… and what this means is that all the possible questions and inquiries a species such as ours with its particular language and sensory apparatus (both structured by concrete neurological processes and components), have already been asked/made. no new philosophical questions can evolve unless there is a substantial change in our physiology, the environment we are in, or both. so while philosophers are babbling on about old questions and problems - which are usually linguistic problems rather than conceptual problems - the gradual change that might/can take place with our species and environment is being monitored by science. the question, to the extent that another philosophical question can be posed, is this; what should be the goals of science now that with it, we are able to control and manipulate not only our species, but our environments as well. we need a scientific ethics… and i think that is possible. but to do this we need to be clear about what we can do with science, or what should be of scientific interest. i think this answer is obvious. increasing human longevity, species mobility (space colonization), genome enhancement, education, cleaner energy sources, eco-preservation, eradication of various diseases, sexier women, etc. a general enhancement of the length, quality and space of/for life. incidentally the greatest obstacle to a serious and sustained effort to begin these projects is global capitalism… because it opens up and leaves these project forces subject to randomly and whimsically selected forms of market organization.
example: by now the world could be driving electric cars, but they aren’t, because private investors are not interested in, or motivated by, the advantages of cleaner energy sources. they are motivated by profit, and if there is an already vibrant market for gasoline powered motor vehicles on earth, they’d continue to invest in that market.
we cannot rely on global capitalism to respond to the stimulus to innovate at the fastest and most efficient rate possible… which should be, in our century, the guiding principle for the development of technology and industry.
so we have a system in which not only are the capitalist functionaries unecessary in the modes of production and distribution, but are also incredibly slow at responding to the scientific projects and tasks mentioned above.
any time you have an important technology that is perfectly able to be mass produced at a point in time, but is not, you can bet your ass that it’s the usual suspects to blame; the private industry owners.
well, the world will no longer tolerate stalling the improvement of man because some new industry that could do it, might or might not put money in some shmuck’s pocket. that’s 20th century nonsense. dinosaur economics.
these premises are very basic and simple enough. no need for ‘philosophy’ here… and anyone who would object to doing it this way would HAVE TO BE a capitalist… or some moron still under the spell of capitalism (thanks to philosophy; long story, that).
we are entering the age in which a lot of fat and gristle is going to be cut off of the giant cheeseburger we are about to start eating, called ‘world economics’, and the improvement of man will begin in rapid progression, following shortly thereafter.
meanwhile the philosophers can continue twiddling their thumbs and asking profound metaphysical questions as they’ve always done. it’s okay. they’re not in the way anymore. this train can’t be stopped.