Friday, 16 September 2016

Death and technology

Nowadays people have switched their faith to science and technology hoping to get immortality and defeat death. But is this not another illusion to go against our destiny of being mortals?
Can cyborgs still be considered humans? If we upload somebody's mind in a cloud and then put it in robots, can we still say that he/she is still the same person?
What about all the information that we are unconscious of or are stored in our cells?
Finally, are we considering all the risks related to modifying people genetically?
In the crazy search for immortality we risk to put an end to humanity and destroy the planet. 

Friday, 9 September 2016

L'oblio dell'Essere

Heidegger diceva che l'uomo ha dimenticato l'Essere. Io penso che l'uomo si e' ingabbiato nelle citta' cincondandosi di oggetti che lui stesso ha prodotto e si dimentica di domandarsi da dove tutto cio' viene. Solo il contatto con la natura che cresce spontaneamente ci permette di non dimenticarci dell'Essere, a patto che restiamo aperti alla contemplazione e al domandare.
Perche' gli enti di natura sono spontaneamente cosi'? Perche' ci sono invece del niente?
Solo se sorgono queste domande e ci apriamo all'ignoto siamo anche in grado di prenderci cura delle cose e degli enti di natura. 

Wednesday, 27 July 2016

The Church and the Environment

Pope Francis has recently said that God created nature which should be taken care and not destroyed by us humans. However it is written in the Bible that Man is at the centre of creation and must dominate on everything else. It is also written that Man was created at God's image and it has been interpreted as superior to any other living being.
He is trying to change this interpretation following Saint Francis but I think it will take a lot of time, if ever possible, to consider all beings as equal as humans because we are all part of the same Whole, or all creations of God as some religions say.
Only then we might come up with an ethic that consider nature worthy. But even now we should realize that we are destroying the planet and we are going too far. I fear that it will soon be too late! 

The Being as possibilities

If we look at Being as a static object we could assume that we could grasp a kind of truthful principle that might explain how the universe works. However we can also think Being as infinite equal possibilities, the ones that materialize and the ones that don't.
If we imagine and think Being as such it would not be possible to grasp, calculate, control or manipulate everything as we would always be subject to the unknown.
This has a great ethical implication, we can and we should know more but we will never get to know everything and there will always be a possibility which we did not considered and had not the chance to control. 
However this does not imply that we are free to create reality which instead comes from the Being.
Freedom can only be assumed but not demonstrated.  

Tuesday, 26 July 2016

Can we explain the mystery with a mathematical formula?

Some scientist think that everything can be explained with a short mathematical formula. When the universe was born, how life started, how the universe works, how our mind works, etc..., anything can be reduced to a formula. Beneath this there is the idea that we can grasp the mystery of life and that it can be calculated and put under control. But can we really reduce mind and life to a mathematical formula? Can we really put ourselves at the very beginning?
Why cannot we accept that we are limited beings within the infinite? Of course we can try to explain as mush as possible but we will always get to a point where we run out of words, where we face the abyss. Then we must let it go and abandon to the mystery.  

Monday, 28 March 2016

Heidegger e l'Essere come (non) fondamento

Heidegger pensa l’Essere non come fondamento per non ricadere nell’errore metafisico. Tuttavia, non essendoci un fondamento, il divenire e’ libero da ogni vincolo. Questa e’ anche la critica di Severino. La tecnica e’ un tentativo illusorio di combattere l’angoscia che ci provoca l’inesorabile scorrere annichilatore del tempo. Quindi a mio avviso l’Essere concepito come non fondamento non e’ efficace per neutralizzare la tecnica. Secondo me si puo’ pensare all’Essere come fondamento, come immutabile e allo stesso tempo non definibile, non calcolabile, non riducibile ad oggetto. In fodo noi siamo parte del tutto e quindi non possiamo mai afferrare l’Essere nella sua totalita’.

What is BEING?

Can we define, calculate, capture the BEING? I think we cannot and if we attempt to do so we would end up considering the BEING as a thing. However the BEING is not a thing, it is not a sum of all things, we can only talk about it in metaphors. I would compare the BEING to a puzzle. It is a sum of all pieces put in a precise order so that it is equally important to consider both the pieces and the order they are put to get the full picture of the puzzle. As we are little pieces of the puzzle we can never grasp the wholeness and the meaning of it. We can have an idea of the whole but we can never fully comprehend it. We live in an era dominated by technology, we think that one day we will be able to control the flow of time and eventually become immortal. I think that it is just a crazy idea due to our incapacity to live in the uncertainty. Stating that we cannot grasp the whole implies an ethical assertion: we are limited and we must learn to cope with that.