Memo to the future from Bertrand Russell

Just got sent this and will listen to the whole thing on the commute home —  the link will take you to Youtube.  If I’ve messed up the link, the future bit starts at 26 minutes, 30 seconds.

  1. James,

    I think you need to flesh that out a bit more; was he right, or was he wrong.

    Are the aspirations flawed.

    Should we, for instance, tolerate those who distort the facts.

    Do we need to take the pogrom to the demagogue, before the demagogue takes the pogrom to us.

  2. When Russell refers to “the truth that the facts bear out” he does not make clear what the facts should be based on, whether on noumena (substance, or cause) or on phenomena (the appearances of substance, or affects). A physicist described the history of physics as the history of giving up cherished ideas.

    Dr Watson’s view that a case was solved based on the physical evidence did not prevent him from deferring to Holmes. Holmes did not discount the physical evidence but he also took the metaphysical view that the physical evidence was preliminary, an understanding of what was elementary to it was necessary to get at the truth.

    Today there are various assumptions that have been presented as facts based on physical evidence. The latest in doubt is that there were species of the human species instead of versions (at the physical level) over the course of evolution.

    If the facts are wrong they create the equivalent of a mirage, which makes it difficult to foster the creation of harmony with universal laws.

  3. The foundation of truth, of what is, will One day unite us all. =

Leave a Comment

NOTE - You can use these HTML tags and attributes:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>