Sober Philosophy: Death From A Distance (Robert presents)

“We have paleolithic emotions, medieval institutions, and godlike technologies. And it is terrifically dangerous, and it is now approaching a point of crisis overall.”
E.O. Wilson

An underappreciated fact about human beings is their ability to inflict death from a distance. Most other animals must overwhelm rivals or prey up close, using natural weaponry like horns, claws, tusks, or teeth. Even the rare exceptions, such as electric eels and spitting cobras, depend on genetic adaptations to kill. Only humans can employ projectiles to deal death from afar (and relative safety). Throughout the course of our existence, we’ve gotten better and better at it. In just a few thousand years, we went from hurling spears and rocks, to shooting arrows, to firing muskets, rifles, and artillery. The twentieth century saw the appearance of ranged weapons like mobile tanks, automatic firearms with laser-guided scopes, bombs dropped from planes thousands of feet in the sky, and finally intercontinental ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads capable of annihilating cities on the other side of the planet with the push of a button. In the twenty first century, we witnessed the advent of remote-controlled combat drones. Today, an operator can sit comfortably in a cubicle in Langley, Virginia, while delivering death and destruction in Afghanistan or Iran using joysticks, consoles, and multiple screens—an experience much closer to playing a video game than to that of a traditional infantry solider or even a pilot in war. And yet the results are just as lethal.

What are the moral, psychological, social, and practical implications of death from a distance? Does each new technological step of remove between killer and killed make it that much easier to dehumanize the enemy? Does death from a distance sanitize or trivialize the ending human lives? Does it create a sense of deniability or an aura of unreality around actions that in most times and places, under most circumstances, would be considered hideous crimes? Does it make forget what death is?

Symptom-free (of potentially contagious disease) people with the capacity to listen considerately to diverse viewpoints are invited to attend after successfully RSVPing.

We begin the meeting at 7:30 pm sharp at the mezzanine above the lobby of the Graduate Hotel in the University District: 4507 Brooklyn Ave NE, Seattle, WA 98105.

Directions for first-timers at the Graduate Hotel:
From the front hotel entrance go to the right. Turn left around the corner to enter through the north valet entrance. If the valet questions you just say you're here for the philosophy group. Go straight to the main lobby and turn right behind the large bookshelves before the elevators. Enter the stairway on your left, go up one flight, and go through the first door you encounter to enter our meeting area.

OPENING ROUNDTABLE FORMAT (ORF):

1. The topic presenter begins the discussion by explaining why they are interested in the topic and some introductory thoughts on it.
2. Each participant in turn going clockwise from the presenter describes their general thoughts on the topic.
3. If one is not ready to speak they can just say “pass” and the next person speaks.
4. After we've gone around once anyone who passed will get a second chance to comment.
5. Once everyone has given opening remarks or passed twice, Opening Roundtable is completed and the meeting shifts into its main format.

TIMED DIRECTION FORMAT (TDRF>4):
If there are more than 4 people present we will use the format below.

1. We will divide up the timed direction discussion time by the number of participants plus one (for a buffer). A timer will be set for this amount of time.
2. Each participant in turn will become a Discussion Director and lead the group discussion.
3. If one is not ready to direct they dimply say “pass” and the next person becomes the Discussion Director.
4. Anyone who arrives after step 1 (above), may participate but will not get a turn as Discussion Director.
5. The Discussion Director can make statements or ask questions, or interrupt or redirect the discussion at their discretion.
6. The discussion participants can state their own opinions only when asked by the Discussion Director, not Interrupt others and accede to the Discussion Director’s interruptions or redirections.
7. When the timer goes off the person speaking finishes their thought and then the next participant clockwise becomes the next Discussion Director.
8. After we've gone around once anyone who passed will get a second chance to direct.

At the end of the meeting, participants will have an opportunity to vote on the topic and format for the following meeting.