Cogitas Ergo Sum

In my last posting I mentioned ‘Ruminations’ which is a spiral bound collection of finalised versions of some of the more, for want of a better description, philosophical items that I have produced recently for this blog. As an integral part of this composition there are a number of accompanying images a few of which I intend to post in separate brief items here.

The first of these is a sketch that I came across many years ago – decades ago in fact. I have no remaining record of the source of this intriguing drawing and as far as I can recall it did not have a title attached to it. So for my own purposes I called it ‘Cogitas Ergo Sum’ which, if my feeble Latin suffices translates as ‘You think therefore I am’.

This is for very interesting reasons that I think are there to be seen, as it were, inspired of course by Descartes’ famous philosophical proposition of 1637 ‘Cogito ergo sum’ – ‘I think therefore I am’ which implies that an ‘I’ exists to do the thinking.

But, you may wish to consider, can we take a further step towards identifying the presence of entities that we think about other than ‘I’? Probably not in the strict terms that were laid down by Descartes, but if people act as if such an entity has an existential standing then in so doing they effectively imbue it with power and creativity in our world so that its status is in at least in one important respect equivalent to existence. Since we come across this phenomenon every day, we should at least ensure that we use it for the better.

Other substantial questions around the Cogitas ergo sum idea will remain of course, perhaps notable amongst these is this: ‘Who is the speaker and who is ‘I’? A fruitful question to contemplate - I think.

Ruminations

It has now been quite a while since my last posting on this blog. The main reason is that I’ve been concentrating my available energy on producing a printed and bound compilation of finalised versions of recent items on the blog. To these I’ve added various images that are meaningful to me and which have deep level relationships to the text. If this sounds a bit mystical then it probably is, since my personal and highly tenuous understanding of the Cosmos is that there is something about it that goes beyond the solely rational – it is not irrational, but is simply more.

I’ve called the collection ‘Ruminations’, a title that reflects my cud-chewing thought processes. Unfortunately Blogspot doesn’t allow the uploading of PDF files – a serious limitation. Nevertheless I’ve produced PDF versions (files that you can read or print out from Acrobat – on most computers) of the complete text and images and I’d be happy to send anyone interested copies by email. My address is MWi8327963@aol.com  

If you decide to have a look at Ruminations you may feel that some of the phrases I’ve chosen to use are interpretable at more than one level. Unintended instances apart, this is because I want them to be this way. Doubly so in terms of the images where, beyond attaching brief personal descriptions of them, I don’t go into detail as my intention is that readers should be free to come to their own understanding of the significance and attach their own labels.

In my view strict requirements for narrow precision and restriction to a single layer of meaning in some topics in Ruminations would produce an incomplete understanding of human qualities and the nature of the Cosmos of which we are an integral part. Like other dreams, memories and reflections, there are times when depth of meaning flows from richness of interpretation, which can bear fruit at many levels.

I want to set out a few thoughts and intuitions on life and its meaning, my views on our place in the Cosmos, on morality and mortality, on our society and some other deep questions that have intrigued me over the years. Wildly ambitious no doubt, but I’m talking about views rather than comprehensive analyses.

In doing this, even at a very short length, my hope is that I may connect with other people ‘out there’ puzzling over the same things but for whom useful discussions are hard to find. Certainly, I’ve found this to be the case myself. I’m sure I stand to be corrected on a number of matters, but my hope is that, nevertheless, there may be one or two points that people will find interesting and helpful in their own explorations.

One risks looking foolish when, at this stage in life, putting out something like this. If this is so, then so be it and I hope that I will find myself amongst those who I think should be suffered gladly! It is unfortunate that many people who may have interesting things to say are silenced by such anxiety, a fear often put into them by critics who, superior beings that they are, would much rather hear echoes of their own voices.

But each person is one-of-a-kind and has a unique experience in life. So I believe we should take courage and say what we think, since we all have something to contribute. So, for what it is worth, Ruminations is my personal offering.

To conclude this piece, I’m not sure how many more postings I will be able to make on this blog, but we will see as time goes on. Thanks for taking an interest.

Omar Khayyam

Omar Khayyam was an 11^th/12^th century Persian philosophical poet, astronomer and mathematician. He wrote many short poems some of which were translated and gathered together as if one piece by Edward Fitzgerald and termed by him a Rubaiyat. Khayyam advocated charity towards all and warned of the temporary nature and dangers of wealth – a message fitting to our times if ever there was one. He was not afraid to depart from orthodoxy and express doubt on fundamental issues – a hazardous pursuit in that part of the world then as now – though broad learning was greatly valued at that time in his culture.

The Rubaiyat has been one of my favourite poems all of my life. Oddly, I was introduced to this by my mother who in all other regards departed little from her standard religious creed. It clearly has a deep resonance with partly conscious and unexpressed uncertainties about life and its meaning. This speaks to my own condition and outlook and I have always turned to the poem if in need of  what I think of as ‘angry consolation’. If you read the whole, I think you’ll see what I mean by this expression.

I once had the good fortune to be able to refer to Khayyam’s mathematical work in an academic paper of my own and have had a lifelong interest in astronomy so I have these reasons too to connect with his great work. This, and Khayyam’s critical approach to riches and his view of their distribution I hope have found an echo in some of the pieces I’ve written and in my own political and moral philosophy. Here I want to share with you just three verses (not in order – they are verse 32, the famous verse 76 and verse 35). They speak profoundly of life and repay the investment of much thought.

Into this Universe and Why not knowing,

Nor Whence, like Water willy-nilly flowing,

And out of it, as Wind along the Waste,

I know not Whither, willy-nilly blowing.

The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ,

Moves on: nor all your Piety nor Wit

Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line,

Nor all your Tears wash out a Word of it.

There was the Door to which I found no Key:

There was the Veil through which I could not see:

Some little talk awhile of ME and THEE

There was – and then no more of THEE and ME.

A Citizenry of Good Intent

What makes for a ‘Good City’? Is it architecture? No. Its plutocratic wealth? Certainly not. Where power is concentrated? No. Rather, it is a citizenry of good intent. What makes for a citizenry of good intent? Shared values, harmonious relationships between individuals, cultures and communities, and their joint endeavours towards the common good.

For one instance of a city that possesses this enormously important but almost always overlooked quality and one which has many other fine characteristics, I would say that Birmingham stands out. It is a good city, and a cosmopolitan world city. These qualities mean that it is growing steadily, and Birmingham is home to 1.1 million people, covering 150 square miles and including much that is green with over 100,000 publicly owned trees and 150 public parks. The Greater Birmingham area has more than double this population.

Although there are local archaeological finds going back to the stone age, far as we know, the continuous population began about twelve hundred years ago when a group of people led by a man called Beorma first settled here. The name ‘Birmingham’ means ‘Home of the people of Beorma’ (Beorma Ingas Ham) and ever since those earliest times the city has welcomed people from all over the world who wish to make their home here too and enrich the community through their work and culture and achieve fulfilment as individuals.

It is on these principles that Birmingham has become the country’s premier city outside the capital. It is the largest local authority in Europe, or, put even more expressively, the largest local authority this side of the Urals. This is something to be proud of rather than, as we're told by those intent on needless change and the further diminishment of local government, a bit of a problem.

Birmingham also has one of the youngest populations of any major city in Europe and there is pride in the open and democratic traditions on which the city’s prosperity was founded. Over 130 years ago the Council made clear that Birmingham knows: “No distinction between her citizens by birth or adoption.” And, as a city of tolerance and respect for all of its citizens, this is constantly reaffirmed. To adapt a famous expression: ‘E Pluribus Birmingham’, ‘From many – Birmingham’.

The city's motto is ‘Forward’ and it lives by this. So even in difficult times when the common good is not to the fore nationally, there will be more opportunities to improve the quality of life for everyone and preserve the city's extensive heritage. This would be in addition to an excellent cultural environment both at the highest level and throughout its communities. The city will continue to do all this along with other beneficial developments while remaining, by all objective accounts, one of the friendliest cities in the country.

All Birmingham’s citizens are encouraged to embrace the common values of our society. For example, our faith communities can maintain their essential traditions and beliefs while integrating into, and fully contributing towards, the common good of the city -  just as their predecessors have done throughout Birmingham’s vibrant history. Community has many dimensions, locality obviously but it is on the faith aspect of community that I wish to focus here.

I have taken part in a number of multi-faith events and have seen the good work of faith leaders and communities throughout Birmingham. While in my personal outlook on life and its meaning I choose to hold a greater degree of uncertainty than most people, like everyone else I seek knowledge, understanding and, where possible, personal meaning.

I am also a harvester of wise sayings – the concise wisdom of others! I take the view that we should accept truth from whatever quarter it may come and however uncomfortable it may be, revising our outlook in the light of the facts. As J. M. Keynes put it: “When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do?” So tradition should have a vote but not a veto. The main challenges are how to be part of modernity without losing essential values and how to fully incorporate in wider society without losing cultural identity.

In terms of common ground it is worth looking for what I call the ‘sentiments within’. What I have in mind here is a constructive 'reading between the lines' of scripture or other significant texts which can expand the range of those who are reached by the essence of the message. This can certainly be unifying. In any text, we should ask ourselves what is the core intent rather than be distracted by the surface wording or contextual particularities. As Shaw expressed it: 'There is only one religion though there are a hundred versions of it.'

In most cases the principal divisive factor turns out to be ignorance, but the good news is that that part of ignorance that is not wilful or deeply indoctrinated can be dissolved – much more by friendly and informal contact than through formal education. The residual prejudice that is not dissolved by the removal of this lack of understanding is a deeper seated problem, but numbers will be reduced as communities as a whole move forward. The key questions remaining are what creates such prejudice in the first place and what sustains it.

At both individual and community levels there is much to be gained by distinguishing carefully between identity and belief. So faith and the traditions associated with it should not represent the whole of identity. The same consideration applies to those individuals with a truculent atheistic outlook – it does not make for a harmonious society, nor does it promote understanding or the common good if people see themselves or others as being defined by these positions and need constantly to put up aggressive challenges.

The question also arises as to what extent identity can be sufficiently secured with a tempering of the surface elements of religion – what I term the 'particularities'. With this in mind, there is also the question as to what extent can the initially disparate identities of communities converge over time? This would be a gradual process in which individual freedoms would have a major role.

And common to all groups, every generation needs to relearn how to live in ways that both satisfy themselves, their communities and promote the common good. In these distracted days when we can so easily become preoccupied with inessentials and become the 'tools of our tools', a highly relevant question is whether or not human beings are related to the infinite.

Birmingham has always seen good interfaith relations as vital. Opportunities for people of different faiths, or none, to learn about each other and overcome suspicions are to be welcomed. So many good things can be achieved by working together in which it soon becomes evident that the core values of the world religions (and those of many thoughtful agnostics) are common ground. Broad based knowledge and understanding are important – those who know only their own side of the case know insufficient of that.

The Cosmos contains subtle and multi-faceted truths towards which religions are pathways, so they should not, at a deep level, conflict with each other. The seeming clashes of doctrine and practice need not be calamitous and may be in fact be opportunities. What would seem on the surface to be antipathies sometimes reveal hidden affinities. Apparent discord can be harmony not understood.

Peace is the greatest good and, like its dreadful opposite, is a human concept. Peace can only come into being when people are in touch with their humanity and this I think is what the mainstream religions seek to achieve. Beyond the political realm, peace depends on harmony between all religions and this is a goal in which we all share. Harmony will have amongst its sure foundations the qualities of knowledge, tolerance, respect and love as we strive towards a world without enemies.

There are those to whom faith is a stranger. Some have this as a preference. Some, while not seeking it, are at least at ease with this state but for others it is unsettling. Wise counsel can assist them, and prayer too since the process of and preparation for prayer is valuable to people of a devout disposition but without specific faith. Preparation involves a gathering of the self, and in providing a release from the urgencies of the moment, allows a focus on a point beyond the self.

All that we do, especially in commercial life, should be done with the guidance of a moral compass knowing that all individuals are important and should be respected and that a single act of generosity or brave intentions can change the course of a life or a part of the world. We should carry our moral values into community and representative life too and thereby continue to play a major role in making us the great city that we are.

Today Birmingham is home to many religious traditions, ranging from varieties of theism through to the many strands of Hinduism and the godless spirituality of Buddhism. There are also many degrees of agnosticism adjoined to core moral values, some of which combinations are difficult to distinguish from un-dogmatic versions of faith.

The power of the state and religious power are both enormous and in the same hands amount to far too great a concentration of authority. So while state and religion should be separate, this does not mean that faith should have no say in government or that government must necessarily be conducted by faithless people. What must be avoided is the situation where religious parties legislate for sectional interests. Faith based values can be advocated with passion but should not be imposed by legislation – a point that is taken up in Appendix A on Lord Justice Laws’ ruling. Appendix B suggests a possible elements in an inter-faith compact.

There is of course a great deal more that should be kept to the fore, for example the contribution of literature and the immense value of the aesthetic sense. Art is a universal language regardless of form. Art can take us to an inner place, hinting at the thoughts that lie hidden in our hearts. Art is a global language that knows no nationality and favours no race, creed, age, class or gender. So a good city will encourage art in all its communities – as does Birmingham.

Finally, in sum what is required from people for harmony? A warm decision by the intellect, and the most rational decision that the heart can take and magnanimity - greatness of heart and mind. These individual qualities are the keys to good relationships between all communities.

And amongst many broad issues there is the necessity of sustaining the good earth, locally and globally, restoring integrity and traditional decent values in politics as well as business and embedding them right throughout society today. And vital international relief and development work will flourish all the more on the foundation of harmonious communities and the generosity of the common good.

In all of this it is relevant to ask: what is the basis of belief? Why do we believe what we do? And, equally importantly: what represents a reasonable basis for changing our minds and what makes for a context in which this can be done? The sociological view is that belief rests on the foundations of family or culture. In psychological terms belief gives the individual a sense of meaning or purpose – but may also be constraining.

A scientific foundation for holding a belief is reason and evidence and, quite opposite to this, there is deference to authority – believing something when told to do so by a person held to be significant or through having read it in an authoritative text. The rational foundation for ‘belief’ requires this to be held provisionally, in the light of the current evidence. But these distinctions are by no means as sharp as may first appear. For example, as the Bible reportedly says: Test everything and hold on to the good!

I am certainly for the common good – the common wealth as it were – enhancing the well-being of everyone, with no-one being marginalised, where the meek get some inheritance today rather than promises for delivery much later, and where well-being is defined in a broad way to include all aspects of the quality of life, not just consumption. In fact we should dispense with the vain quest for emotional well-being to be gained through material consumption. In fact ‘consumption’ is a word that was once used to describe a state of ‘ill-being’ - a wasting illness – ironically still appropriate today.

And I am equally certainly against 'sin'! To my mind sin is socially pathological behaviour. Fundamentalist violence is the worst possible example, representing that which is all too literally mortal. I wish that our language had a secular word that was equivalent to ‘evil’ – for this is surely it. But more commonplace aggressive self-righteousness, intolerance, excessive consumerism and greed are examples of social pathologies that can detract from the well-being of all communities and diminish the qualities of a good city.

But any such negative impacts will be reduced to an absolute minimum and ultimately eliminated through shared values, harmonious relationships and joint endeavours oriented towards the common good. These are all much in evidence in the good city of which we have spoken, and long may it be so.

Appendices

A: Lord Justice Laws’ Ruling

Lord |Justice Laws’ wise words in a marriage guidance case merit careful study. In his ruling Lord Justice Laws wrote:

“We do not live in a society where all people share uniform religious beliefs. The precepts of any one religion – any belief system – cannot, by force of their religious origins, sound any louder in the general law than the precepts of any other. If they did, those out in the cold would be less than citizens and our constitution would be on the way to a theocracy, which is of necessity autocratic.

The law of a theocracy is dictated without option to the people, not made by their judges and governments. The individual conscience is free to accept such dictated law, but the state, if its people are to be free, has the burdensome duty of thinking for itself.

In a free constitution such as ours there is an important distinction to be drawn between the law’s protection of the right to hold and express a belief and the law’s protection of that belief’s substance or content.

The conferment of any legal protection or preference upon a particular substantive moral position on the ground only that it is espoused by the adherents of a particular faith, however long its tradition, however long its culture, is deeply unprincipled”

“It (a faith) may of course be true; but the ascertainment of such a truth lies beyond the means by which laws are made in a reasonable society. Therefore it lies only in the heart of the believer, who is alone bound by it. No one else is or can be so bound, unless by his own free choice he accepts its claims.”

B: Possible elements in an inter-faith Compact

1. We accept each other for what we are without trying to change one another.

2. We will identify and promote our common core values and resolve to be people and communities of reconciliation.

3. We commit ourselves to work together for a cohesive society in the spirit of mutual respect and openness.

4. We will work together for understanding, respect, justice and peace.

5. We seek to promote the common wealth, the common good and a harmonious common life within a good city and a virtuous economy.

References

If you have found some of the articles that I've posted recently on this blog of interest, you may also find items on this short list of relevant reading, including some less well known but absorbing books, intriguing. Of course, there are a good many books and other publications (for example special issues of The New Scientist or The Scientific American) that take up similar ideas in one way or another, these just happen to be the ones that caught my eye.

I have concentrated solely on printed books here although some of the titles may now be available in electronic form. Some of them may have associated websites (amongst very many other websites) but they are rarely as substantial as the book. There are also numerous relevant and interesting broadcast documentaries that may be repeated. Wikipedia will also be a useful reference of course and a Google search will also turn up further details and some additional related items.

In no particular order:

Memories, Dreams, Reflections: C. G. Jung

Modern man in search of a soul: C.G. Jung

Ideas and Opinions: Albert Einstein

The Clock of the Long Now: Stuart Brand

The Tao of Physics: Fritjof Capra

The Soul of the White Ant: Eugene Marais

Truth and Fiction in the Bible: Robin Lane Fox

The Star Thrower:  Loren Eiseley

Cosmos: Carl Sagan

Gödel Escher Bach – an eternal golden braid: Douglas Hofstadter

The Harvest of a quiet eye: A. L. Mackay

If you take up any of these reading suggestions, I hope that you find them as thought provoking and inspirational as I have done.

Some Fundamental Questions

These are some of the fundamental questions that have intrigued me all of my life. There are more, of course, particularly relating to consciousness, that may well be among the last to be answered. The ‘answers’ below are just my own, certainly imperfect, understanding of the present state of knowledge. I hope that you find this brief discussion interesting.

Q: Does our world have a special place in the universe?
A: In the sense of being at a relatively benign location, yes, we would not be here otherwise. Most of the extra-solar planets discovered so far are not habitable for life as we know it, but we’ve only had search tools for a few years.
But our world is certainly not the unique centre of the universe nor is it the centre of our hundred thousand light year wide galaxy. The solar system is located in one of the outer spiral arms of our galaxy – and all the better for that. The quieter ‘suburbs’ of the Milky Way provide longer lasting security from catastrophic events and a safe distance from the galaxy’s central black hole. Our excellent sun has a good life expectancy, is stable and of an intensity to give a decent sized habitable zone in which, fortunately, the earth is located.

Q: Will we ever understand it all?
A: We perceive only 'through a glass darkly' with the imperfect minds of the unperfected beings that we are. We’ve only been at the scientific process consistently for a few centuries (despite the insights of some of the early Greeks – but not the most famous ones). A complete understanding may take thousands of years to acquire. Indeed it may be that full knowledge of the nature of reality will remain forever beyond our ability to ascertain for ourselves - although perhaps not beyond our ability to grasp if explained by sentient others. And it may turn out that such an understanding may not be confined within the constraints of current orthodox scientific analysis.

Q: Are we alone?
A: I see there being three possible answers to this question (not including ‘don’t know). In my view the answer is no, but the universe is not overcrowded with technologically advanced civilisations that have not self destructed or otherwise come to an end.

Q: Where is everybody?
A: Be patient! The Galaxy (a tiny fraction of an observable universe of a hundred billion or more galaxies) is a vast place with two hundred billion or more stars. If the sun was the size of a grain of rice you could just about fit the Milky Way into the space between the Earth and the Moon. There are more stars in the universe than there are grains of sand in all the beaches of the world. There may be ten times as many planets as there are stars. This is why, to me, complete solitude has always seemed unlikely to say the least.
For all we know thousands of advanced civilisations might have arisen in the Milky Way galaxy alone but, given its scale, with most of them likely to be separated by hundreds of light years in space and possibly hundreds of millions of years in time. Quite possibly, long lasting technical civilisations are a rarity and that in this neck of the thousand light year woods we are ‘it’. This is the third answer alluded to above – no and yes (in practical terms). It’s rather like a code based on prime numbers that is in principle crackable but the fact that it would take centuries to do this makes the code effectively uncrackable.
Can we make ourselves an exception to the longevity issue and can we acquire the patience and vision to continue with our modest efforts to make contact for more than the few years we’ve been at it?

Q: The most fundamental question of all: Why there is something rather than nothing?
A: There are at least two assumptions implicit in this question namely (a) that something ‘exists’ and (b) that nothingness is a default position inherently more likely and less demanding than ‘somethingness’. I will accept (a) and in terms of (b) my personal guess is that the quantum nature of reality will turn out to be a necessity, that quantum fluctuations are an inescapable part of this and that with random quantum fluctuations permanent total nothingness is a logical impossibility.

Q: Is there not evidence of design?
A: In a universe that is capable of developing and sustaining life there must inevitably seem to be evidence for design given the conditions that appear to be required, but that does not necessarily imply that there was conscious design even though it is true that the universe is, to use a youthful expression, ‘brilliant’ and wonderful.
A number of interesting questions arise. Here are two of them. Would a designer necessarily be conscious – or is that bit up to us? Would a designer have much (or any) choice in terms of ‘the laws of nature’?
However, it is intriguing to speculate what a conscious universal designer would have set out to achieve. In my view this would include freedom for any sentient beings (and the suffering that is an essential part of this - the price of freedom) an absence of favouritism and a wide separation between planetary civilisations to reduce the possibility for mutually assured destruction. Funny, but that seems to be the way it’s turned out.

20 Personal Dispositions

Following my last posting’s return visit to the 24 dispositions, I thought it would be a revealing exercise to produce a set of personal dispositions with accompanying explanation and commentary (which turns out to be at least as hard to formulate as the dispositions themselves). The hardest part of all of course is living up to them! The list gives a picture of where you stand and who you see yourself as in terms of morality and social values. It doesn’t have to have 24 parts but my scheme of lettering (for ease of reference and not indicative of priority) restricts it to 26 – a useful maximum.

Any such compilation will always be a work in progress and imperfectly expressed. I cannot escape the feeling that I have overlooked important elements, but these could be included at the next iteration. Also, because something isn’t included in a current list doesn’t mean that you don’t care about it – it’s quite hard to make explicit what you value and you can’t put absolutely everything down if the list is to be useful. If you decide to try this exercise yourself remember that these will be your own personal dispositions so you shouldn’t feel obliged to add in something because others might think that it ‘ought’ to be in there.

I think that this is all well worth a try, particularly if you consider yourself to be a ‘seeker’ – it may turn out that you have already found rather more than you thought. Good luck.

Here are my personal dispositions.

20 Personal Dispositions (With Commentary)

(a) Valuing the individual and safeguarding their inalienable rights.

(Humanity consists, in the overwhelming majority, of people who are worthy of respect and who are entitled to personal freedom, security and a measure of happiness.)

(b) Valuing family and community.

(Those closest to us deserve our greatest, but not our exclusive, love and attention.)

(c) Being true to oneself and thinking for oneself.

(If you are not true to yourself it is hard to be true to others. Nature gave all of us the capacity for thought, but did not empower or appoint natural 'authorities'. What a waste it would be if seven billion people declined to use their powers of thought.)

(d) Having an open and enquiring mind, and valuing knowledge.

(Our comprehension of the world is always provisional. New knowledge or a more developed understanding may call for new views. No-one is in a privileged position in respect of truth. Reliable knowledge and sure understanding are hard won.)

(e) Being considerate to other people and the environment.

(Do as you would be done by. Disregarding the environment means disregarding future generations.)

(f) Being active in the community, volunteering, supporting good causes and seeking to enhance the common good.

(We should try to secure 'the greatest happiness of the greatest number' within our reach, beginning with those who have least.)

(g) Being regardful of injustice and suffering and seeking to alleviate them.

(Human beings are the means by which justice can be served, diseases cured, injuries healed, innocence protected and suffering lessened.)

(h) Seeking to comprehend people more fully and thinking carefully about their different situations.

(Imagine walking in another's shoes – mile after mile. 'Understand and judge not'.)

(i) Being fair and forgiving.

(Who would wish to be on the receiving end of unfairness? Vindictiveness is a corrosive emotion. Forgiveness heals both parties.)

(j) Listening to others, being tolerant of other points of view and being prepared to admit that one's own views might need to change.

(Wisdom does not belong to an exclusive few. Even where we think that wisdom is lacking, we should suffer 'fools' gladly, because it is right and because we may find ourselves amongst them.)

(k) Willingness to accept light from whatever quarter it may come.

(Some of the deepest insights come from the most unexpected sources – external and internal. Rule out no possible origins as possible providers of meaning.)

(l) Living by the rules of society and valuing democracy, its institutions and procedures.

(If the rules seem unfair or wrong, free societies have processes for change. The most valuable 'institution' we have is democracy itself. If there is a lack of respect for it and it is undermined, so is society and so, ultimately, are all of us as individuals.)

(m) Being accountable and living with integrity.

(Integrity can be seen as honest accountability to oneself. More widely, accountability is to the whole of society not just particular groups.)

(n) Being polite, temperate and modest.

(Who would wish other people to be disrespectful to them? There are too many displays of petulant anger and far too much infantile boasting. We all have good reason to be modest, most evidently if we could see ourselves as others see us.)

(o) Helping to create harmony and cultivating inclusion.

(A harmonious common life is the core of a unified society. Exclusion diminishes those who do the excluding as much as those who are excluded.)

(p) Recognising the value of stewardship.

(Stewardship can contribute more to the common good than most 'leadership' and can take the form of leadership by example.)

(q) Being truthful and reflective.

(Truthfulness is something that we can all contribute to society and there is much to reflect upon both within society and within ourselves.)

(r) Attaching a high value to reason and evidence.

(Against the pitiless background of evolution we've developed as the predominant species not least because of our abilities to reason and to evaluate evidence. So if it stands against reason, it's probably wrong. If the evidence lines up against it, it's also probably wrong.)

(s) Being courageous and visionary.

(Having the courage of ones own convictions is good, but it often takes more courage to change ones convictions on the basis of what we have learnt. We should form our own picture of a desirable future, one that recognises the freedom of others and seeks to enhance the common good.)

(t) Cultivating a sense for the profound and the magnificence of the Cosmos.

(Stillness and reflection in quiet places help in gathering the self, contemplating that which is beyond the self and in seeking personal meaning. Above our heads on a clear night we can look out in wonder on half of everything.)