Bauernbergpark Man II

Today we gave a plastic bag full of useful things to the Bauernbergpark Man. He was not there. So we don't know if he will use the toothbrush or if he will eat the cheese. I say "we" but it was my girlfriend's idea. She is much less shy than I am, as regards the Man.
I wonder what social constructivism says to all that. Nothing, I assume.

Magicians and other Intellectuals

Only division of labour allows the existence of magicians and other intellectuals. We often neglect the fact that being a magician or intellectual can be a tough job, too. Apart from the frequent possibility of being hunted down by other members of the public for the purpose of burning someone alive, working with the brain or in the company of demons is sometimes rather hard.
The better you get with your ideas or magic the closer you get to the brink of insanity. Only a nice cold glass of beer might safe you, given that you consume it fast enough.
My favorite intellectual/magician is the Bauernbergpark man. Though I do not understand what he does, I appreciate his efforts, and he lives a humble life, similar to that of the Cynics in classical times.
I try my best to be a proper magician by not doing any magic at all, and to be a good intellectual by learning how to stop thinking. That is all I can do.

Construction II

In their first chapter Berger and Luckmann discuss everyday life. They explain a world centered in the "here" and "now". They analyze aspects of language and knowledge in relation to everyday life.
I was wondering when science and religion enter their considerations. And: voilà on page 40 (Anchor Books, 1967) it is there: Symbol systems very remote from the pragmatic language for everyday purposes: Abra cadabra so to say.
Cynicism and skepticism have a lot to say about the expendable nature of all that.
I am looking forward to read more about B&L's arguments in the coming chapters. I can recall the Ichthyosophists, who I really like.
Nevertheless, I think Berger and Luckmann are completely right about the predominance of the "here" and "now"as the focus of everyday knowledge. Everything is in it, the future, which is just an illusion, and the past, which is just a memory. In the presence everything is there.
However, why do we permanently try to escape from the "here" and "now"by thinking, day dreaming, drugs, television and other means?
To learn why, and to learn to avoid it is one of my missions.

Construction

I am about to read "The social construction of reality" for the second time. This time I will remember more aspects than when I read it for the first time.
I really like the introduction by Helmuth Plessner, in which he says that the sociology of knowledge of Scheler and Mannheim was a theory of bad conscience towards Marx. :-)
In their work the influence of ideology on knowledge was central.
That brings us back to religion. Ha!
Is it better to live in a geocentric or a heliocentric world? However, we still say that the sun rises instead of : "We have accomplished another rotation."
How come, that this trace of medieval bullshit (in the sense of Harry G. Frankfurt) is still in our heads and words.
I think it is better not to be in the centre of the Universe, but to be in an outer spiral arm of some smaller galaxy somewhere in time and space.
My conclusion is that religion and ideology are not the best friends of scientific knowledge. Religion on the other hand can be a means of orientation, that does not exist in science. Does it?
There is reason, logic and mathematics. Can they really help with ethics or normative orientation?
However, from Berger and Luckmann we learn, that all knowledge is socially constructed, through processes of institutionalization, due to the need for legitimization and finally is internalized by socialization.
So what about the social construction of God?
Nah. It is something you have to believe in with or without knowing.
For the moment I have to take a walk in the Bauernbergpark and leave the discussion of religion and science behind. I have to open my eyes and see, what is there. I have to feel the wind, and look after my dog. That is all much more important.

Epicurus

I am still not sure which classical school of philosophy I favor. It seems as if  a good deal of wisdom was there, but somehow it was all only particularly dealt with by single philosophers. 

The last chapter that I read about was about Epicurus and Lucretius, who despised religion and above all the superstition that comes with it.

Is it good to have a world without religion?

I am a religious man myself, but I am also a scientist. Nevertheless, what I believe in has a lot to do with the presence, the here and now, and not so much with flying pasta monsters. However, it is almost impossible to talk about Zen, especially for a humble pupil and beginner. Maybe it is even harder for a master.

So I write about a world without religion. 

Yesterday my girlfriend brought some food to the Bauernbergpark man. We can do such things without religion. On the other hand, Jesus, Buddha and other prophets or religious teachers, say that it is a good thing to do so. I think religions have many good things to say. But what is the problem with them, if there are positive, useful and generous ethical messages that are the core of the teachings of any religion (except maybe the church of Satan).

One problem is power and the interference with politics. It does not matter whether it is science, economy, art, education or religion that crosses the path of the political system, it will be a victim of power. Wonderful religious teachings will become inquisitions, crusades, Jihads and witch-hunts. 

Epicurus, I think taught to abstain from politics as well.

The pursuit of personal happiness is central for him. 

And he was wise enough to see that you cannot get that by eating 10 pounds of Hungarian goulash, drinking liters of wine and having sex with plenty of different women.

You see, there is good ethical teaching without religion, too.

So Epicurus and his disciple Lucretius might be right.

I am not sure but I am just 40 years old and I have to read a lot about the wisdom of the world, and I have to meditate a lot to get rid of all this knowledge again, to be sure.

Sometimes I envy the ones that say: I believe.

Sometimes I despise the ones that say: What I believe is right, and what you believe is wrong.

So, again, let me ask: Is it good to have a world without religion?

To be continued…

News

Now I really understand the truth about reading the news. Recently, I have been wondering: Why do I read a newspaper or its online edition? At least 99,9% of the information does not concern my everyday life. For instance: The weather forecast. Usually it is sufficient to look outside and see how the weather is. If I ride my bycicle I just can take some appropriate clothing with me. If I plan a hiking tour then the weather report might come in handy. The more dramatic news are mainly some sensationalist stuff that comes to late to be relevant. Because if it affects me I might be among the victims of a crime/chemical accident/car accident.
Politicians do whatever will bring them more votes the next time. So why bother about politics. Science might be interesting, but most newspapers don't even cover it. So why read the news?
Actually, I should have known the answer for a long time, because it can be found in one of my psychology textbooks. The answer is: I want to survive socially. I want to interact and participate in communication. And: People talk about the news. They believe in it. It is their everyday sermon, their prayer for understanding reality.
So I have started to read it again. I try to balance news of mass murder, war and crisis with the few entertaining bits about science or society. I am a little less happy for a while but I can communicate again. I can say more than: "Aha" or "I haven't heard about it". I am a 21st century man again.
Nevertheless I am not sure, if my strategy will change again pretty soon.
However, what I forgot to mention is, that I even once read an article on the Bauernpark man in the local newspaper. So it is not all just bad.

Zen

The more I get in touch with Zen, the less I have to say.

Popper

I am about to develop some hypotheses.
They concern the use of gravel by the Bauernbergpark-man and the use of flour. I think that both are somehow there to mark his territory or to protect him from something.
The gravel, as I may have mentioned before, is arranged in little circular heaps. They seem so regular when one compares them that I am led to believe that the man counts the tiny stones.
The flour is usually spread along the outer edge of the path. Recently there was a more complicated sign on the ground, also made with white flour. It looked like a sort of tic-tac-toe game. (see also Wikipedia) but sadly no one went there to make the second move.
How can I test my hypotheses.
Of course I can ask the man about it, but I still do not have the courage.
What does Popper say to people who do not have the heart to test their hypotheses. Hmm?

The spiral staircase of life

A few days ago I noticed the total absence of the Bauernbergpark man. All his belongings were gone too. Before that he had been the proud owner of a large tarpaulin that had covered all his other things. There had been carton boxes of different sizes, one of them containing tobacco packets (predominantly Maverick), lots of bottles, stones and gravel, blankets, jackets a backpack, two trolleys and a sleeping bag. Then, suddenly everything was gone. Did someone take it from him, just cleaned the park benches, took all these precious goods away. Where did he go?
Yesterday night I saw him again, sitting there, doing some weird motions with his hands. He had nothing.
Today I passed by his two favorite benches again. There was a plastic "Lidl" bag with some bottles and a blanket. So I think he is about to start all over again.
While we sit inside our warm apartments, playing Minecraft or hugging our loved ones, he starts to rebuild his mediocre empire again from nothing but a few pieces of gravel and with the help of a few nice people who obviously help him.
This gives me hope for all future catastrophes. I think we can always trust the world to get us back on our feet again. This is also one of our weaknesses, because with this hope and trust, we sometimes forget to keep on walking without any help. Maybe next time we get back on our feet without touching anything.
Maybe everything will collapse pretty soon. If so we can be sure that there will be something new, something even better and somehow worse.
That is the spiral staircase of life, the universe and everything.

Synthetic PhD

Between my walks in Bauernbergpark I travel. I was in Berlin another time.
First I met my wannabe taxi driver actor friend, who has moved from London to the German capital.
Then I attended a conference on synthetic biology, life and art at the Berlin Brandenburg Academy of Sciences. The most interesting aspect of it all was the Butterbrezel on the flight back.
I didn't know that you can make tiny holes into a Brezel and fill them with butter. I'll never say again that the Germans have no idea of haute cuisine.
The conference was a big success as regards applying an interdisciplinary approach. Maybe it also inspires my own work, although, so far I don't know how.
In the nighttime I read about Plato. It is entertaining but makes me wonder how he was able to influence christian philosophy to such an extent. Maybe I can read about that in a later chapter.
However, due to climate change, winter arrives late this year. That is good for the Bauernbergpark man, who can still stay outside, but bad for winter tourism.
I had another conversation with my PhD supervisor today. It ended in me having no idea what to do and us  together having birthday cake and coffee.
To sum up: My new thesis title will be "The Impact of the Butterbrezel on Synthetic Biology", nah...better "Platonic cosmology and the Bauernbergpark man". I don't know.
Maybe I start all over again, reading some Max Weber stuff instead.
Sometimes I wish I had the courage to sit next to the man in Bauernbergpark and drink a bottle of beer with him instead of wondering about my PhD work. Sometimes I wish I had followed another line of work.
Nevertheless yesterday a colleague told me: "We always want to do the opposite of what we are doing at the moment." So I am waiting for the next moment, in which I know that I do exactly the right thing. Here it is. Nice. Bye bye.