Philosophy of Stephen Fry

thanks to Matthew for this link: http://www.facebook.com/groups/dorsethumanists/10150692397203943/




 Stephen Fry talks about how loosely the term philosophy is used; philosophers dont give us a way of living life but rather raise lots of questions. Bertrand Rusell history of philosphy: Xeno and the pre-socratics, Plato, socrates, aristotle (logic but had a pernicious effect on medieval thinking by categorising), Spinoza, Kant (questions make rethink everything), Locke, Hegel (like grabbing a salmon, feel very stupid). Buddhism or spiritual, niceness is good. Logic takes very hard work, often ignored - talking about 'spiritual' is just not good enougth!

3:40 Imagine there's no heaven (John Lennon) - Even IF it isn't true you must absolutely assume their is no afterlife, you cannot for one second abrogate the responsibilty of believing this is it. If you think your going to have an eternity to talk to Mozart on a cloud, or have an eternity to understand stuff, you won't bother NOW! I may be wrong and their is an afterlife, but at least I'll have had a crammed THIS LIFE.

5:01 What do you believe? Atheism comes in for bad press, Humanism is better. I don't believe in A God, but if I were to believe I'd believe in GODS (plural) (I can understand that eg mountains might be considered to have an inner animous and to personify as the Greeks did into Athena and other gods), monotheism is a staggering misapprehension. The world is beutiful and wonderful - but that doesn't mean that there is a god, you have to account for bone cancer in children, a parasitic worm eating a lambs eye etc, most animals in the wild live under stress and will die a violent bloody death. Atheists and Humanists wonder about the world. God was everything when we knew nothing a millenium ago. Now god is now a 'god of the gaps'. Greeks said that if there were gods, they were capricious, not loving. 

8:49 Good without God - empower ourselves to create own ethical standards. Euthrypro. God did not give us free will. Enlightenment of 400 years - no new Dark Ages - the battle lines must be drawn

10:57 What is Religion Good for? Music (composers write for power and money), paintings (same), pieces are numinous not devine; architecture and churches, kind people who give to the poor - not necessary to justify religion

13:01 Are ther religious leaders you admire? Trevor Huddlestone, Archbishop Tutu - forght for justice; Bonhoffer spoke out against Hitler, Dalai Lama.

Stephen Fry at Harvard

Heroes the Enlightenment struggle, Percey Bische Shelley expelled from Oxford for atheism... understood Greek myths, Promethius, if gods then are capricious, inconsistent.  Futile theology, theodicy.. a comic strip. Spirit in man who wants to make us guility, Catholic dogma, crime of being born, arid insulting dogma. Oscar Wilde viva voce, the revenge of secular world over religious world ... 

8'40": If you are humanists, be citizens of the world. You can engage or play or be graceful with the minds of others - but don't ever dare to try to own the minds of others. 

In 1980s, Karl Mark (politics), John Lennon (rocknroll), collapse of Berlin Wall, will not save the world. In 1990s - Albert Einstein and Oscar Wilde. Life of the mind. Ability to play gracefully with ideas.

Stephen Fry: "it is essential to nail one’s colours to the mast as a humanist."

source: http://www.humanism.org.uk/news/view/447
FEB 04 2010

The British Humanist Association has welcomed the author, comedian, presenter, and director Stephen Fry to its membership and as a Distinguished Supporter of Humanism.

The news comes during a busy Membership Month in which the BHA has announced that it has doubled in size in the last five years and wants to double again in just half the time.

Stephen told the BHA, ‘At a time when the achievements of the enlightenment are questioned, ridiculed, misunderstood and traduced by those who would reverse the progress of mankind, it is essential to nail one's colours to the mast as a humanist.

‘For me, that is not a turning away from mystery or a cold rational dispute with the numinous and spiritual in life, it is an acceptance of the awesome and splendid responsibility we each have for our own destinies, ethics and morals.

I repudiate the authority of churches, revealed texts and vain unsubstantiated assertions and embrace the shared glories of humanity's intellectual and spiritual struggle to understand the universe into which we are born with honesty, openness and faith in our own natures.’

Stephen Fry has long stated his support for Humanism and his personal non-religious beliefs.  He was interviewed in New Humanist magazine in 2003 and also discusses his views on God and religion in his autobiography Moab is my Washpot.  More recently, he won the Gay and Lesbian Humanist Association’s award for services to Humanism and LGBT rights in 2009.

Notes

Find out more about the Membership Drive Month.
The BHA has over 120 Distinguished Supporters. These include cultural figures – authors, artists, actors, comedians – as well as campaigners, scientists, historians, broadcasters and MPs and Peers .  Distinguished Supporters’ work with the BHA varies, including attendance at events, speaking engagements, letters to the press on our behalf and activity in Parliament.

The British Humanist Association (BHA) is the national charity representing and supporting the non-religious and campaigning for an end to religious privilege and discrimination based on religion or belief.

Are all valid ideas derived from Rationalism? A palette of reason.

source: Zoonomian

HASSNERS.org highlights

HASSNERS.org comments: Tim Jones draws insights from a talk by Stephen Fry and expands on the meaning of Rationalism and its many synonyms. Read full article. Just as some concepts are grounded in the 'Scientific Method' so can other (equally valid?) ideas be derive from Rationalism and Empiricism.

...

Yet at an emotional level, attacks on rationality can grate, especially with scientists and technologists.  I bristled when Fry likened over-zealous support for rationalism to belief in religion.  Was this the same Stephen Fry whose debate trounced the Catholic Church, and who regularly shares platforms with the likes of Richard Dawkins? But rather than rejecting rationalism, I believe he made a valid point: that it is too easy to assume a rationalist approach in all situations – however complex – when sometimes the abstract premises from which we deduce knowledge for decision making are just not up to it.

...

A palette of reason

Moving on, but with an eye to Fry’s sentiments, there seem to be an awful lot of reasonable sounding words out there: like ‘rational’, ‘empirical’, ‘evidence-based’, ‘logical’; and indeed –  ’reasonable’.  Whether in the context of drugs policy, climate change, faith schools, or whatever;  these words sit like so many pigments on a palette of reason, wielded by individuals and governments alike, to convince us – and themselves – that a particular course of action carries some special sanction.  But why do the same words frequently lead to misunderstandings and angst?

...

It seems to be down to definition and interpretation.  Boiling our list down to rationalism and empiricism (subsuming ‘evidence-based’ into empiricism and  logic into rationalism) the dictionary definitions and learned philosophical commentaries leave plenty of scope for confusion.

The  Compact Oxford English Dictionary defines rationalism as:

‘the practice or principle of basing opinions and actions on reason and knowledge rather than on religious belief or emotional response’, and empiricism as

‘the theory that all knowledge is derived from experience and observation‘

which seems pretty clear. But  the Oxford Pocket English Dictionary muddies the rational water by including philosophical and theological interpretations that flex the definition of rationalism to a form no scientist could agree with.  It seems scientific rationalism is just one brand.  I’ve really no idea what to make of the theological interpretation given as:

‘the practice of treating reason as the ultimate authority in religion’.

but it put me in mind of this quote from the current Pope, relayed in this interview by the Vatican astronomer Guy Consolmagno, and equally confusing to my concept of rationality:

“religion needs science to keep itself away from superstition“

...

 And when A.N.Wilson goes on to invoke the R-word:

‘Those who dare question scientists are demonised for their irrationality. Global warming may or may not be a certainty, but anyone who queries it has his sanity questioned. Cast doubt on these gods of certainty and you are accused of wanting to suppress free expression -…’

Are scientists certain about climate science? I don't think so. So anyone who questions it should surely not be demonised! For example IPCC Synthesis report pg 17 states "Most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic GHG concentrations." On pg 5 the IPCC define 'very likely' and other terms viz. 

Where uncertainty in specific outcomes is assessed using expert judgment and statistical analysis of a body of evidence (e.g. observations or model results), then the following likelihood ranges are used to express the assessed probability of occurrence: virtually certain >99%; extremely likely >95%; very likely >90%; likely >66%; more likely than not > 50%; about as likely as not 33% to 66%; unlikely <33%; very unlikely <10%; extremely unlikely <5%; exceptionally unlikely <1%.

he’s right;  anyone who doesn’t comply with the scientific definition of rationality is demonised.  Personally I’d like the scientific definition to be universally accepted, but while there are powerful constituencies who benefit from and delight in wooliness defended as realism or flexibility  (politicians, theologians, dictionary compilers), I can’t see it happening.

...

 Likewise, the only kind of rationality under which a discussion on the virtues of faith schools makes sense is one that allows ethical and metaphysical propositions (e.g. is there a god).  Moreover, we’re left with politicians working up a drugs policy using an ethics-based ‘political rationality’, and an education policy that recognises and values a ‘religious rationality’.

Unfortunately, the transparency being called for concerning when and under what circumstances this flexing of scientific rationalism happens, also threatens politicians with the anathema of exposing less visible agendas traditionally played close to the chest.

The Intelligence Squared Debate: Christopher Hitchens and Stephen Fry vs. The Catholics (1 of 5)

QIs’ Stephen Fry Puts Religion In Its Place

This untransmitted extract available on the DVD shows an insightful and intelligent Stephen Fry explaining his views on religion to his co-star Alan Davies who is himself quite vocal on the subject of religious zealotry. A fascinating insight, removed from broadcast, presumably for its content; which just goes to show you can criticise anything, as long as it doesn’t trample on society’s most irrational, idiotic and self-deluded beliefs.

Source: http://www.stokehumanists.co.uk/blog/?p=29

Merry Mithras 2007 - Roman Sun God born 25th December, Qi by Stephen Fry

reposted from: http://richarddawkins.net/article,1964,n,n
Chris Street comments are in bright green;

highlights in yellow blockquotes.

Click on the image above to play video.
Video requires QuickTime Player 7. Download the free player here.
3.2 MB : 2:44
This file is available for download here.
Ctrl-Click and 'Download Linked File' (Mac)
or Rt-Click and 'Save Target As' (PC) the link above.

Reposted from:
http://onegoodmove.org/1gm/1gmarchive/2006/12/merry_mithras.html

Here's a fun one from the archives. Norm at http://onegoodmove.org posted this again, and I just couldn't resist. (Mithras - wikipedia)