MOST INTERESTING ESSAYS 12/4/25: THEORY & TRUTH, MEMORY & INTELLIGENCE, PSYCHIATRY, WRITING, EGYPT IN 2019, LIVE OR DIE, GARDEN OF EDEN, SOCIAL DYSFUNCTION, DEATH ROW, RIGHT & WRONG, FRANTZ FANON, TRUTHINESS, CONSPIRACY, LIBERALITY, LIFE IS LIQUID, BECOMING god-LIKE, TIPPING POINT, VANISHING WORLD
Brianna Weist philosophical book is worth listening to as a guide but not as an authority of how one should live their life.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
101 Essays That Will Change the Way You Think
Author: Brianna Wiest
Narration by: Abby Craden
Brianna Wiest (Author, earned a BA in English and received an Honorary Doctorate in Literature from Elizabethtown College.
This is an odd book because it is written by someone who is not a psychologist, psychiatrist or therapist but presumes to know how one can understand themselves, think differently and become a more psychologically heathy human being. “101 Essays…” has become a popularly read and listened to book by the public. Of course, one can take her observations like one would take the meaning of many non-fiction authors who have a point of view about life and living. They are called philosophers.
One finds Wiest’s essays make sense, but her formal education makes one uncomfortable with her expressed beliefs.
On the other hand, what formal education was there for Socrates? (A. I. generated image of Socrates as a young man.)
Weist is straight forward in her opinions, and she taps into a human wish for one to be psychologically and physically as good as they can be. Changing “…the Way You Think” is no easy task but the idea of consciously understanding ourselves is an oxymoron that limits one’s ability to change. We are as likely to lie to ourselves about who we are or what we believe as to have a true understanding of ourselves.
Daniel Kahneman is a renowned psychologist and Nobel laureate. He is an American citizen that served in the Israeli military and used his education, research, and experience to write “Thinking Fast and Slow”. His observations explore many aspects of human decision-making.
Weist logically argues one can become a better human being by changing the way they think. She is not acting as a clinical psychologist but as a philosopher of life and how one may make the most of it. If one understands Weist from that perspective, she is like Marcus Aurelius, Soren Kierkegaard, or Simone de Beauvoir. She has a philosophical point of view but not necessarily a happier or more fulfilling life.
The meaning of experience on one’s life is often too opaque for one’s understanding without the help of others.
Weist writes we should see what hurts others and ourselves and quit doing those hurtful things by changing our mind. This seems a good idea but denies the subjectivity and the unique experiences in one’s life. Many people are unable to understand the impact of experience on their lives. They are unable to change the way they think because they are unable to understand how or why an experience has affected their lives. Only with the help of a qualified psychologist, psychiatrist, or trained therapist can most people objectively understand themselves to constructively change their mind.
Nevertheless, Weist philosophical book is worth listening to as a guide but not an authority on how one should live their life. Most human beings are not introspective enough to find their way through life without the help of a person trained to elicit what we do not know about ourselves. On the other hand, it appears Weist has a genius beyond her years of life.
The story of McCandless’s life is that meaning in life comes from people and nature, not one or the other but both.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
Into the Wild
Author: Jon Krakauer
Narration by: Philip Franklin
John Krakauer (Author, mountaineer, raised in Corvallis, Oregon.)
The main character in “Into the Wild”, tuned in and dropped out. His “tune in” is not to drugs but a wish to understand the meaning of life. Christopher Johnson McCandless chose, after graduating from Atlanta, Georgia’s Emory University, to live off the grid of society, i.e. particularly capitalist society. His degree is a BA in history and anthropology. McCandless chooses to drive around the country, working at dead-end jobs to sustain himself until he finds a place to live in a natural habitat, without the aid of society which he believes keeps him from understanding the meaning of life. He began a “walk about” from Georgia with a plan to explore survival in the frigid wilds of Alaska. McCandless kept a journal of his search for life’s meaning. His journal became the guiding source for Jon Krakauer’s book about McCandless’s brief life.
Christopher Johnson McCandless (1967-1992, died at the age of 24.)
The McCandless family picture with Christopher either before or after enrollment at Emory University.
McCandless came from a solidly middleclass family but rejected capitalism defined by the desire for money, power, and/or prestige. He obviously loved the outdoors and wished to explore the possibility of living off the land with whatever nature had to offer. McCandless rebels against capitalist beliefs when graduating from college. He begins a search for the meaning of life beyond the principles of a capitalist society. He sought understanding by experiencing the attractions and dangers of the American wilderness. McCandless wishes to be free of materialism, his familial relationships, and the conventions of a middleclass capitalist life.
(One wonders if McCandless’s story is part of today’s rising homelessness with people living in tents, sleeping in business doorways and on sidewalks of American cities? Are Americans becoming disillusioned with capitalism because the gap between rich and poor is rising and pushing the middleclass into poverty? Some argue the cost of living is climbing faster than the wages of employment.)
McCandless graduation form Emory University in Atlanta Georgia.
With a BA in history and anthropology, McCandless graduates from Emory in 1990 and leaves Atlanta, heading west. Rather than look for a job or extending his education, he donates his savings to charity, cuts off communication with his family, and journeys to the west in a 1982, B210, Datsun. He heads southwest, traveling to Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas, and New Mexico. He spends some time in Arizona with odd jobs and becomes stranded when his Datsun is disabled by a flood. He hitchhikes to California via Las Vegas, goes through South Dakota with his determined destination being Alaska in 1992. Nearly two years have passed since graduating from Emory.
Map showing McCandless’s two years of travel from the East to the West, mid-West, and on to Alaska.
McCandless kept a journal of his travels. The author, John Krakauer, interviews some of the people McCandless meets and/or works for that are noted in his journey. All say he was a nice person and hard worker who dependably showed up for work. However, one employer noted he had to be told to take a shower and wear socks when he came to work at their fast-food restaurant. McCandless was obviously homeless and had no shower facilities in which to bathe. He reluctantly complied as best he could but soon left to find his way to Alaska.
Sample of McCandless’s journal when he called himself Alex Supertramp.
McCandless arrives in southern California. He meets an older (80 something) American named Ronald Franz, a leatherworker, who tries to convince McCandless to give up his wandering life. They become friends but McCandless leaves Franz without saying goodbye as he heads north. The importance of their relationship is shown in a letter sent to Franz by McCandless that explains his inner conflicts. McCandless explains his need for independence and the freedom it gives him to personally connect with himself. By abandoning materialism, wealth, and social expectations, McCandless believes it makes him free. The tension created by McCandless’s belief in social isolation versus human relationship is expressed in his letter to Franz. Being alone is no answer to the conflict one feels toward their family or those who are part of society. Part of one’s identity, belief in who they are, and belief in oneself is reinforced by other people, not in wilderness isolation. This is a lesson of life that McCandless refuses to see or understand. The well-known poet, John Donne, recognizes “No man is an island”. All humans are interconnected which is a truth McCandless refuses to see.
McCandless dies in a Fairbanks city Transit bus he used as a shelter in Alaska. John Krakauer speculates on the cause of death being inadvertent poisoning from eating potato seeds because of McCandless’s hunger, emaciation, and lack of nourishment. If there is meaning in life, McCandless search and isolation is in vain. The story of McCandless’s life is that meaning in life comes from people and nature, not one or the other but both.
Aristotle’s belief was that the goal of life is living well, Sartre suggests there is no inherent meaning to life, Bentham said the goal of life is happiness. What does Gladwell believe?
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
OUTLIERS
Author: Malcolm Gladwell
Narration by: Malcolm Gladwell
Malcolm Gladwell (Author, Canadian journalist, and public speaker.)
“Outliers” makes several points, some of which are insightful while others are debatable. As with all observations of life and discovery, correlation of what we see, hear, and understand does not prove causation. Gladwell shows the advance of civilization and great successes in life are from luck, timing, and hard work more than I.Q.
Gladwell offers examples of chance and the circumstances of an era that advance society.
Gladwell explains intelligence alone does not make a person successful. He offers a brief biography of a high IQ person who did not achieve success despite his intelligence. He notes intelligence and one’s culture must be accompanied by individual hard work, interest, and commitment as well as the luck of being born at the right time. Gladwell’s examples of success are Bill Gates, the Beatles, sports’ stars, retail clothiers, and lawyers. Each of his examples are a result of being in the right place at the right time with an innate wish to work hard that makes “Outliers” personally and/or financially successful.
The founders of Microsoft, Paul Allen (L) and Bill Gates.
Gladwell argues his case about “Outliers” by offering several examples. The founders of Microsoft were born at a time when computers were first being discovered. The Beatles lived in a culture that idolizes musicianship and entertainment. A quirk in society that artificially determines children born in certain months are presumed by some to make good to great sports stars which results in higher-order support of children born in particular months of the year. That birth-month’ choice garnered extraordinary support of parents and coaches according to Gladwell. Those children became sports stars as a result of that early parental and coaching support of their sports careers. Gladwell goes on to suggest observation and experience of immigrating Jewish clothes-makers arrived in America and became wealthy merchants at a time of America’s economic growth. And finally, Gladwell notes lawyers began creating elite legal firms to support growing litigation between growing mid-twentieth century American corporations. Gladwell’s common denominators were relative intelligence, a burning interest in cultural change, and a commitment to hard work. The circumstances of the time (new invention and social change) and hard work, rather than high I.Q., were the primary causes of individual success.
Cultural backgrounds.
Gladwell suggests cultural backgrounds prepared some to seize opportunities that were overlooked by the general population. He suggests some Jewish immigrants who migrated from discriminative cultures, were liberated by the freedom available in America. Gladwell notes the creation of the garment industry in New York and the rise of successful Jewish legal firms are examples of seized opportunities missed by many in the 20th century. The common denominators were hard work, social change, and culture.
The criticism one may have of Gladwell’s book is in the examples he chooses to make his arguments.
Gladwell’s examples are chosen to support his argument, but they narrow the reality of the complex life lived by most humans. He oversimplifies success because it seems narrowly defined as wealth and/or fame rather than happiness or contentment. He defines success as something that requires a “10,000” hour commitment of research and practice, i.e. an arbitrary criterion that has no basis in fact. People make their own choices in life whether it is as a nerd, a famous musician, a high-powered lawyer, or one who loves to read and spends time listening/reading and reviewing books.
Determinism vs. free will.
Gladwell seems to say life is deterministic, but many choose to adapt rather than be driven by the circumstances of life. This generation’s great change will be in the implementation of A.I. Massive investment is being made in A.I. today with momentous change coming to the world of employment.
Aristotle’s belief was that the goal of life is living well, Sartre suggests there is no inherent meaning to life, Bentham said the goal of life is happiness. What does Gladwell believe?
“Betraying Big Brother” is not wrong about gender inequality but the author’s anger and personal choices cloud the author’s message. Gender inequality is real everywhere in the world. Education is a beginning, but practice is the end.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
Betraying Big Brother (The Feminist Awakening in China)
Author: Leta Hong Fincher
NarratedBy: Emily Woo Zeller
Leta Hong Fincher (Author, American journalist, feminist and writer, first American to receive a Ph.D from Tsinghua University’s Department of Sociology in Bejing., graduated from Harvard with a BA and a master’s degree in East Asian Studies from Stanford.)
The education and experience of Leta Hong Fincher is somewhat betrayed by her anger in “Betraying Big Brother”. Misogyny is an international reality that defies the truth of human equality. This reviewer’s prejudice, like the author’s biases are suspect because of their respective life experiences. This book reviewer was raised by a single parent mother who worked to keep two sons with a roof over their head and food on the table. How women survive inequality is made of the same stuff as that which plagues minorities around the world. The difference is that women are not a minority.
She writes of being a 15-year-old girl who is physically and emotionally abused by two boys who are friends of an older male friend that takes her to a get together of young acquaintances. That event burns a memory into Fincher’s mind that sets her on a journey thru life. One reading/listening to “Betraying Big Brother” recognizes the truth of what the author writes is reinforced by her life experiences. Of course, that is true of all human beings, but anger diminishes the impact of what Fincher says and writes.
Leadership?
Whether living in a democracy or autocracy, sexual inequality is present. Gender discrimination is universal. America and China talk the talk but fail to walk the walk. Fincher writes of Mao’s saying that “women hold up half the sky” implying he believed in gender equality. Mao spoke of marriage reform and labor participation but patriarchal norms were adhered to with women workers not being paid the same as men nor offered similar positions of power.
Xi speaks of gender equality, but no women are on the 24-member Politburo.
Xi also speaks of gender equality, but no women are on the 24-member Politburo while pay and promotions lag behind men. Fincher writes of Big Brother censorship, surveillance, and detention of women in China. (One presumes that is also true of everyone in China.) Like Trump, Xi promotes women’s roles in domestic stability, and their childbearing responsibilities. America has yet to elect a woman as President. Equal pay for equal work is improving in America, but a gap still exists with lower starting salaries, performance evaluation biases, and fewer high-profile assignments or promotions.
“Betraying Big Brother” is not wrong about gender inequality but the author’s anger and personal choices cloud the author’s message. Gender inequality is real everywhere in the world. Education is a beginning, but practice is the end.
Though Mahbubani’s book is quite provocative, it is short and interesting. “How the West Lost It” is certainly worth reading/listening to, but few Presidents of the United States have reversed the admittedly slow improvement of “equality of opportunity” in America.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
How the West Lost It (A Provocation)
Author: Kishore Mahbubani
NarratedBy: Jonathan Keeble
Kishore Mahbubani (Author, Singaporean diplomat and geopolitical consultant, former Fellow at Harvard University’s Center for International Relations, formally served as the United Nations Security Council President.)
Mr. Mahbubani’s short book suggests the highly provocative belief that the West’s dominance of the world is giving way to Asia, particularly China and India. To mitigate the West’s decline, Mahbubani argues–the West needs to develop a more “coherent and competitive global strategy”. Paul Kennedy of Yale University praises Mahbubani’s assessment. The public commentator Fareed Zakaria endorses Mahbubani’s belief, and Hilton Root of “The Independent Review” acknowledges Mahbubani’s inference that “the West’s overperformance was a historical aberration and the East’s rise reflects a rebalancing of history”. Despite Root’s measured support of Mahbubani’s book, his analysis is nuanced. Root argues the decline of the West is oversimplified and that Mahbubani underestimates the resilience of Western economies.
Mahbubani argues Great Britain’s Brexit and Trump’s re-election are reactions to the West’s economic decline.
Edwad Luce argues Western liberalism needs to be reinvented by investment in a technological revolution for all Americans, not just those who have benefited from the industrial revolution. However, China seems to have read the future better than the West by building up their reserves of rare metals needed for advanced computer chips. In contrast, President Trump chooses to antagonize allies as well as competitors with a foolish trade war.
Root believes the innovative capacity and adaptability of the West will make adjustments to remain competitive, if not the dominant economic power of the world. Trump’s trade war suggests otherwise. Trump’s attitude is to ignore the years of built-up trust with Western allies and attack the world with destructive economic tariffs meant to right wrongs that are figments of real-politic’ imagination. However, some believe Mahbubani discounts political freedom and the drive of both the West and East to improve citizens’ living standards. That seems somewhat plausible, but Trump is attacking Americas most highly regarded universities with specious concerns with what he considers overactive recruitment of immigrants and minorities. The truth is American education for immigrants aids the strength and influence of Democracy in the world.
Yale University (American education for immigrants aids the strength and influence of Democracy in the world.)
The long cultural, educational, and technological influence of the West may be diminished by some of today’s political leaders but the trend over the last 200 years is unlikely to be reversed by Trump’s misguided authoritarianism. Trump’s significant risks are partially mitigated by publicly ingrained western democratic values. Though democracy is messy, it has demonstrated long-term stability and innovation that equals or exceeds the worst of what Trump’s authoritarianism is doing to the American economy and its institutions. Three more years of Trump’s presidency will not erase America’s legacy or destroy its future.
Though Mahbubani’s book is quite provocative, it is short, impactful, and interesting. “How the West Lost It” is certainly worth reading/listening to, but few Presidents of the United States have reversed the admittedly slow improvement of “equality of opportunity” in America. Mahbubani argues for a more diplomatic American policy with rising nations in the East because he believes China will ultimately replace America as the leading economy in the world.
The interpretation of the Constitution has changed over the last 200 years, but it stands for continuity for America’s present and future.
The direction of American society remains true to the fundamental beliefs of liberty, equality, sovereignty, rule of law, separation of powers, federalism, checks and balances, and individual rights. Trump is challenging some of those rights, but balance of power and term limits will ultimately rescue America from his misbegotten domestic and international blunders. These rights have been challenged at different times in America’s history but never permanently reversed.
It is ironic that Trump has suffered so much from America’s legal system and is unable to see NIMBY mentality and a return to the past will not “Make America Great”.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
Breakneck (China’s Quest to Engineer the Future)
Author: Dan Wang
NarratedBy: Jonathan Yen
Feng Chen Wang aka Dan Wang (Author, Canadian technology analyst and writer, visiting scholar at Yale Law School.)
Dan Wang is a highly credible author of the 21st century economies of China and the United States. Mr. Wang’s mother and father were born in China when the one child policy was the law of the land. Mr. Wang was born in Canada in either 1991 or 1992. Though Mr. Wang may be an only child, his parents advised him that living in China was challenging because of its state control and family planning that restricted their human rights.
Dan Wang has lived in Canada, America, and China.
From 2017 to 2023 he worked as a technology analyst in Hong Kong, Beijing, and Shanghai. As a young man, Wang bicycled across China with young friends. Having been educated in Canada and the United States, growing up in Toronto and Ottawa and going to high school in Philadelphia, he has a broad understanding of the economies of all three nations. Of course, his specialty is technology which gives him a unique understanding of what is happening in America and China today. He graduated from the University of Rochester in 2014, studying philosophy and economics.
Trump’s apparent view of Xi.
After listening to Wang’s book, one begins to understand why President Trump’s perspective is that the world, with emphasis on China, has taken advantage of America’s economic wealth by eviscerating its industrial industries with less expensive product made in other countries. Wang presumes as a person who has an economics education that Adam Smith (the Father of Economics) and Donald Trump are right when they argue tariffs are justified in areas of national defense, or for retaliation. On the other hand, Adam Smith, noted “It is the maxim of every prudent master of a family, never to attempt to make at home what it will cost him more to make than to buy.”
Adam Smith (Father of Economic Theory)
Smith argued if another nation can provide the same product for less cost, a prudent buyer should buy the cheaper product and use money saved to produce a different product. Wang and Trump disagree with Smith because the revenue producer that America turns to is the service industry rather than product development. What is missed by Wang and Trump is that America is the third largest agricultural producer in the world with China and India being the largest. Of course, the difference is that America has 1/3rd the population of China and India, respectively. Lower population and high agricultural production in the United States hugely benefits its economy. More significantly, food, like water, is an essential need of life. The point is that non-food product production is not necessary for living life.
Loss of industrial production to China.
Wang’s and Trump’s argument is that America’s loss of industrial production has made it too dependent on other countries. They either infer or say Americans are forgetting how to manufacture product. They argue American industries are closing because of America’s inability to compete with other nations because of labor and material cost differences. History shows America fails to expand its industries because production of things is provided by other nations at a lower cost. And as Adam Smith noted, “It is the maxim of every prudent master of a family, never to attempt to make at home what it will cost him more to make than to buy.”
Wang decries America’s movement toward a service industry as the basis for economic growth.
America is the richest country in the world, but America has failed to eliminate poverty, house the homeless, feed the malnourished, and provide for the infrastructure needed to improve America lives. One may ask oneself-what is wrong with becoming a service industry nation? Why does America have to return to its past. As Adam Smith noted: “It is the maxim of every prudent master of a family, never to attempt to make at home what it will cost him more to make than to buy.” The future is about being healthy, being housed, fed, and clothed. It should not be about being the richest and fattest minority in the world, particularly when there is an inordinate gap between the rich and poor.
Wang argues America’s economy is diminished, not by reduced industrialization, but by its growth of legalism that reinforces nimby (not in my backyard) litigation.
Delays in public improvements in America are restrained by lawsuits that protect the rich and victimize the poor. An example is the long delays in mass transportation improvements which become more costly with every year that passes before completion. The delays are caused by litigation. When China can build rapid transit in 3 years while it takes 15 or more years in America, one wonders why. The huge investments China has made in massive infrastructure improvements have vastly improved their economy. In contrast, America wastes investment resources litigating mass transportation improvements in California, Washington, and other states by increasing costs from delays caused by litigation. It is like throwing the baby out with the bath water because the number of people who benefit from infrastructure improvement are largely discounted or ignored. Equally appalling is homelessness in America because of NIMBY’ objection to low-cost multifamily housing that could get the homeless off the street. Cost benefit analysis should prevail, not litigation based on interest group objection. In Wang’s terms, American infrastructure decisions should be based on science and engineering like, what he argues, China bases their infrastructure decisions upon.
The fundamental point is that America has lost sight of the importance of a balance between benefit to the public and individual rights. Equality of opportunity is split between the rich and poor with the middle class being too complacent while the rich reap unconscionable reward. Where are the Eisenhower-like Presidents who promoted an Interstate Highway System that created a 421,000-mile interstate highway system?
Trump is no Eisenhower because he wishes to return America to a past rather than look to its future. It is ironic that Trump has suffered so much from America’s legal system and is unable to see NIMBY mentality and a return to the past will not “Make America Great”. Wang’s book explains how China has succeeded in improving their economy while America’s economy is failing.
Human nature is universal, but it is also particular. In that particularity, “Ikigai” may or may not work for you or me. That is not to say the philosophy of “Ikigai” cannot lead one to a better life but only you can decide.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
Ikigai (Japan’s Secrets to a Long and Happy Life)
Author: Hector Garcia, Fransec Miralles
NarratedBy: Oscar López Avila
Hector Garcia (Spanish born author and philosopher, lives in Tokyo.)Fransec Miralles (Spanish Editor, world traveler.)
In planning a trip to Japan in September 2025, “Ikigai” is a recommended book by our Japanese guide. Surprisingly, the authors are born in Spain.
“Ikigai” is a Japanese philosophy about life and its value.
As understood by Garcia and Miralles, “Ikigai” is a guide to a meaningful and fulfilling life. As a philosophy, “Ikigai” is not about life’s destination. “Ikigai” is a compass to give one direction for a meaningful and fulfilling life. The principles of “Ikigai” revolve around a healthy diet, high quality health care, community ties that limit one’s isolation, physical routines, mindfulness, and stress reduction. Those who practice the philosophy of “Ikigai” in Garcia’s and Miralles’s opinion will live happier, healthier, and more fulfilling lives.
Life’s value.
Garcia and Miralles suggest the demographics of Japan are proof of the value of “Ikigai”. The highest number of citizens over 100 years of age live in Japan. The average life span of men and women in Japan is 85; for Americans, the average is 79.61. The authors suggest longer lives of Japanese is because of their practice of following the principles of “Ikigai”. Of course, the length of one’s life is not the point, but the quality of one’s life is everything.
Diet, healthcare, sociability, and daily routines reduce stress. These are guidelines for an “Ikigai” way of life.
There are no surprises in these guidelines. Diet is to consume fruits, vegetables, fish, limited red meat, with few sweets containing processed sugars like white, brown, powdered, or high-fructose corn syrups. Healthcare should be provided through universal coverage. Sociability is encouraged to avoid isolation. Daily walking, stretching, moving around, and being mindful of one’s activity should be a part of a person’s lifestyle. Find what reduces your stress and practice those activities. These are familiar guidelines but not often practiced because of the stresses of the culture in which people live. Many try to escape the stress of their cultures with bad eating habits, poor physical routines, and social isolation. Some fail to follow these guidelines because they are too poor to care.
Human frailties like hearing loss, vision loss, or physical deterioration.
There are a number of difficulties with the guidelines noted by Garcia and Miralles. Finding a way of life that fulfills the ideals of “Ikigai” discounts the nature of human beings. It is impossible to ignore the personal instincts, drives, physical maladies, and cognitive abilities of different human beings. One size does not fit all because of these differences. Human nature may be universal, but it is not the same because human history, physical limitation, culture, and individual experiences are different. If the cultures in which you live do not offer universal health care, one is on their own. A capitalist culture operates in a different way than a socialist culture. Poverty, levels of education, and government influence exist in every culture and by nature distort what use can be made of “Ikigai” guidelines.
Human nature is universal, but it is also particular. In that particularity, “Ikigai” may or may not work for you or me. That is not to say the philosophy of “Ikigai” cannot lead one to a better life but only you can decide.
Wittgenstein’s philosophical belief is that words matter. To Wittenstein, words are not just sounds and symbols–they are the scaffolding of humanity’s shared reality and continuing search for truth.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
Wittgenstein
Author: Hans Sluga
NarratedBy: Ken Maxon
Hans Sluga (Author, Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at U of C.)
Ludwig Wittgenstein (1889-1951, considered by some as one of the greatest philosophers of the twentieth century)
This is a difficult introduction to the philosophy of Ludwig Wittgenstein. One is unsure of whether it is difficult because of the author’s explanation or the abstruse nature of Wittgenstein’s writing. Sluga notes there is an early Wittgenstein philosophy and a later Wittgenstein philosophy. There is the 1921 “Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus” published in 1921 and a later “Philosophical Investigations” published in 1953.
In both publications, Wittgenstein’s philosophy is about language and its use to explain reality. The 1921 publication argues what can be said clearly can be said by all and when it cannot be said clearly the speaker should be silent. In 1953, Wittgenstein argues reality only has meaning as language is used to describe it.
The difficulty of grasping Wittgenstein’s later philosophy is knowing whether what one says about reality is true or false.
Wittgenstein notes problems arise when language is pushed beyond its utility for understanding. Wittgenstein implies there are realities that cannot be meaningfully described by language. He is redefining philosophy as a matter of understanding how language works rather than understanding some objectively understood reality.
If language is the source of reality, how can one know what is true or false based on how one’s language explains it?
The argument is that Wittgenstein is saying there is no reality except that which one can identify through language. Reality and truth exist but it is defined by public, practical, and embedded use of one’s common language. Truth is based on precise language broadly accepted by those who use language to explain reality. The difficulty of that idea is in fundamental science that changes because of newly discovered knowledge.
This later philosophical belief of Wittgenstein’s means truth is no longer absolute but contextual based on words used to describe it through science, law, and ethics of the time in which it is explained.
Wittgenstein’s philosophy is troubling. What is to keep humans from one country creating language that suggests they are a superior species and can destroy cultures other than their own? Wittgenstein’s answer is that languages are not hierarchical so words of another culture or nation have equal weight. His meaning is that reality is based on all public languages, not a private nationalist language. He writes “Philosophy is a battle against the bewitchment of our intelligence by means of language”. Further, he notes a singular culture cannot weaponize words because words are a universal medium for understanding reality.
Wittgenstein’s philosophical belief is that words matter. To Wittenstein, words are not just sounds and symbols–they are the scaffolding of humanity’s shared reality and continuing search for truth.
The inference of “Plato and the Tyrant” is that all forms of government are like the parable of the cave in “The Republic”, i.e., people only see shadows of life’s truth.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
Plato and the Tyrant (The Fall of Greece’s Dynasty and the Making of a Philosophic Masterpiece)
Author: James Romm
Narrated By: Paul Woodson
James Romm (Author, Professor of Classics at Bard College, specializes in ancient Greek and Roman culture and civilization.)
James Romm reviews Plato’s personal correspondence that offers an interesting perspective on “The Republic” as a critique of Dionysius the Elder’s tyrannic rule of the island nation of Syracuse, Sicily, and southern Italy. (Syracuse is a Mediterranean island 620 miles off the coast of Greece.) Some believe there are 13 private letters written by Plato with the most famous and debated letter being number 7. Romm’s book is about these private letters and what they reveal about Plato’s character.
Excerpt of the 7th letter to Dionisius the Elder:
Holding these right views, Dion persuaded Dionysius to summon me; and he himself also sent a request that I should by all means come with all speed, before that [327e] any others13 should encounter Dionysius and turn him aside to some way of life other than the best. And these were the terms—long though they are to repeat—in which his request was couched: ” What opportunities (he asked) are we to wait for that could be better than those that have now been presented by a stroke of divine good fortune?” And he dwelt in detail on the extent of the empire [328a] in Italy and Sicily and his own power therein, and the youth of Dionysius, mentioning also how great a desire he had for philosophy and education, and he spoke of his own nephews14 and connections, and how they would be not only easily converted themselves to the doctrines and the life I always taught, but also most useful in helping to influence Dionysius; so that now, if ever (he concluded), all our hopes will be fulfilled of seeing the same persons at once philosophers and rulers of mighty States. [328b]
By these and a vast number of other like arguments Dion kept exhorting me; but as regards my own opinion, I was afraid how matters would turn out so far as the young people were concerned—for the desires of such as they change quickly, and frequently in a contrary direction; although, as regards Dion’s own character, I knew that it was stable by nature and already sufficiently mature. Wherefore as I pondered the matter and was in doubt whether I should make the journey and take his advice, or what, I ultimately inclined to the view that if we were ever to attempt to realize our theories [328c] concerning laws and government, now was the time to undertake it; for should I succeed in convincing one single person sufficiently I should have brought to pass all manner of good. Holding this view and in this spirit of adventure it was that I set out from home,—not in the spirit which some have supposed, but dreading self-reproach most of all, lest haply I should seem to myself to be utterly and absolutely nothing more than a mere voice and never to undertake willingly any action, and now to be in danger of proving false, in the first15 instance, to my friendship [328d] and association with Dion, when he is actually involved in no little danger. Suppose, then, that some evil fate should befall him, or that he should be banished by Dionysius and his other foes and then come to us as an exile and question us in these words—“O Plato, I come to you as an exile not to beg for foot-soldiers, nor because I lack horse-soldiers to ward off mine enemies, but to beg for arguments and persuasion, whereby you above all, as I know, are able to convert young men to what is good and just and thereby to bring them always into a state of mutual friendliness [328e] and comradeship. And it is because you have left me destitute of these that I have now quitted Syracuse and come hither. My condition, however, casts a lesser reproach on you; but as for Philosophy, which you are always belauding, and saying that she is treated with ignominy by the rest of mankind, surely, so far as it depends on you, she too is now betrayed [329a] as well as I. Now if we had happened to be living at Megara,16 you would no doubt have come to assist me in the cause for which I summoned you, on pain of deeming yourself of all men the most base; and now, forsooth, do you imagine that when you plead in excuse the length of the journey and the great strain of the voyage and of the labor involved you can possibly be acquitted of the charge of cowardice? Far from it, indeed.”
Dionysius the Elder ruled for 35 years and is succeeded by his son, Dionysius the Younger. Dionysius is characterized as a combative, brutal, and authoritarian leader. Plato visited Syracuse many times with the desire to ameliorate the Elder’s style of leadership. Plato’s effort results in the Elder’s selling him into slavery, presumably because of political differences and the Elder’s tyrannical power.
Plato (428/423 BC to 348/347 BC, died near 80 years of age.)
Soon after being sold into slavery by Dionysius the Elder, Plato is rescued by Anniceris who bought Plato out of slavery. Anniceris (aka Annikeris), a wealthy Greek philosopher, apparently recognized Plato’s brilliance. Plato goes on to create his famous academy in Athens. Though the Elder successfully controlled Syracuse and much of Italy during his tyrannic rule, his son, Dionysius II, used similar but less effective tyrannical rule and was eventually defeated. Plato tried to convince Dionysius II of his errors in leadership but fails and is compelled to flee house arrest to return to Athens. (Romm suggests Plato loved Dionysius II in more than a platonic way but was unable to change his tyrannical rule.)
Plato’s ideal republic envisioned a just society led by philosopher-kings. These rulers would rule based on collective good rather than personal gain.
This ideal republic would be built on wisdom, justice, and a strict class structure where there would be rulers, soldiers, and workers. Of course, the weakness in this ideal is human nature. Whether ancient or modern culture, as Lord Acton notes in 1887–power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. People do not naturally fall into specific classes. Human beings are individually and differently self-interested which ensures conflict. That is why both communism, capitalism, and its socialist leanings work inefficiently in ways that unjustly create haves and have-nots.
At the heart of all known forms of government is power.
There are good and bad leaders in history. The good are those who shaped nations, inspired movements, and changed the course of civilization for the better. The bad are the tyrants, the incompetents, and the cruel. Both the good and bad can be found in the histories of every form of government rule. One can argue Alexander the Great, Napoleon Bonaparte, Abraham Lincoln, and Queen Elizabeth I led forms of government that changed the course of civilization for the better. By the same token, one can argue Dionysius the Elder and Hitler changed the course of civilization in the opposite direction. The common denominator for constructive and destructive leadership is power. The type of government makes little difference. Every form of government has human leaders which may lead in ways contrary to the best interest of those they rule.
Plato’s Republic, Adam Smith’s “…Wealth of Nations”, and Adolph Hitlers’ “Mein Kamph” are ideas directed toward the exercise of power.
“Plato and the Tyrant” offers a perspective that makes one think about the history of Plato and government but does not offer anything new.
Romm’s evaluation of Plato’s “Republic” is a retelling of an ideal form of government that cannot exist because of the nature of human beings and the caves in which we live.
The private letters of Plato reveal little new about the consequences of rule by democracies, monarchies, oligarchies, dictatorships, theocracies, or anarchies. The inference of “Plato and the Tyrant” is that all forms of government are like the parable of the cave in “The Republic”, i.e., people only see shadows of life’s truth. Governance will only improve when people crawl out of the cave to see the truth of life.
History of the world has shown all forms of government are “equal opportunity” inhibitors, if not destroyers.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
Secondhand Time (The Last of the Soviets)
By: Svetlana Alexievich
Narrated By: Amanda Carlin, Mark Bramhall, Cassandra Campbell & 8 more.
Svetlana Alexievich (Author, Belarusian investigative journalist, winner of the Nobel Prize in Literature in 2015.)
Svetlana Alexievich’s “Secondhand Time” is a remarkable and informative explanation of why Putin believes he is right and why many citizens of Russia seem to continue in their support of his administration.
Map of the former U.S.S.R.
Alexievich conducts a series of interviews with Russian citizens of different generations about the U.S.S.R. and its return to the world stage as a Russian nation. The narrators of her book recite those interviews to give listener/readers a complex and enlightening picture of Russian culture. The clash of communist and capitalist ideals is at the foundation of the interviews and the narrators dramatically told stories.
The Russian Soviet Army is the first to arrive in the Battle of Berlin on April 16, 1945. Their flag was hoisted on May 1, 1945.
The citizens of Russia are justifiably proud of their role in WWII that turned the tide of Germany’s war of aggression. (Of course, that is putting aside Stalin’s Machiavellian decision to join Hitler at the beginning of the war.) Some Russian soldiers who fought in that war were disgusted with what they feel was a betrayal by Mikhail Gorbachev of communist ideals for which they lived and died for in the 20th century.
The rejection of communist ideals for capitalism is viewed by some Russians as a tyranny of greed that lays waste to the poor and creates a class of haves and have-nots.
Some Russian veterans of WWII see the seduction of capitalism destroying the ideal of a classless society. Some citizens see the ideal of a government is to demand the wealth of life be spread equally according to individual need. To these believers, enforcement of communist ideals would eliminate private property and greed that would create a classless society. Some believed Stalin exemplified leadership that would achieve that ideal. The hardship of life during Stalin’s rule is considered by some as justified means for the achievement of the Marxist ideal of communism.
Statue of the “Circle of Life” in Norway.
Cultures may be different, but all human life is the same.
The underlying point of these interviews is to show Russian culture is not monolithic, just as culture is not in any nation. All cultures are filled with diversity. There is no singular cultural mind but a range of interests among many factions that establish a nation’s culture. The evidence of that is the contrast of Gorbachev and Putin in Russia and FDR and Trump in America. All four leaders led their countries but represent completely different cultural beliefs.
Conservatives, New York Governor Al Smith, Southern Democrats, and isolationists like Charles Beard opposed FDR in America. Putin and Trump have their cultural supporters in today’s national governments, but they also have their critics. The difference is that in Putin’s world, being killed or put in prison for opposition is culturally acceptable. In America, one is reminded of Trump’s deportation and imprisonment of migrants without due process.
The author’s interviews are not suggesting that either Russia or the West have good or bad governments but that every culture tests their leaders.
Many Russians, undoubtedly blame American Democracy for the dismantling of the U.S.S.R. Alexievich interviews Russians who believe the hardship that countries within the U.S.S.R. experienced were not the fault of Stalinist policies but the failure of citizens to live up to the ideals of communism. To anyone who has traveled to the Baltics, that opinion is founded on ignorance of the hostility expressed by citizens of the Baltics who were starved, displaced, jailed, and murdered during their occupation by Russia.
The other part of the story is the rise of the oligarchs in Russia as a result of the greed associated with capitalism.
The gap between rich and poor is accelerated in Russia just as it has been in America. Democracy does not have clean hands when it comes to equality of opportunity. Like the Jewish pogroms in Russia, America’s enslavement, murder, and discrimination of Blacks is proven history.
Siberian Exile during Stalin’s reign in Russia.
Alexievich draws from all sides of Russian beliefs. Those interviewed note the terrible conditions of those exiled to Siberia. Many Russians became disillusioned by the redistribution of wealth and privilege after Gorbachev and Yeltsin showed themselves to not be up to the task of leadership change. In fairness, one wonders who could have been up to the task when Russia had a long history of monarchal and tyrannical leadership?
A few Russians became immensely wealthy while the majority were somewhat better off but some struggled with the loss of State benefits and fewer jobs. The rising gap between rich and poor soured communist idealists. Even those who had been sent to Siberia by Stalin who toiled and suffered the experience of isolation, slave labor, and frigid weather felt they were no better off because of the loss of a socialist future.
REVIEWS AND VIEWS OF LIFE 