At tomorrow night’s meeting of the New Inklings, the paper for discussion is Derek Parfit’s classic Personal Identity, first published in The Philosophical Review in 1971.
Parfit uses many examples seemingly inspired by Star Trek and other science fiction, such as the teletransporter, to explore our intuitions about our identity. He is a reductionist, believing that since there is no adequate criterion of personal identity, people do not exist apart from their components. Parfit argues that reality can be fully described impersonally; there need not be a determinate answer to the question “Will I continue to exist?” We could know all the facts about a person’s continued existence and not be able to say whether the person has survived. He concludes that we are mistaken in assuming that personal identity is what matters; what matters is rather Relation R: psychological connectedness (namely, of memory and character) and continuity (overlapping chains of strong connectedness).
On Parfit’s account, individuals are nothing more than brains and bodies, but identity cannot be reduced to either. Parfit concedes that his theories rarely conflict with rival Reductionist theories in everyday life, and that the two are only brought to blows by the introduction of extraordinary examples. However, he defends the use of such examples because they seem to arouse genuine and strong feelings in many of us. Identity is not as determinate as we often suppose it is, but instead such determinacy arises mainly from the way we talk. People exist in the same way that nations or clubs exist.
A key Parfitian question is: given the choice of surviving without psychological continuity and connectedness (Relation R) or dying but preserving R through the future existence of someone else, which would you choose?
Parfit described the loss of the conception of a separate self as liberating:
My life seemed like a glass tunnel, through which I was moving faster every year, and at the end of which there was darkness… [However] When I changed my view, the walls of my glass tunnel disappeared. I now live in the open air. There is still a difference between my life and the lives of other people. But the difference is less. Other people are closer. I am less concerned about the rest of my own life, and more concerned about the lives of others.
Needless to say, I’m with Parfit on this one. His view is both liberating and … dare I say it, Christian.
(Or, at least, conducive to a Christian way of life.) (But with some startling implications for some Christian views of salvation.)
Here’s the Parfitian question again.
Given the choice of
(1) surviving without psychological continuity and connectedness (Relation R), or
(2) dying but preserving R through the future existence of someone else,
which would you choose? (Hint: what matters is Relation R.)
(But first, check out the Republican Movement’s logo above. What is it? A stylised letter ‘R’? A misshapen black nodule? Or a badly drawn smiling frog-face? Whatever it is, our people do not want it disgracing our national flag.)
The case for a New Zealand republic sets out the main arguments for why New Zealand should become a republic. They fall into three categories:
Independence — New Zealand should have a New Zealander as the head of state; Nationhood — the constitution and head of state of New Zealand should reflect New Zealand’s national identity, culture and heritage; Democracy — New Zealand should have a democratic and accountable head of state.
In this post, I’ll take a look at the Republicans’ argument that we need a New Zealander as the head of State, under the heading “Independence”.
Independence
New Zealand will not be fully independent until we have a New Zealander as head of state. New Zealand likes to think of itself as an independent country. However, it cannot objectively be argued New Zealand’s current head of state represents this.
Never mind the head of state. New Zealand will not be fully independent while half of its citizens are dependent on state welfare. That’s a much bigger problem to address.
As the United Kingdom’s one-time head of state, Margaret Thatcher, once said, “there is no such thing as society. There are individual men and women, and there are families. And no government can do anything except through people, and people must look to themselves first. It’s our duty to look after ourselves and then, also to look after our neighbour.” How are we to look after our neighbour when we, ourselves, are reliant on government largesse? New Zealand society will never be independent until such time as its men and women and families are no longer reliant on state welfare handouts and “tax breaks”.
Add to this the fact that the New Zealand’s external debt is the vicinity of $90 billion dollars. We have a long way to go before we can declare our financial independence from foreign lenders.
A republic means a New Zealander as head of state
“Is New Zealand to continue to have an appointed Governor-General… or should we move to an elected president? This will not happen because of any lack of affection or love for our Queen in London, but because the tide of history is moving in one direction.” – former Prime Minster Jim Bolger.
Do we really want someone like Jim Bolger as our head of state? Or Margaret Thatcher? Or John Key?
I’m not a stalwart royalist like my mum, but I’m more than happy with the Queen. Next to spending time with my family, Her Majesty’s message is the highlight of my Xmas Day. (BTW, Happy Birthday Your Majesty!)
Our current head of state is not a New Zealander and does not represent New Zealand. When the Queen travels overseas, she does so in order to represent Great Britain.
The Queen works to strengthen British economic and political ties, and does whatever the British Government asks of her. In fact, whenever “our” head of state visits New Zealand, the Queen has to ask for permission from the British Government to leave Britain.
You have got to be kidding. She’s the Queen! Her subjects answer to her, she doesn’t answer to them!
If the Queen wanted to be a citizen of New Zealand, she would not meet the legal requirements to become a citizen. The Citizenship Act 1977 requires an applicant for New Zealand citizenship to have been resident in New Zealand for five years before citizenship is granted. The Queen has spent a total of no more than six months in New Zealand.
The Governor-General is not a proper head of state. While the Governor-General may increasingly act in ways that befit a head of state, the reality is that New Zealand is still not regarded as being fully independent of Great Britain. Appointing the Queen’s representative in New Zealand is inadequate. A New Zealand head of state will make it clear that New Zealand is an independent country. It will signal New Zealand’s independence and maturity to the world.
I’ll be honest. I don’t actually know who the current Governor-General is. And that’s exactly how it should be. A head of state so off the radar that only Wikipedia knows his or her true identity.
Deciding the rules for ourselves
In recent years, the British Parliament has attempted to amend the succession law. The problem is the Statute of Westminster 1931, the law which granted independence to Canada, Australia and New Zealand.
Oops! Looks like the Republicans just shot themselves in the foot. By their own admission, New Zealand has already been granted independence!
The Statute requires “consultation” on changes to the succession before any changes to the succession law. While this provision is not binding, it is still an important constitutional convention. The most recent attempt in 2008 failed for this reason: the British Government did not want to have to consult with all the parliaments of the Commonwealth realms. New Zealand’s Parliament could change the law of succession unilaterally, but that would go against the convention established by the Statute of Westminster. Change can only be enacted if the governments of all the 15 Commonwealth realms are consulted, probably by Britain. In a republic, the rules governing New Zealand’s head of state will be made solely by the New Zealand Parliament. They will change as New Zealanders decide they need to, not because of events in Great Britain.
Er, well, that’s it. Pretty lame, huh. (Part 1 of 3.) So far, I’m fully not convinced that New Zealand needs to become a republic. And, as I commented on Facebook yesterday
Why do we need “a New Zealand republic with an independent head of State.” I can’t think of a good reason. Change? Why change? Haven’t you people got more pressing concerns?
Should the design of the New Zealand flag be changed? That’s the question the people at the NZflag.com Trust would like to see on a referendum at the next election. It’s all a bit of a hullubaloo. The right time to change the flag is when we become the Republic of New Freeland. Bring to light that day of joy!
Meanwhile, here is my proposal for our new flag. The new flag has the virtues of elegance, simplicity and respect for our history and traditional values.
Black, red and white are the colours of Māori, discoverers and first inhabitants of New Zealand. The black represents Te Korekore, the realm of potential being, as well as signifying Rangi, the Heavens. The red represents Te Whai-Ao, the realm of coming into being, and signifies Papatuanuku, the Earth Mother. The white of the stars represents Te Ao-Marama, the realm of being and light.
The new flag retains the red, white and blue of the Union Jack, recalling our nation’s origins as a British colony. In the stars of the new flag, a thin border of red separates the inner blue from the outer white. The Southern Cross itself is retained in recognition of our nation’s strong Christian heritage.
The new flag shall be known as the New Zealand stars and stripes, paying homage to the Western heritage of democracy and freedom we share with our friends and allies.
At the great gig in the TSB Bank Arena last Saturday, the audience were dressed predominantly in black. My brother remarked, “It’s New Zealand’s national colour. If we ever change our flag, it should be a black flag.”
Speaking with Sean Plunket on RadioLive, Devoy called for people to send in their complaints. “It’s caused an understandable fury out there.”
She said that although no official complaints had been lodged, she encouraged people to complain.
When Plunket asked her to clarify whether she was soliciting complaints, she said she hoped that people who had expressed their displeasure on social media would do the same through official channels.
Race Relations Commissioner Susan Devoy said the cartoons were offensive and appalling.
Her distaste for them has spurred her to question the high threshold required for a finding of racism within the commission’s inquiries and complaints process. The threshold under the law was “very high” and was about inciting racial disharmony.
“Perhaps it is not right that the threshold is that high,” but that was a matter for the Government she said.
Asked why anyone should make a complaint about the cartoons when the threshold for what was considered racism was so high, she replied: “I ask myself that all the time”.
Despite that, the Human Rights Commission could still address the issue, and she encouraged people to complain to the commission, the editors of the newspapers, and the Press Council.
…
It would not be any more acceptable if just white people were depicted.
Richard Goode I’m a libertarian. I believe in individual freedom and personal responsibility.
The big problem in New Zealand (much bigger than the problem with K2 being sold in dairies) is that people want individual freedom for themselves but they don’t want the personal responsibility that goes with it. [But] individual freedom and personal responsibility are two sides of the same coin.
I see far too many people blaming “K2” for their problems, when their own lack of judgement, lack of a moral compass, psychological problems, and lack of parental control are the root causes in the vast majority of cases. Like that teenager supposedly “addicted” to K2 whom I saw on TV the other night. He was fine once someone found him an honest job boring post holes up [in] the hills.
Remember that cannabis is a gift from God and that the Devil makes work for idle hands.
That was my post [with minor edits] on the Facebook group K2 and Other “LEGAL HIGHS” in New Zealand we all need to know the dangers. I was added to the group recently by a fellow drug law reform activist and didn’t at first appreciate the nature of the group. It’s a support group “to warn people about the dangers of these relatively new highs and the trouble it has caused so for many.” Perhaps if I’d known that I’d blundered into a support group, I wouldn’t have made such an insensitive post. Perhaps.
Here are the responses.
Tracey Metternich supposedly “addicted” Richard do you not believe it is addictive? lack of parental control? this I disagree with strongly. I am guessing he wasn’t as good as it looked on TV because this teenager found an honest job he was fine. I bet he struggles everyday and he still thinks about it everyday.Cannabis is a gift from god? shame people decided to speed up the natural process and grow in under lights instead of planting a seed and leaving it to grow. Yes it is the lesser evil but it can cause problems for some but not to the extent this chemical crap is doing and it would be a safer option.
Polli Marriner Hayden is not fine . That’s why he spoke up. You have no idea of the pain he goes through every day, or his mother! How DARE you minimise the harm to push your own barrow! You people are the evil! Kids do not need drugs! It was pot heads who brought this stuff into our country and made a demand for it by trying to escape from reality through chemicals. Live a real and godly life in THIS reality before you judge others!
Richard Goode “Live a real and godly life in THIS reality before you judge others!” It’s good advice.
Tim Wikiriwhi I suppose you Polli Marriner are going to blame Nz’s Suicide epidemic of ‘Pot heads’ too! You simpletons seen to forget that like Suicide, drug use is *an Effect* of deeper underlying issues in our society… not the cause of them. Young people try drugs (including alcohol Polli) for different reasons, often it is to sooth a painful heart or to fill a dark empty void… and as you know sometimes a drink (or a smoke) can help… other times it can make things worse… One thing is for sure… persecuting people certainly makes things much much worse, whereas when things like K2 are legal, at least no one is getting kicked over and criminalised by a cold hearted Nazi police, and they can get help for what is *the real problem*… the ussues which have nothing to do with drugs… yet simpletons like you cant e bothered thinking about the deeper/ more complex problems in our society which result in high suicide rates, high drug use, etc…. You prefer to think like a pig and say ‘Ban it’ ‘Ban it’…. Throw them in Jail…. Give the police greater powers!…. More raids!…. Zero Tollerance… “Everyone should be like me!!!”… vote for the Populist Politican who promises to be ‘Tuff on drugs’… etc etc…. year after year… decade after decade…. yet the Stats keep getting worse and worse…. yet you will continue to floog your favorite dead horse because you refuse to consider you have been wrong your whole life….
Polli Marriner Lol…. That’s so funny! If you only knew!
Richard Goode “You people are the evil!” Judge not, that ye be not judged.
Polli Marriner Therre have been a lot of pot smoking people in these anti K2 groups hurting people’s feelings and linking the fight with support cannabis efforts. NOT HELPFUL AT ALL! Gof iChat your own battles in your own page and leave these heroes alone!
Polli Marriner Again, leave people alone, and go fight yr own battles somewhere else!
There’s irony in a rabid Prohibitionist telling me to “leave people alone”! There’s irony in her judging that “you people are the evil” and in the same comment reprimanding me for judging others! (Just saying.)
Subsequently, my post was deleted by the group admin, presumably for its unsupportive tone. (But I blame Tim’s comment. :-D)
Two things are very clear.
First, there are some seriously upset people out there. It’s understandable that they’re upset. From what I’ve read of their stories, some of them have been to hell and back, and they blame it on K2. Indeed, it does seem that some synthetic cannabinoids can have some very serious ill effects on some people.
Second, these people should not be allowed to have any sway over the government’s drug policy. With all due respect, they’re too emotionally overwrought and they can’t think straight. We need to regulate, not ban.
This picture reminds me of one of my father’s favourite jokes.
(Mojo Mathers is New Zealand’s first deaf MP.)
The Green Party has far too many list MPs, so it’s good when they actually do something slightly useful. It looks like Mojo Mathers is following in Sue Kedgley’s footsteps, by keeping us all informed about our foods. Today she issued a press release.
Dole should peel off their stickers claiming their bananas are an ethical choice until the Commerce Commission investigates their claim, the Green Party said today.
Today Green Party food spokesperson Mojo Mathers wrote to the Commerce Commission requesting they investigate Dole’s claim that they sell ethical bananas. Ms Mathers’ request was sparked by an Oxfam report which suggested Dole’s claims may be false and misleading.
“Oxfam’s report into Dole bananas suggests that Dole’s ethical choice claims may be entirely misleading,” Ms Mathers said.
children 15 years old and under working eight to 12 hours a day, harassment of workers for joining a union, aerial pesticide spraying while workers are on the plantations, and environmental damage.
Banana importer Dole is to stop using Ethical Choice stickers on its fruit after criticism that the labels could mislead consumers.
This week humanitarian group Oxfam released a report claiming that child labourers exposed to toxic chemicals were used to harvest Dole bananas in the Philippines for supply to New Zealand.
Last year Dole was put on notice by the Commerce Commission that its Ethical Choice brand risked breaching the Fair Trading Act.
Among the concerns was whether consumers might think the stickers were certified by a third party and make Dole appear more ethical than its competitors.
Today the company announced that it would discontinue the use of the Ethical Choice label on all future fruit shipments.
What with dairies selling K2 to school kids and now this, it’s been a bad month for business ethics.
Go grab yourselves some Dole “ethical choice” bananas and some K2 “takes you higher” smoke while you still can!
Fucking is an Austrian village in the municipality of Tarsdorf, in the Innviertel region of western Upper Austria. The village is 33 kilometres north of Salzburg, 4 kilometres east of the German border.
Despite having a population of only 104, the village has become famous for being the birthplace of Adolf Hitler.
