Café Philo

I think writing journal entries to share our ideas and opinions are a good way to talk and think about a more or less philosophical topic.

However, I think we could imagine another type of interaction where students and people interesting in sharing ideas could meet and talk about a topic proposed by a student.

In France, “cafés” are very famous. It is a place where people like to meet and talk around a coffee or a drink. Recently “Cyber-café” has emerged as networking places where people like to come and share their passion online.

“Café-Philo’’ appears some years ago. A guest like a teacher, or an author is sometimes invited to talk about a specific topic. My mom liked to go there when we were in France. I went to one of them before we left for the United States. The discussion was about the new challenges for the education in the XXI century. The speaker was very interesting and I was fascinated by his ability the express his ideas in a very compelling way and the discussion then was very animated and fruitful. I think café-philo are a very good way to both express your opinion on a specific topic and also hear opinions of other people, allowing you to open you mind and have a different view on a particular topic. I would like to organize that kind of conversation in Aurora, either in school as a part of a club or outside of school to allow more people to join the debate. I would like to have your opinion about this project and know if it would interest you to have that kind of place in Aurora. If you have any suggestion, please let me know either by posting a commentary on this blog or by telling me at school.

Weather forecast

We were standing in a line during our Christmas shopping waiting for our tour to pay and I was listening to a conversation from people standing behind us:

A said: “The weather is incredibly nice. It is surprising not to have snow yet”

B answered: “It is probably due to the climate change and greenhouse emission”

Any slight change in weather is more and more attributed to the global warming and greenhouse emission. It’s difficult not to refrain a connection between both. That is true, though I think some people are sometimes extremist in their conclusions.

Exceptional seasons have ever exist. If you talk with the older people, they will tell you some stories about warm winters or summers they have had during last century.

However, it is true that the modernization has dramatically accelerated and side effects appeared by end of last century with the emission of greenhouse gas responsible of the ozone layer depletion.

The United Nation Conference on Climate Change that will be held in Copenhagen from December 7^th to 18^th is one of the most important summit after Kyoto where countries will stop to talk but will have to commit to fight against global warning and to give their objectives in term of CO₂ and greenhouse emission reduction and plan to achieve it. More than 100 countries will participate, amongst them India, the fifth most polluted after Russia.

A key question debated will be the financial support to be given to the developing countries to reduce their emission as they do not accept to pay on their own for activities that essentially profit to developed countries.

So, saying that we can see that it is a complex topic that has political implications. However, to me, I think everybody is concerned and should do something as his own level. For example, reduce the car use as soon it is possible, buy local products that have not required long and high CO₂ emission shipment, reduce air conditioning use, save water…

Northern countries, like Denmark, or Finland are well advanced on global warming and know how to wrestle with it. We should look at what has been done there and draw some inspiration from their accomplishments.

France resistance to Starbucks

While picking out my preferred Starbucks selection last Friday in the soft and typical Starbucks atmosphere, I was wondering why Starbucks was not established in France. One of our friends even told us that Starbuck of Rue de France in the very core of Paris was poised to close and that Starbuck CEO Howard Schultz had decided to curb next openings initially scheduled.

I tried to figure out why Starbucks brand did not succeed in France.

I think Starbucks concept based on the Italian or French café has been a success in the United States because the concept did not exist yet. That means, Starbucks was one of the first to offer in the 70’s a neatly decorated and relaxing place where you could stop and take time to savor one of the delicious composition offered.

Howard Schultz marketing strategy was to offer a “third place to live” (meaning Home, work, Starbucks).

French café or “Bistrot” exists for ever. They are small shops, often family businesses that you can find in each town, and village even very small. Cafe is the focal point where people like to come. Café-keeper usually knows his clients and habits. He is like a friend who is happy to see you and serve you the coffee selection or the drink you usually have. Starbucks tried to reproduce this characteristic by asking you your first name. I think Starbucks did a cultural error here as French people, more distant and protective in the first approach, do not like to tell their first name unless very close from the person.

Another cultural difference perhaps not properly considered is that in the United States, people prefer more diluted coffee they drink all along the day with a wide range of flavors. In France we like strong small coffee, we drink either black or with some cream. That’s it! As it is strong we rarely have coffee after 2 or 3 pm.

Finally Starbucks’ prices are very high while coffee in France is one of the cheapest beverages affordable.

I think these cultural differences should have been considered by Starbucks marketing before establishing shops in France as they have a significant impact on the activity and were predictable.

Health Reform and French system

A lot has been said and disputed about Obama’s Heath Reform aiming to give access to Health care system to everybody.

Coming from France, our Heath care system is often viewed as a typical French privilege. I think this perception has to be explained and clarified.

It is true that French and American systems are very different. In France, EVERYBODY, even homeless people, can go to the hospital 24/7 and receive care they need. It is one of the basic foundations of the French ethic where everybody has to be treated as equally as possible.

I remember the first time we have had to find a doctor for a throat infection. My mom called a family doctor to get an appointment. The first questions asked have been: “ Do you have an insurance? How will you pay? Who are you working for? Do you have a financial guarantor?” Because we were a self-cash payer, the lady said she was sorry but we had to go to an emergency care center to see a doctor.

This would not have happen in France. Each town, village has a panel of family doctors and specialists that can be visited upon an appointment or family doctors can be called to visit a patient if needed.

Medical costs are mainly covered by the Heath branch of the Social Security budget coming from the two third of tax-payers. Care reimbursements are governed by rules. That means that the rate of reimbursement will depend upon the type of care concerned. Typically what we call “Comfort care” will be reimbursed at low rate while others will be reimbursed at 100%.

For a better coverage, you need to have a personal insurance often proposed in your employee package.

This is a very good system but too many abuses have lead to a serious debt in the State budget. Abuses and unfairness come essentially from the increasing portion of population, which does not pay income taxes because of their low revenue (unemployed, immigrants…) and who benefit the system without contribution in return. This results in several tensions in the population between those who have a job and those who do not.

So I would not say that French system is ideal. It is different with some advantages and drawbacks. To me the main weakness of the French system is to make people too dependent of the medical care. In other words, people go to the doctor for nothing. In reaction and to reduce the deficit of the budget, more and more medications and cares are less reimbursed by the Social security.

At the opposite, the United States system, based on 100% assurance coverage, is a real penalty for those who cannot afford an insurance and may people take risk with self medications as regularly reported in the news.

I hope that Medicare program will help to find a balance between both and make people responsible of their health.

Innovation

Everybody talks about innovation as the key driver to recover from the numb situation economy is today. Companies spend a lot of money in technology and programs to stimulate innovation or innovative ideas.

I was reading a paper about Nobel prizes and that discussed how legitimate it was to award a prize to one group. Should the prize go to the group having made a theoretical prediction in Astrophysics science or to the group having made a technology breakthrough in telecommunication science?

I think the debate between Theoretical Science versus Applied Science is an endless topic of discussion, though I think we need both.

The main question I had after reading this paper was to try to figure out what should be the next most innovative and significant discovery we should need. Everybody has in mind Light bulb from Thomas Edison, airplane from the Wright brothers, Einstein’s Theory of relativity or the discovery of Post-it by Arthur Fry.

To me I think the most significant discovery will probably be a medical discovery. I think resources and efforts should be put on research for the Cancer, HIV and degenerative brain diseases like Parkinson or Alzheimer (stem cells!).

Then any findings to reduce pollution, negative impacts on the climate and preserve the planet would be the most significant discoveries.

If you have any other ideas to contribute this conversation, do not hesitate to post a commentary and enrich this conversation!!

TV shows and Philosophy

I was not really happy when my mom told me that we will were invited to a dinner with people I did not know. The atmosphere was heavy and conversation was limited to social things like “ how long have you been here? Do you like the area…’’. It was so boring that I finally asked: “What is your favorite TV show’’ Instantaneously, everybody had something to tell and we finally spent a good time to exchange our point of view on TV series and their new role in our life.

Coming back home I started to think about what happened during the evening.

To me, TV show, more than music or cinema, have become point of reference, a topic of conversation. Everybody has watched or heard about House or Lost… And has an opinion about this.

How to explain this new phenomenon?

I think the unique and new point with the TV show is to create a unique situation like a flight crash in Lost or new medical cases never seen before in House, and to involve the viewer in the exploration of all the consequences on the characters. Contrary to cinema where the viewer has only the possibility to observe a situation, characters and psychology issues, the show concept immerges the viewer in the action and gives him the chance to have his own opinion on psychological dilemma evolving in the show.

I think TV show, or at least some of them, are really interesting as they address a social or psychological issue that lead you to think about and formulate your own opinion.

For example, House is not a pure medical show that addresses a key medical ethic question concerning the place of emotion in the medical practice.

House, in the show, never shows any emotion but resolves all medical challenges. He pushes reasoning to its extreme. Each episode includes a phase of crisis where he has to make patients take risks, in order to find the truth.

Cameron, one of the doctor in his team represents the theory of Care strongly present in the United States medical system.

As said Nietzsche a crisis step is necessary to get to the revelation. I think this show demonstrates this concept very well.

Each show has its own characteristics and philosophy.

I learned in Latin class that Socrate used maieutics technique to make his student express their ideas using mythology stories. I think TV shows could be seen as the new Socrate support, to make people formulate their opinion on a specific topic.

Beauty and estheticism

Some days ago, we talked about beauty and symbolism of the beauty during the Middle Age in English class. We have had an interesting conversation on the topic saying that at that time a woman was considered attractive if she was fair-skinned and overweight because it represented wealth.

After the class, I started thinking about the beauty in general.

To me, I think there is a difference between beauty and estheticism. Something will be elected beautiful at a certain time because it meets the specific esthetic codes of the time but it will be ugly later if the codes have changed. The case of Middle Age we are studying is a good example. At that time, beauty was characterized by a fair-skin and over-weight, while today you have to be tanned and slim to catch eyes on you.

I think we are not talking about beauty here. We are talking about estheticism codes and that these codes vary with time.

I think beauty is not only limited to the physical appearance but also can be related to the emotion. We can be moved by a music, a scenery, the cherishing mother’s look on his baby…

Beauty is the richness of a person whatever how he/she looks like. The appearance should not have an influence on our judgment. As in the Wife of Bath Tale, wisdom and intelligence reveal the true beauty of someone. I have met a lot of people that were disgraceful but were so rich by their reflections and their open-mindedness that you wanted to stay with them. This is the real beauty.

Unfortunately, in our society, appearance often dictates the chance and opportunities that will be offered to you in your life.

To me beauty is not necessarily link to something visible. The quote I posted at the top of this page reflects pretty well what I mean by that –“ On ne voit bien qu’avec le coeur; l’essentiel est invisible aux yeux’’ which can be translated by “ We can only see well with the heart; Essentials are invisible to eyes’’