes presents his ingenious psychological analyses and extrapolations. However, Sherlock's psychoanalysis is not what I want to talk about here. Rather I'd like to have a look at the plot of that particular episode I watched, and ask you whether there is something odd about it. The anti-hero is Charles Augustus Magnussen who, unlike others from previous episodes, is neither a murderer, nor a terrorist - he is a blackmailer. He hoards information about powerful people and then uses it to his own advantage. This is how Magnussen...

"Myslím, že si neuvědomuješ vážnost situace," říkám si dnes v koupelně před zrcadlem. A co tím myslím? Něco v tom smyslu, že svůj život neberu dostatečně vážně, že mám pořád tendenci konat lehkovážné činy a zabývat se zbytečnostmi, jakoby mi ani nedocházelo, že toto je jediný pokus žít, který mám. A co pak? Šmitec. Finito. Tři mince pro Chárona. Game Over. "Co jste vy, byli jsme i my. Co jsme my, budete i vy," jak je psáno na hřbitovní bráně v Jaroměřicích nad Rokytnou. Tak tam stojím s kartáčkem v ruce a pěnou u huby a v hlavě mám na pár vteřin ticho, které se pak spontánně rozplyne do večerní všednosti. A zase nic. Tyhle sentimenty nikdy moc dlouho netrvají. A je to škoda. O vážnosti situace sice rozumově vím, ale že bych nějak niterně cítil tu přítomnost Dámoklova meče nad temenem, to se říct nedá. A přitom by se to tak hodilo!  Co s tím? No na rameno Carpe diem  si tetovat nenechám. Vykloktám, vyčistím si uši a půjdu spát. A možná si půstím Nohavi...