Hello Everyone,
...all we need is philosophy
Hello Everyone,
Recensione d’estetica per l’esploratore Daniele Castiglioni, in occasione del Festival “20 di Siberia”: 2003-2023, da lui organizzato in Ottobre a Tradate (VA)
DANIELE CASTIGLIONI ED IL VECCHIO CANALE (FRA I FIUMI OB ED ENISEJ)
Daniele Castiglioni ha percorso a remi il vecchio canale che congiungeva (con l’aiuto d’un affluente naturale) i fiumi Ob ed Enisej. Alla fine egli compirà una vera performance, contro le difficoltà del momento. Infatti d’estate le acque possono calare di molto, le zanzare colpiscono improvvisamente a sciami, i tronchi abbandonati a se stessi occludono le strettoie, i remi un po’ alla volta si logorano ecc… Naturalmente, c’è anche la difficoltà di trovare un punto di ristoro, fra i piccoli paesi lontani per centinaia di chilometri.
(courtesy to Paolo Meneghetti)
In fase di approccio alla materia filosofica, sia esso per scopo di ricerca, insegnamento e divulgazione, è buona pratica affidarsi alla trattatistica dei nomi illustri dell’ars philosophandi, ma è altrettanto buona norma non sottovalutare perciò il proprio potenziale in fase di produttività ragionativa.
Il principio base dell’opera del dottor Salvatore Grandone[1] (Duelli filosofici. L’arte di dibattere sui concetti, Diarkos editore, Reggio Emilia, 2023, N.d.R.) è propriamente sradicare la convinzione che la materia filosofica sia fatta di riverente osservazione ed apprendimento, senza mai giungere alla pratica del ragionamento e della formulazione del pensiero proprio del lettore. In particolar modo, la necessità di una rivoluzione in tal senso risulta fondamentale dinnanzi al rapido ed inarrestabile divenire generazionale, in direzione di una frenesia della produzione che ostacola il ragionamento personale in favore dell’immediatezza delle opinioni e del riconoscimento, ed ancor peggio ostacola l’interazione intellettualmente onesta tramite piattaforme sociali (social media in particolare, N.d.R.) apparentemente predisposte al rispettoso dibattito, sebbene in realtà “l’imperativo è asfaltare l’interlocutore. A ogni costo” (Grandone 2023:9).[2]
War is not our Profession – Paradoxes for a Moralization and Morality of War
Here we go! It is with distinct pleasure sharing this paper with my everpresent SF audience. It is the first one for this year. The topic is extremely timely: the morality of war. This is a real philosophical paper for the journal Moral Philosophy/Filosofia Morale. I thank Professor Roberto Mordacci, dean of the faculty of philosophy of Università Vita-Salute San Raffaele, for his kind invitation. It was the opportunity to write officially about Kant’s morality, one of my greatest philosophical conceptions. I reframed it and tackled the most difficult question in morals: can war be just? And the answer is resolute: no… but! And I leave you all with this hoping to have feedback on the reading. The paper can be found here: academia and on the journal’s webpage.
Since I started this blog, its motto was “All we need is philosophy… which is love for knowledge”. Naturally, it was a paraphrasis of Beatle’s song “All we need is love”, an over abused mantra. The irony is that the paraphrasis is almost untouched as philosophy was classically defined by Plato as love for knowledge (or wisdom, or whatever it increases human understanding): “all we need is love for knowledge” is what I would have sung if only I was a good songwriter. “All we need is love for knowledge” seems to be a far better and more universal creed, so much so that so great music composers such as the Beatles did not miss it. As it was said in a private conversation by one of the two editors of the esteemed Intelligence and National Security, this special issue was an act of love toward philosophy. As strange it may sound, as unlikely it could be in hour days, when everything is reduced to brutish emotions and useless sarcasm and cynicism, this is the truth.
Giangiuseppe Pili (2022) Deciphering intelligence analysis – The synthetic nature of the core intelligence function, Intelligence and National Security, DOI: 10.1080/02684527.2022.2041947
Honestly proud of this achievement! For a shortcut: Pili_2022_INS_Deciphering_Intelligence_Analysis
ABSTRACT
Intelligence analysis is one of the most explored topics in intelligence studies. However, decoding its nature is still challenging. A unifying question must be considered: ‘Is intelligence analysis – analysis?’ Unfolding the problem leads to an extreme conclusion: intelligence analysis is a way to structure sensory data collection and reduction. It is, namely, synthesis. A systematic scrutiny of the general nature of analysis is considered to compare it to what intelligence analysis is intended to be. As it will turn out, intelligence analysis is much more synthesis – namely, structuring sensory data collection – than analysis per se, which is the main conclusion of the argument.
Nichilismo e terrorismo nell’Europa della seconda metà dell’Ottocento
Roma, Bibliosofica, 2021
Formato cm 15×21, pagine 120
€ 13,00 – ISBN 978-88-87660-456
Pili, G., (2021), “Be coherent with yourself! A pluralistic approach to objectivity for intelligence analysis”, American Intelligence Journal, 38:1, 96-103.
Is objectivity possible in intelligence analysis? This long-lasting question can be answered by a new and pluralistic approach to objectivity within the s objectivity possible in intelligence analysis? This intelligence studies literature. If objectivity is possible, first, it must be defined. Second, it must be understood in terms of its attainability—in what way, how, and to what extent. A systematic analysis is offered to tackle the issue through the different angle offered by the philosophy of science, which already engaged in close issues such as politicization in science. Ultimately, the challenge is to fix the analyst’s duty in the face of his/her goal, which requires unfolding the implicit intelligence analyst’s worldview. Finally, balancing reality and ideals, the slogan of intelligence should be: “Be coherent with yourself; be coherent with what you know,” instead of “Speak truth to power.” A conceptual defense of this very idea will be explored systematically. Interested? Write me at scuolafilosofica_AT_gmail.com!
Don’t miss my last publication for the The Journal of Intelligence, Conflict, and Warfare
Pili, G. (2021). “Why HAL 9000 is not the future of intelligence analysis: Intelligence analysis in the 21st century.” The Journal of Intelligence, Conflict, and Warfare, 4(1), 40–60. https://doi.org/10.21810/jicw.v4i1.2566
Abstract
Intelligence analysis is a core function of the intelligence process, and its goal is to synthesize reliable information to assist decision-makers to take a course of action toward an uncertain future. There is no escape from uncertainty, friction, and the fog of war. Since the dawn of human history, the present moment has been experienced as unpredictable, and the challenge of determining the right future through sound decisions has always existed. Investing in new technology, continually touted as the answer for analytic troubles, seems far less difficult in the short run than trying to find consensus about a long-term vision. It is easier to develop a nuclear missile, for example, than to give a universal definition of peace, and this is what the history of the XX century was all about. While intelligence analysis is still a necessary tool for decision-makers, it is unclear who or what will perform this function in the future. Though the solution cannot be only technological, the current trajectory tells a different story whereby the human analysts are removed from their central position to make way for Artificial Intelligence.