In (one) European tradition there is an idea that a human being is specified by nothing else so much as speech (talk): I am what I say, and if my talk is not coherent, then neither am I. The most trivial example is a moment when I do not keep my word – when I do not, for example, wait where I promised to wait and my friend who keeps the appointment waits in vain; at first he is angry, but when it happens again and again, he stops waiting and then I cease to exist for him. Either we keep our word or we are no longer in this world.
This week, the results of the Marie Skłodowska Curie Actions Individual Fellowships (MSCA-IF) were published. We are pround to announce that two excellent researchers who applied to visit our centre (Dr. Silvia Panizza and Doc. Olli Lagerspetz) were successful in getting the fellowships.
With two successful projects, our Centre will host the same number of Marie Curie fellows as, for example, the entire Masaryk University in Brno. We congratulate both our colleagues for their hard work in writing the applications.
Matej Cíbik wrote a new blog about the relation between politics and reality in the context of the recent attack on US Capitol. You can read it HERE.
Politics is a peculiar subject for theoretical study for one key reason: in it, our intuitive conception of the world is often reversed. Our basic understanding of reality tells us that there is an objectively existing outside world, which we try to grasp the best we can. Yet, more often than not, the situation is exactly the opposite in politics. Political reality is largely constituted by our collective perceptions. It is our understanding that creates reality, not the other way around.
Philosophers unreasonably question the obvious. “What, then, is time? If no one asks me, I know; if I wish to explain to him who asks, I know not.“ What is so tricky about time? We certainly know that there is an arrow of time, that the only direction of time is forward. There is no time travel to the past. That much is for sure. Isn’t it?