MORE PHILOSOPHICAL STUFF FOR ALL THE PHILOSOFIZERZ

Human rights verses the security of living will always be a controversial matter; for example, analyzing what rights – if any – people should be prepared to relinquish in return for the security of living. Though saying that everyone is not entirely free to practice their religions seems to infringe on the freedom of individuals, it is a statement that must be true when taking into account the safety and security of living in a democracy or any sort of social environment. Some religions have traditions that violate the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, for example: women’s rights. A particular religion may believe it appropriate that women aren’t treated equally, and are beaten by a man. Also, in some religions the penalty for violating their ways is death. Obviously there are many places where religion is not completely compatible with a secure and modern society. Therefore to insure the safety of the greatest number of people, there are times when religions must be willing to give up some of their rights – especially when we live in a society of such cultural and religious diversity where conflicts are bound to arise.

Epistimological Stuff

“Are there some things humans can know with absolute certainty?”

Besides our own emotions, all we can know with absolute certainty is that for at least as long as we are limited to our physical bodies and the limitations of the physical world – nothing is for certain.

Although, maybe math. And the past. But not even that because the only way we have of telling the past is through stories passed down through other individuals and everyone has their own biases. And as for math – it’s probably a lie. All the algorithms are probably just sent to us by aliens intent on a slow and steady destruction of the human race.

I’m on to you, floating green alien population.

Philosophical Rambling Number 2…

“Why does evil exist?” you ask?

Wellllllll…..

Evil Exists, because in order to preserve the existence of the universe, there needs to be balance. To life there is death, to joy there is grief, to success there is failure, and, alas; to good there is evil. None can exist without the other. If one did exist without the other, then it would lose its meaning. And ultimately, life does have meaning. How would anyone recognize joy if they never knew the opposite? How could they cherish their own state of happiness if they didn’t know there was an alternative? How could they treasure their own life if they never had to let it go? Without opposites, life is only half of itself – and that half becomes a place of numbed indifference. Therefore, in my opinion, evil exists because good does.

— Written by a completely non-subjective person.

Thinking About Human Nature..

Mulling over the question: “Do you perform good deeds to make yourself feel better, or to make others feel better?”

I think that for a deed to be truly good as the question states, then it would have to be done to make others feel better. If serving others was done only so that it could serve yourself, then the deed would not truly be good since it was not done with pure intentions. Therefore, when a good deed is done to selflessly help another, the resulting good feeling is simply a bi-product – one that is happily met, but one that is not necessary for the good deed to have been committed.

Of course, that argument only stands under the belief that there is in fact such a thing as a ‘purely good deed’. And that is based on one’s belief on the innate nature of human kind. And so, this is one of the questions that can never truly be answered non- biasedly or with one determining truth.

Philosophy stuff.

 

Breathe with your piano, soul gaze with your cat.

Worries grow. It’s their nature. They’re not vindictive, they’re not spiteful: they’re just natural. But as they grow, they cloud reality. They fill your vision and encase your thoughts, unraveling your emotions and preying on your sanity. Some are more susceptible to them than others: some will allow them in, while others are seemingly immune. Who’s to say why they target some more than others; why they affect a few and not all. But they aren’t as large as they seem. That’s easy to forget. But it’s in the simple moments where you remember. Soaring with a bird, breathing with your piano, soul gazing with your cat. Entirely subtle experiences with astounding power because of it. Find those experiences . Don’t look far, because they’re here, surrounding you constantly. And out of the subtlty will come clarity. And the worries, as large and as crushing as they were, will reveal themselves as unimportant. I need to remind myself of that.

Feature Article (Extended)

The Black Market of Foreign Kidney Transplants

The black market of foreign kidney transplants is an ethical issue that is enduring a lot of heat in our society today. In places such as Moldova, China, Egypt, Pakistan, India, Israel/ Palestine, and Kosovo, there are people who have reached a point in their life where they have reached the bottom of the poverty level and out of the need to survive, apply to sell their organs to North American buyers. Many people victimize the buyers, but it should be recognized that they too are dying, and they too are at a point in their life where they are forced to make a life and death decision.

Many Westerners of today’s society hold the view that the buying and selling of kidneys is, “a kind of global social tragedy” as recorded in an article on CBC the Passionate Eye. But can one who has not experienced what another is going through rightly condemn the moral decision of those involved?

On the one hand, there is the sad reality that there are multitudes of people in Eastern countries that are living with abject poverty and malnutrition. These people are in circumstances that the average Western Canadian cannot relate to, and so cannot rightly condemn for their desperate actions.

On the other hand, there is the Canadian of varying age, stuck on dialysis with no family to donate a desperately needed organ. They are faced with the knowledge that the waiting list for a kidney will take years, and that it is quite possible that in that extended time, their health will deteriorate enough that they will no longer be eligible for the transplant. And so if, in that state of mind, they do pay a man or woman from a foreign land for their freely given organ (at the same time lifting that family out of the poverty that they had so desperately wanted out of) can their actions really be condemned?

It is not as if the foreign family signed up for the donor list without heavy consideration. They knew the risk the operation could have on them, and the fact that they signed up anyways shows how much they have to gain from taking part in the trade.   And so in this situation, both sides are happy – on both, life is gained.

Much of the problem with this black market stems from an idea that these trades create a two-sided world. On one side, there are those who are rich and buy organs off of desperate foreign individuals, and on the other side there are those who are being taken advantage of because of their desperation. That is the exact reason why this matter is so controversial. Human morals vs. Human desperation.

Many ethicists debate whether or not the black market of foreign kidney transplants is an abhorrent way of devaluing life, or if it could possibly be a way to sustain the lives of many around the world. Stephanie R. Murphy, an internet columnist for LewRockwell.com outlines some of the objections raised by ethicists against a human organ market. To begin with, one of the objections is as follows: “An organ market would encourage organ thieves. It also encourages the killing of comatose and brain dead patients to harvest their organs and make a profit.” Contained in that statement is a logical fallacy; it’s like saying, ‘taking money out of a bank account only encourages people to rob banks’. The statement is also making a biased implication that the organ market is immoral, and uses that bias to insist that if a person makes one immoral action, they will be compelled to make more.

Another concern brought up by ethicists is that selling organs is dangerous, even for those organs which can be removed without killing the donor (for example: the kidney), and so by completing the transplant, the life of the patient is placed at less of a value than that of the recipient. Stephanie R. Murphy responds by asking, ‘Isn’t it more dangerous to have black market organ transactions?’ The point is a fair one. As long as the buying and selling of organs is stigmatized by society as it is, the transactions will still continue to go on in secret, but will be in less stable and potentially hazardous environments. By removing the stigmatism against the organ market, the operations can then be supervised by surgeons in safer environments and the health of the patients can be assured.

When it comes down to it, donating a kidney for money – or any human organ for that matter – is a free choice. As for the objection; ‘foreign kidney transplants devalue the lives of foreigners’, can it not be turned around to ask, ‘why should foreigners not get the right to make their own choices? Is it not devaluing their lives to say otherwise? To restrict them from the ability to make that choice?’

As with all decisions, it does come with a price. In 2002, an article was published in the Journal of the American Medical Association that examined the effects of offering payment for kidneys in India. The results showed that 96% of people sold their kidneys to pay off debt, that 76% still had debt six years later, that 86% of people reported deterioration in their health status after donation, and that 79% would not recommend to others that they sell their kidneys.

Granted, this survey was only taken in India, not any of the other donating countries, and couldn’t possibly have included all of the donators. But the results are still sobering and provide an alternate viewpoint on this complicated issue.

It must also be taken into account that these statistics do not reveal how those surveyed used the money that they earned, how many people were included in the survey, whether or not there were other factors that could have affected their health besides the transplant, or the degree in which their health deteriorated.

                    Also, unlike the results shown above, TED Case Studies states that India displays a dramatic success rate
 of kidney operations. The study also says that “Supply and demand created a marriage of un-equals, wedding wealthy but
 desperate people dependent on dialysis machines to those in India grounded down by the hopelessness of poverty.” Differing
 from the study shown in the previous paragraph, this case illustrates a symbiotic relationship, benefiting both sides.

Consequentialism is the ethical belief that an action is right if it promotes the best consequences, and that the best consequences are those in which happiness is maximized. As for the black market of foreign kidney transplants, if the results shown in the Journal of the American Medical Association are viewed as an irregularity, I believe that the organ market in a way does create the greatest amount of good: both people are saved. A dying North American is given a life, and a foreign individual is given the chance at one. Yes, perhaps the idea of selling body parts seems inhuman and immoral – perhaps it is – but if both parties are consenting, and both are aware of what they are agreeing to, and if the outcome is better for everyone, can their decision really be condemned?

On the other hand, according to the Virtue Theory of Ethics, (for example, Aristotle’s Moral Theory) an action is right if it is what a virtuous agent would do in the circumstances. I cannot manage to coincide the term ‘virtuous’ with the black market of foreign kidney transplants. A word to better describe it is ‘necessity’ and ‘survival’. But virtuous? I don’t think it can be described as that. In that case, there are many ethicists that would be opposed to the idea of this black market, above all: Aristotle himself.

But I also believe that there comes a time in life when virtue is not always an easy option, where need becomes the only thing left that drives us. That the most ancient and influential part of us burns with an innate need to survive. And if the survival of the greatest number of people can be achieved through foreign kidney transplants – whether it be through saving the life of a desperate North American, or the life of a desperate starving foreign family through less than desirable means, does the ends justify the means?

It is a question that is not easy to answer, not until we ourselves are placed in that position – perhaps not even then. But until that moment all we can do is agree to not judge too quickly, learn as much as we can, and reflect on the information we have gained.

The Power of ‘They’

Throughout time it has been commonly discovered that putting a name to something diminishes the fear of it, and that understanding the unknown makes an individual more comfortable with their place in the grand scheme of life; more confident in the control they have on their situation. This is the way of society – it has been, and it still is. This is the reason why a dying man will ask how much time he has left, why the condemned will ask to know the name of his sentence, why a pregnant woman will examine the health of her unborn child.

The unknown has power. And with the knowledge of that power, comes the ability to abuse it.

We see it every day: Commercials saying, “Experts have proven this shovel to be the best in all of shovel history” and, “Ninety percent of dentists use Colgate Total as their primary tooth paste” and, “Women everywhere are raving over our new anti-aging cream”. But what experts? What dentists? What women? Ninety percent of how many? Three? Six? Are we honestly supposed to believe that Dove and Loreal surveyed every single woman everywhere, and that they were all raving over their newest cream? Of course not. But the statements still have power over the majority of society – if they didn’t, advertising campaigns wouldn’t be using them anymore.

Thus: the power of ‘they’.

This power has been present all throughout time. Trends are created because of it; whether it be commonly spoken phrases, fashion, materialistic objects, or activities. The latest fad doesn’t happen because ‘no one is doing it’, it happens because everyone is doing it. (Or so businesses and the commercial industry would have it seem.) I guess it stems from an innate need to belong; a human desire to be ‘popular’ and ‘up to date’ – Now, whether this need is a natural one, or if it has been conditioned into us by society is still debated. But though the superficial need to be ‘one of the many’ seems to benefit the buyer and follower of trends, it truly is the businesses that profit. The businesses use the power of ‘they’ to create the trends, and by using that power, they gain a stream of revenue going right into their own pocket.

Another problem with this misused power is that people try to use ‘they’ as a reason: as proof. An individual can defend their actions by referring to the similar actions of ‘them’, therefore ‘proving’ that they are in the right because an allusive number of supposed people are doing the same thing. Yet aren’t ‘they’ still just made up of individuals who have to make their own moral choices? So why is ‘their’ opinion viewed with so much weight?

And of the individuals who are part of the allusive ‘they’, how many of them are biased? How many of them are fully informed? How many of them have been paid to give a specific answer? How many of them are even qualified to be used as the reasoning and proof behind someone else’s argument? We don’t know. Because the vague statement of ‘they’ doesn’t reveal that information. Hence, the danger behind the power of ‘they’.

Fear of the unknown is present within all of us; it’s hardwired into our very existence. The unknown has the power to make people do foolish and reckless things – a trait that is easy to use against us. The power of ‘they’ is part of those ‘unknown’ things – it can mean anything and nothing, everything and all, but society will never know which one it is: it is simply a broad brush stroke meant to attract attention and persuade: it is an advertising strategy.

We, as philosophical thinking minds, must constantly be wary of the ever-present danger of ‘they’. It is a statement that hides un-provable claims, that covers up gaping holes in arguments and theories. If we are to build a society of reasoned, critical thinkers, we must be able to look past its guise, and see the multitude of flaws behind it.

Julie Annesrefoihweoif Veugen

Once upon a time in a far off land, on a blustery December Tuesday, an angel was born. They traveled over mountains, over hills and valleys, over lakes and rivers and deserts and ice – all to see this prodigy brought to life. But when they got there, the child was gone. In its place was a vortex, and beside that – a note. The horror struck villagers gathered round, leaning on each other for support in the shock of the disappearance. A brave speaker gathered his wits, and collecting himself and wiping his tears, he stepped up onto a platform of stone. He read the note aloud;

Distraught citizens, our planet is coming to an end. Chaos, rooted from within, has taken its toll and will soon consume all. We needed help. We needed an angel – so we stole her. We may give her back. Maybe.

-Earth

This is the story of how Julie Anne Veugen came to be. See, she is not an ordinary human. She is a phenomenon. A once in a lifetime creation. But more than that, Julie is a doll. She’s also Dutch, and if that doesn’t mean anything to you – well it doesn’t really to anyone. If books aren’t written about her… they will be. Writers block will get us all. So will cats. She’s not just a person. She’s the living embodiment of cows. Cows are the ultimate form of absolute content. They’re stable and supportive, and just as good on the inside as they are on the out. Some would say that they’re even better on the inside. But that’s Julie – my beautifully wrapped shining center of a best friend. And every single day of my life, I thank the swirling vortex that sucked the little child away from her faraway land of mountains and ice, because, now I get to be best friends with an angel.

So Julie’s earth family is made up of a mom and a dad, a brother named Joe, who’s one year older, and a sister named Jenna, who’s three and a half years younger. And a cat. And another cat. (She really loves those cats). After almost seventeen years of living, Julie has learned to value individuality, truth, and loyalty. That’s probably why she loves cats. But she wouldn’t be the person she is without the influences that come side by side with life. Events, people, and circumstances have shaped her into the amazing, idealistic and slightly-odd-when-you-you-get-to-know-her person that she is today – into the girl I love.

Julie is a veteran of travel- the Christopher Columbus of High school.  With her family she’s explored the waters of tropical seas, she’s discovered coastlines of shimmering white sand, and she’s observed the daily rituals of natives. These adventures have opened her eyes to the supreme diversity of humankind and instilled in her the need to continue to experience the world in all of its unique glory. And she faces it all head held high with confidence – a confidence instilled in her through dance.

Dance never has just been a hobby to Julie – it’s a need. It’s something that’s inside her, an expression that needs to break free. It’s in her bones, in her spirit, in her heart. You’d know it if you saw her. Dance has inspired her to be outgoing – through the friendships and relationships she has created, through the performances that push her both emotionally and physically. Her self esteem has been raised, and now she is the self-assured girl we all know.

Not only experiences help to form Julie Veugen, but people as well have contributed to the wonderfully perfect whole that is Julie. As is the same with many of us, parents are the ones we have spent the most time around – they’re the ones that have been there from the start, the ones that have helped us grow, the ones that have taught us the values and ideas that we accept and hold close. Because of the natural parent-child bond, Julie has said that her parents are one of the greatest influences on her life. Her humour, her intelligence, and her undying lightheartedness, stems from them – they are her constant support system that she loves and is constantly grateful for.

A less understandable influence on her life is this weird kid named Ali – Ali Carrola or something. She’s kind of a nerd, but I guess it works because Julie also has her own share of abnormality. I guess Ali brings out some of Julie’s weirdness. Actually no. It’s not even that. I think maybe it’s because of Ali’s peculiarity that Julie can be herself. So, since it seems unavoidable, and well, because I want to, and I can, I’m going to tell you all about Julie’s oddness. She has this strange obsession with Nancy Drew video games… She has a stack of the games. I counted them one time. I lost count. She also makes weird noises. And watches Dexter and gets almost suspiciously excited over a particularly gruesome episode. Also somewhat suspicious is her odd obsession with vampires. Seriously, walk into her room and look at her bookshelf. They’re pretty much all vampires. Okay that’s a bit of a stretch. Throw in a werewolf. And an alien inhabited human mind. She writes poems too. So she’s all deep and stuff. But to me, this is just listing all of the reasons why I love her. But I guess we’re just a pair of nuts.

Sorry. Bad analogy.

Julie Veugen is a combination and compilation of many things, including travel, dance, siblings, Lydia Herle, her parents, cheerleading, her friends, Knee problems, Kurt Place Kids, and a kid named Ali. She has her life all laid out before her. She dreams of going to university for the sciences, marrying in her twenties, giving birth to two preferably non-bratty children, working a term on a cruise ship, having a cat named Willow, inheriting her parents Florida house, saving up money to travel, and, as is a common goal to all of us – winning the lottery.

To summarize Julie Veugen is almost impossible, because I risk missing something important, which I most definitely have. Knowing who she is, what she believes, and what she stands for, she falls perfectly into the Bundle theory – the theory that holds that the self is a bundle or a collection of bits and pieces of experience. She’s someone you won’t find anywhere else, which I guess makes sense, since she isn’t from here. She’s the angel stolen from a far off land to save this world simply by being her. And now I’m going to make a promise, an extremely selfish one. When her original world begs and pleads Earth to give them back their lost one… I will tie her down to a chair and lock her in a windowless room with four iron bolted doors. Because I won’t let them take her back. She’s my beautifully wrapped, shining centre of a best friend. So like I said – she’s a cow.

Hold on to the Wind

Tapping. Feet, fingers, hands: drumming. Can’t keep still. Imagining someone throwing you a guitar like in the movies and jumping on the table. No music in the Caf. But there’s music in your head. Let it out. Blank pages. Absolutely stunningly white, and blank. A blinking line. Rhythmically blinking. To the beat of your music. Fight it. Fill the pages – write.

Attempt.

Anything.

Pause. Let your mind wander. Follow it. Where are you?

Sea breeze. It fills your lungs, water droplets cooling your face, your skin, and your clothes. Damp stone beneath your feet, toes clinging to the smoothed surface. The water recedes. You watch it, anticipation building in your chest in waves of inextinguishable excitement. Shells of muted colours spin and dance before landing on the newly revealed auburn sand. You can smell the exposed earth, the sea salt, the grasses behind you, the storm. The earth crackles in electric expectation. And then you see it. The distant growing of white foam, rushing back towards you, increasing speed. You brace yourself, plant your feet. Connect to the earth, hold on to the wind. It’s here. Crashing. Thunderous explosion of sound, water and air. The sea wall rises above you, you face it and throw your head back as water assaults you and life rages through you.

The Black Market of Foreign Kidney Transplants

 

http://www.cbc.ca/passionateeyemonday/feature_030308.html

The article shown above takes a slightly biased, Westerner point of view on the idea of a black market for human organs, but besides its take that the buying and selling of kidneys is, “a kind of global social tragedy” it does manage to show a little bit of both sides of the argument. On the one hand, there is the sad reality that there are multitudes of people living in Eastern countries that are living with abject poverty and malnutrition. These people are in circumstances that the average Western Canadian cannot relate to, and so cannot rightly condemn for their desperate actions. On the other hand, there is the Canadian of varying age, stuck on dialysis with no family to donate a desperately needed organ. They are faced with the knowledge that the waiting list for a kidney will take years, and that it is quite possible that in that extended time, their health will deteriorate enough that they will no longer be eligible for the transplant. And so if, in that state of mind, they do pay a man or woman from a foreign land for their freely given organ (at the same time lifting that family out of the poverty that they had so desperately wanted out of) can their actions really be condemned? It is not as if the foreign family signed up for the donor list without heavy consideration. They knew the risk the operation could have on them, and the fact that they signed up anyways shows how much they have to gain from taking part in the trade.   And so in this situation, both sides are happy – on both, life is gained. Much of the problem with this black market stems from an idea that these trades create a two-sided world. On one side, there are those who are rich and buy organs off of desperate foreign individuals, and on the other side there are those who are being taken advantage of because of their desperation. That is the exact reason why this matter is so controversial. Human morals vs. Human desperation.