The Blog of the APA is happy to announce “Philosophy and the Mirror of Technology”, a series of authored articles and interviews about the impact of accelerating technological advances – both good and bad – on ordinary lives and worldviews. The series has been created by Charlie Taben who was inspired by conversations with Yale professor Michael Della Rocca and his latest book, The Parmenidean Ascent. To introduce the series, Taben talked with the Blog about his inspiration for the series and its goals.
What are the goals of this series?
My goal is to explore the relationship among science, philosophy and faith in novel ways. In particular, evaluating the underappreciated implications of modern physics and technology for traditional philosophical questions. In addition to presenting my own views, I plan to interview philosophers that might represent unusual voices in the discipline. I think we benefit from hearing different perspectives and look forward to exploring unconventional ideas.
In the process, I will introduce new and upcoming books, and preview exciting projects. Interviews will include;
- Michael Della Rocca on The Parmenidean Ascent, discussing how rationalism leads to a deep skepticism,
- Christopher Tollefsen on The Way of Medicine, Ethics and the Healing Profession, making the case against euthanasia based on intrinsic human rights, and
- Sean D Kelly on The Proper Dignity of Human Being, exploring what it means to be authentic in our post-modern, technological world.
In sum, I will cover a broad landscape of perspectives, with an emphasis on the practical ramifications of scientific advancement. My interviews will focus on challenging subjects, hoping to deal with important questions in different ways while spurring dialogue among academics and non-academics alike.
What motivated you to start this series?
These topics have interested me my whole life and have been the focus of long-term personal studies and reflection. This series is effectively the by-product of resolving my own worldviews.
Frankly, this is my first work in many years, having received a BA in Philosophy in 1983, but I am excited to explore how recent developments in modern physics can reframe classic philosophical questions and the nature of faith. Reading Michael Della Rocca’s latest book, The Parmenidean Ascent, inspired me to reduce my thoughts to writing and understand how recent scientific and technological advances can invigorate Spinoza. The thought of continuing the dialogue with a series was gratifying and has led me to cast a wider net for challenging topics.
What inspired your interest in Spinoza? What insights can he offer to the modern world and/or what insights can the modern world provide regarding Spinoza’s work?
My fascination with Spinoza begins with his thoroughgoing commitment to the Principle of Sufficient Reason, generating a necessary, divine conception that is commonly misunderstood. The insight for the modern world is a unique, absolute form of faith, consistent with scientific advancement, that could fill an important void in our secular culture.
Why is the APA Blog a good home for this series?
The philosophical community will hopefully be intrigued by the relationship among faith, science and philosophy, which should have foundational interest. To the extent I’m not an academic, I hope to present materials in a different way – simpler, with less argument. Perhaps my technical inexperience will make the content more accessible and engage a larger group of readers.
What’s the most surprising thing you’ve discovered in this work?
How far my views are from the mainstream! Accordingly, I would like to frame rationalism in unique ways, hopefully encouraging readers to reconsider Spinoza in particular. I’ve also been overwhelmed by the good faith of the philosophical community. All three professors who contributed to this series were incredibly gracious with their contributions and guidance. It has been immensely rewarding to be welcomed by the academic community and engage with the discipline again.
What do you hope your readers will gain from this series?
My goal is to explore modern science and technology in ways that might encourage readers to reconsider their views. Spinoza’s Necessitarianism and Parallelism are excellent examples – controversial or even discredited doctrines that deserve reconsideration in light of recent developments in quantum mechanics. Secondly, I seek to understand how these scientific advancements can shape our worldviews and understanding of faith. Finally, my sincere hope is that this series will encourage dialogue, as opposing views and civil disagreement are indispensable to personal growth.
You can engage with Charlie Taben about his new series in the comments section below. Comments must conform to our community guidelines and comment policy.
Charlie Taben
Charlie Taben graduated from Middlebury College in 1983 with a BA in philosophy and has been a financial services executive for nearly 40 years. He studied at Harvard University during his junior year and says one of the highlights of his life was taking John Rawls’ class. Today, Charlie remains engaged with the discipline, focusing on Spinoza, Nietzsche, Kierkegaard and Schopenhauer. He also performs volunteer work for the Philosophical Society of England and is currently seeking to incorporate practical philosophical digital content into US corporate wellness programs. You can find Charlie on Twitter @gbglax.
Maryellen Stohlman-Vanderveen is the APA Blog's Diversity and Inclusion Editor and Research Editor. She graduated from the London School of Economics with an MSc in Philosophy and Public Policy in 2023 and currently works in strategic communications. Her philosophical interests include conceptual engineering, normative ethics, philosophy of technology, and how to live a good life.
Looking forward to reading your thoughts on this topic, Charlie!
Thanks! Sorry for the late response. My first authored piece will be posted on 8/12 – how quantum artificial intelligence invigorates Spinoza. My thesis is that QAI is as meaningful as splitting the atom, with philosophical implications. This will be the first post of several on the nexus between modern physics and rationalism. Thx again
Mr. Taben,
This seems like a welcome focus for a series. You state your goal for the series as “exploring modern science and technology in ways that might encourage readers to reconsider their views. ” I very much share this interest and have been writing about it in earnest for some time.
If I could, I would suggest a focus on the philosophy which is the source of the growing list of technology based challenges, our “more is better” relationship with knowledge. I’ve been attempting to argue that this is a simplistic, outdated, and increasingly dangerous 19th century philosophy which we are blindly attempting to apply to a very different century.
The “more is better” relationship with knowledge made perfect sense in the long era of knowledge scarcity, but we no longer live in that scarcity era, but instead in a period characterized by knowledge exploding in every direction at an ever accelerating pace.
A “more is better” relationship with knowledge is built upon the typically unexamined assumption that human beings can successfully manage whatever new powers will emerge from an accelerating knowledge explosion. The Peter Principle should be adequate for demonstrating that this is a false assumption, or if you prefer, the nuclear weapons we have pointed at our own heads.
We are not gods, and so there is some limit to how much power human beings can successfully manage. Whatever that limit is, we are currently blindly racing towards it as fast as we can.
All over the net the vast majority of writers are addressing themselves to the challenges presented by this or that particular technology. This is a mistake, because even if we solve one problem, an accelerating knowledge explosion will quickly generate another. If we focus on the challenges presented by particular technologies one by one by one we will be trapped in a game of wack-a-mole that we will sooner or later lose, because an accelerating knowledge explosion will generate new challenges faster than we can address them.
The rational act is to focus on the source of all these challenges, our relationship with knowledge. That relationship will determine the future of our civilization, so it seems a very appropriate focus for philosophers.
Thanks very much for the interesting observation. In fact, it dovetails with my next piece. Recalling Kierkegaard’s plea for subjectivity, I will explore the limits of objectivity and explanatory powers of science. Consistent with your point, I question the value of descriptive knowledge, which is obscured by the success of science. Of course, abstraction and objectivity have lifted the living standard of millions, but, in my view, they inhibit our search for truth. These points will also be consistent with my later pieces on Spinoza, exploring is view of the highest form of knowledge (in the context of modern physics). In sum, I look forward to continuing the dialogue. Thanks again for engaging!
Charlie
Charlie,
Yes, abstraction and objectivity have lifted the living standard of nearly all of humanity to an incredible degree. And it’s correct that this historic success is obscuring the truth that human beings, like all else in nature, are limited, and thus incapable of riding an ever accelerating knowledge explosion forever.
Point being, I don’t see a limit to the powers of science, but rather a limit to our ability to manage the powers unleashed by science.
I look forward to your coming pieces and any future engagement.
Excellent Work – Keep it up! You have Great Skills Of Writing Blogs.
Thank you Tracy. I’ve had a lot of fun with this series. I hope you enjoy the next few pieces
Importance of Physics in the Current Society
The present world has witnessed spectacular progress in terms of technology at a breakneck pace. This has been made possible only because of Physics. Without this science, there would be no use of communication equipment, transport systems, television, and many more such facilities.
[…] faith, science and philosophy, with a focus on the import of modern physics and technology. In the introductory post, I explained that my interest in Spinoza reflects a hope that his unique philosophy could help fill […]
Thank you. I really liked your article. I have been following your blog for a few days now. All your articles are great. Keep up the good work. Thank you very much…
Thanks very much – I appreciate the engagement