There are no philosophy factories

  

It seems to me that most education, not just philosophy but even including science, has little to no relevance for most jobs. Education does have an arguably important role in enriching the individual, but it's not so much concerned with teaching the practical skills necessary for the world of work. Of course, something like philosophy helps a person think rationally and systematically, so that might be of indirect help for some jobs. And we need to have some provisional answers to certain practical philosophical questions about how we should live. For example, how should society be arranged?

But for most of us philosophy, and indeed most subjects, will not help in the world of work. It seems to me that we could radically cut down the time that children spend at school and the number of people that go to University, and for this to have no significant impact on economic growth. Would it have a significant effect on the enrichment of people? That's a more nuanced issue, but I suspect it's the quality of the time spent in education that is far more important than the numbers of hours a week that people spend in education. 

An Amazing God

 

An even more amazing thing about God is that he created the world with its physical laws where that is complete bollox. Otherwise, no life would have ever arisen on earth, nor indeed anywhere else in the Universe.

My brief experience with the BenQ EW3270U Monitor

I purchased this monitor five days ago from Amazon UK, but which I’m now having to send back due to a couple of issues. I have been in contact with BenQ, and they appear to be of the opinion that my problems do not stem from a faulty monitor. If they are right, and given that the main problem occurs on both my 10-year-old desktop PC and a 3-year-old laptop, then we can conclude that this particular model of monitor (the BenQ EW3270U) has compatibility issues with certain computers.

I’ll start upfront by saying I was delighted with the quality of the picture. It was bright, detailed and very large. And I have no idea what people are talking about with the angles issue. It seemed absolutely fine to me. If only the monitor didn’t have other issues, I would have been very happy indeed.

Most often, buying a monitor is a straightforward process. Yes, it’s a hassle inserting the cables, since where they are plugged in to the monitor are unerringly awkwardly placed. And yes, on first switching it on it is necessary to adjust certain settings like brightness, contrast, and the size of the text. But that should be just about it and perhaps only takes 30 mins or so to unpack it and set everything up. Then the only thing to worry about is the actual quality of the picture and the frame rate when playing games and videos.

It didn’t happen like that, on the contrary, it was very stressful.

First things first, after I opened the box it came in, I discovered there was no power lead. That was immediately concerning as I wondered whether someone had bought this specific monitor before me, encountered problems, and sent it back, but neglected to include the power lead. So I immediately was worried. And I had to hunt around my flat trying to find another power lead. This took some considerable time until I eventually managed to find one.

So then I set my new monitor up and switched on. Now, I normally have my monitor at a very low brightness level. Initially it was way way too bright, so I quickly pressed the control to access the brightness and contrast controls… only to discover they were greyed out. This was further stress as I had no idea what to do in order to get these controls to function. To cut a long story short, I did eventually manage to get the brightness and contrast controls working, but I have no idea what specific action of mine achieved this goal. Incidentally, I note that in the questions on the Amazon page for this product, someone else mentions this brightness issue being greyed out. This suggests it might be a common problem with this specific model .. unless, of course, that someone sent his monitor back and was then sent on to me without Amazon resolving the problem!

Anyway, I was a bit concerned with this brightness issue, but felt everything was probably going to be OK at that point.  And the picture was very nice and large.

But then the next day dawned…  I use Microsoft Excel connected to a program that sends data from the net onto my spreadsheet and updates that data on a continual basis. I use Excel and this program constantly, and have done so with virtually no problems for many years. This day, Excel after being connected to this program was crashing after 2-3 minutes every time.  Initially, I never realised it had anything to do with the new monitor. I assumed it had to be an issue with my PC and software. But I eventually hooked up my old monitor again, and lo and behold, the problem disappeared! Moreover, although manually changing values in Excel had been laggy with my new monitor, this disappeared on hooking up to my old monitor.

I also discovered that this precise same problem occurs with my laptop too, although far less frequently.  Again, this problem disappears either using the laptop’s own screen or my old monitor.

So, mysteriously, my new monitor was managing to crash software on both of my computers! Initially, this seemed bizarre to me. I had imagined that a monitor is simply a passive device that displays the information from the output of a computer. However, this is definitely not the case. For one thing, powering up my PC or laptop with the new monitor changes the resolution of the screen. So it seems the monitor sends a message to my PC or laptop telling it to modify certain settings in order to make it compatible with this new monitor. We can surmise that it is this change in the settings that is somehow precipitating the problem – not only on my PC, but also occasionally on my laptop too.

I attempted to resolve the problem by:

1. Turning off hardware acceleration within Excel.
2. Making sure I had the latest graphics driver for my GTX670 graphic’s card.
3. Changing to a lower resolution and changing scale and layout.
4. Trying both the appropriate BenQ monitor driver and generic monitor driver.
5. Purchasing a DisplayPort to DisplayPort cable and using that instead of a HDMI cable to hook my PC up to the monitor (why they don’t include this cable with the monitor I do not know).

Incidentally, the HDR and automatic brightness setting were both turned off.

None of these measures apart from “5” made a blind bit of difference. The DisplayPort connection did make the problem occur less frequently, but it still occurs.

Even at this stage, I felt I could somehow sort the problem out. I contacted BenQ since it seemed to me that they would certainly be familiar with this issue and would make the appropriate recommendations. My only concern is that they might have responded by telling me that the monitor isn’t compatible with my PC or laptop. I certainly didn't expect the response I actually got, where I was simply fobbed off and incorrectly told me the monitor is passive, and no help was given whatsoever!

I now suspect that with the missing power cable, someone did indeed have this specific monitor before me and perhaps sent it back due to the very same problems I’ve experienced.

So I have now boxed it up and am going to send it back.

Netflix Programmes

I subscribed to a month of Netflix in order to watch the 2022 version of All Quiet on the Western Front (see my previous post for my opinion of that film). Only my 2nd month of Netflix ever, the first time I subscribed was nearly 2 years ago.

Anyway, now I have subscribed again, I might as well check out any other programmes that might be worth watching. There's a lot of positive talk about Stranger Things. Last night, I watched the first episode of the first series or season, or whatever it's called.  I got the impression it's one of these American series where lots of weird things happen with no real progress in the story or resolution, and which go on interminably.

Watching the entire first episode of a series is reasonable. But if it hasn't grabbed my interest at that point then I don't feel it's worth pursuing. I'll see if I am able to get past the first episode for anything. In all honesty, I probably won't.

Got these to try.

Wrong turn

Army of the Dead

All Of Us Are Dead

My Name

Squid Game

Dark

I'll update once I've tried.

UPDATE 15th December

I tried "Dark" and watched about 30 mins or so.  I had no idea what the heck was going on, so I never even bothered watching a single episode. And if you asked me now what happened in that 30 minutes, I'm afraid I cannot remember! 

I watched wrong turn. This was a remake of a film of the same name. The original Wrong Turn was great (haven't watched any of the sequels Wrong Turn 2 etc).  This remake of wrong turn wasn't actually a remake, but an entirely different film with very little in common with the original. They're deceiving people by using the same name to make more money. And it's definitely not worth watching, I wasted my time watching it.

Squid Game was very good, definitely something that is worth watching.  I was surprised at how good it was!

This was my second month of Netflix, the first month was about 18 months ago.  And this is the last day of my subscription of this 2nd month, but will probably subscribe again within a month or so. 

A friend of mine from Australia -- Veroni Bear -- advised me not to bother with All Of Us Are Dead, so I won't.  She also recommended:

Train to Busan
Kingdom
My Name
Sweet Home

But Train to Busan isn't on Netflix.  But I'll give the others a spin.  I also want to try the series the mist which is based on Stephen King's novel.

The new "All Quiet on the Western Front" (2022)

I've just now finished watching the new "All quiet on the Western Front". I watched it in German with subtitles.

I've never been a soldier, but it seemed to depict war as it really is. Uncompromisingly dark and brutal. It showed utter unmitigated horror, pain, suffering, despair and terror.

There was nothing redeeming about what they did. Not on either side. No honour, nothing of any merit, nothing of any hope, certainly nothing won. It was just a wretched waste of human life for absolutely no reason.

The stupidity of mankind and the utterly vile things we do to each other will ensure our eventual demise.

Today's Budget

I'm trying to get my head around today's budget.  If my understanding is correct, this will be calamitous for a significant proportion of the UK.

Let's just consider energy costs.

A typical energy bill will be £3000 come April. Compare that price to this financial year where a typical average energy bill is £2,250 (averaging the present cap with the cap from April to October 2022). So that's £3,000 minus £2,250 equals £750 extra we need to find there. But! It is much worse than this since in this financial year we all got £400 help + most of us got £150 help paid by the council. We are not getting this help the next financial year.

So £750 + £400 + £150 = £1,300 worse off per annum for energy alone!

Or am I not understanding something?

Also, I'm hearing a lot of people on social media state that those on means tested benefits have done well out of this budget. Well, they'll "only" be £1,050 worse off rather than £1,300. This financial year, they got the £400 + £150 like most other people. And they also received an additional £650. That equals a total of £1,200 (£400 + £150 + £650). However, next year they're only getting £900. So £300 worse off there (£1200 - £900).

But also next financial year, the energy bill will be £3000 on average. The average energy for this year is £2,250. So that's another £750 they're worse off. £300 + £750 means they're £1,050 worse off. Everyone else are £1,300 worse off. (Edit:  No, it appears that those on benefits will only be getting £600 the next financial year of 2023-24.  So they will be £1,350 worse off.  See below).

And we haven't even begun to consider all the other factors making us poorer e.g. the fact that food appears to have increased by over 30% in the past year.

At the moment in the UK, the news is full of people using food banks, missing meals, not putting their central heating on and so on.  See here.  What do people imagine will happen if they receive a £1,000 less?  Indeed, perhaps £1,500 to £2,000 less once we factor in all the other spiralling costs? (the 6% wage rises or 10% benefit rises scarcely mitigate this calamity).  Significant social unrest is surely the inevitable outcome.
 
Clearly, many poor people (and definitely not just those receiving means tested benefits), simply will not be able to make ends meet. So the Government has to do something else.

Update 4/1/23   Re The help with those on means-tested benefits.

I said above: "next year they're only getting £900. So £300 worse off there (£1200 - £900)".

It has now been revealed that they will only get £600 the next financial year rather than £900, with the final payment of £300, taking it to £900, being made in the Spring of 2024 which I believe will take that payment into the 2024-2025 financial year. Most likely the energy prices will have not gone down by the 2024-25 financial year, so my worry is that this final £300 will also be counted towards the help given in the 2024-25 financial year. In other words, it looks like the Government might try to double-count this £300 and be trying to give the impression that those on benefits are getting £300 more than they actually are.

 

 

 

Give people a second chance?

It's interesting that when members of the public are interviewed about a politician's misdemeanours or whatever, there are loads of them who say that everyone deserves a second chance. Clearly no one is independently coming up with this sentiment, they're all just repeating each other. 

I see no reason why everyone deserves a second chance. Especially not if we're talking about some important job or task. If people screw up, act unethically, or whatever, then there are many other more suitable people that can take their place. Why on earth give people a second chance?

As I predicted back in August, Liz Truss has resigned.

So Liz Truss has announced her resignation as PM.  The shortest serving PM ever -- just 44 days as PM.  And something I predicted before she became PM on the 6th of August.

As I said back then:

"It's possible that Liz Truss might be one of the shortest serving, if not THE shortest serving PM, ever.  You heard it here first".

Why on earth, how on earth, she became PM eludes me.  Why on earth did Tory party members vote for her??  Let's hope that they don't get a say who our next PM is!

22/10/22 Edited to add: I discovered after publishing the above that Matthew Parris (a Tory) has very similar views on Liz Truss to my own.  Here's a clip from Newsnight that was shown the night before last.

The increase in the price of food from October 2021 to October 2022

Also see my figures for July 21 to July 22.  And click on food prices label at the bottom to get all relevant blog posts.

According to this article food prices rose by 14.6% in the 12 months to September.

I do not think this figure can possibly be realistic.  According to the chart above, food prices have gone up by around a third compared to this time last year.

I should firstly state that I almost always pay the cheapest price I can pay.  Certain food products continually cycle up and down in price with their price being labelled an "offer" at the low end of the price cycle. I just stock up on the products when they are on "offer" and never buy them when they are not on offer (although I might have screwed up with the walnuts that I bought a year ago and bought them at the high end of the price cycle.  This will explain why the chart says they've gone down 11% in price.  In reality, this seems very unlikely). And I always compare to the current bottom end of the cycle prices, even though these prices might not be what one pays on this specific date.

For nuts and cheese that I've highlighted in yellow, they're now selling the same product in smaller packets, so have adjusted accordingly.

I'm not sure if I should include the price of salt, sugar, sweets, crisps and frozen chips due to various reasons (highlighted in orange at bottom of chart). Salt and sugar will only be rarely bought. Crisps and sweets are luxury foods. Frozen chips is repetitious since I have already included potatoes. So, if we exclude these products, then the average price increase is 33.5%. More than double the 14.6% that they claim.

But could the average be dragged down to 14.6% by incorporating other foods?  This seems very unlikely to me.  Just look at the number of food products that have increased by less than 14.6% compared to those that have increased by more than this figure.

 

An article on near-death experiences

I read the following skeptical article on NDE's:

The Afterlife Is in Our Heads

These so-called scientific explanations of NDEs assume that it is entirely unproblematic that brains produce consciousness, and given this assumption, they advance speculative hypotheses about how the brain creates such experiences.

Incidentally, I wouldn't claim that NDEs give anything like proof of an afterlife. Clearly, one's mind and implicit expectations very much influences what one actually experiences. But this certainly doesn't mean that one isn't encountering some afterlife realm that one's implicit expectations and beliefs are moulding and shaping. Indeed, this to a certain extent even happens with our everyday embodied vision, as demonstrated by perceptual "illusions". Just consider that dress.

Just a few comments on various quoted parts:

The idea that near-death experiences, also known as NDEs, offer proof of an afterlife for the soul has been remarkably persistent, despite an accumulation of scientific evidence to the contrary.

 …

NDEs are … explained by physiological processes, [neuroscientists] said, which have been pieced together over the past 50 years.

I’ve never come across any of this evidence. As I said above, at best, they are speculative hypotheses.

[A] wealth of neuroscience research describes how OBE-like experiences—a loss of the sense of self and disturbed body perception or ownership—can be triggered by brain damage, epilepsy, and migraine,7 as well as by stimulation of the part of the brain where the right temporal and parietal lobes meet.

Which, as I have continually explained on countless occasions e.g here, has no implications either way, since this would be precisely what we would expect regardless of whether NDEs are a glimpse of some external reality or not.

The “dissociative anesthetic ketamine can reproduce all aspects of the near-death experience,” Jansen wrote. That includes a sense of ineffability, timelessness, that what is experienced is “real,” that one is actually dead, a perception of separation from the body, vivid hallucination, rapid movement through a tunnel, and emerging “into the light.”

So this assumes that ketamine induced experiences are produced by the brain rather than modifying the brain to allow access to other realities. So this argument only works for those that draw a distinction between the ultimate origin of NDEs on the one hand, and psychedelic experiences on the other.

The article reports Anil Seth as saying:

“If somebody with no brain activity were able to experience something and remember it later, then pretty much everything we know about the brain, about science, about physics is wrong.”

This is just nonsense on stilts. Obviously, since the physical sciences wholly leave out consciousness in their description of reality, then necessarily they can have nothing to say about the abilities of consciousness.