THE DEATH OF THE AUSTRALIAN PHILOSOPHER JIM BAKER

'There are only facts, i.e., occurrences in space and time.'

- John Anderson, 'Empiricism,' Australasian Journal of Psychology
and Philosophy, December 1927, p 14.

On March 3, 2017, which just happened to be my 62nd birthday, an Australian philosopher and university lecturer of some renown passed away at the age of 94. Sadly, his death appears to have gone completely unnoticed in the mainstream media, apart from a death notice placed in The Sydney Morning Herald by his family. Of course, that was to be expected because the mass media caters for the tastes and interests of the hoi polloi, so the media takes the view that talking about philosophy and academics is a complete waste of time except perhaps when some eccentric university lecturer says or do something grossly politically incorrect or otherwise sensationalistic.

The man of whom I speak is Jim Baker, pictured. Allan James Baker was his full name. He was born on July 22, 1922 and he studied philosophy under the Scottish-born Australian philosopher John Anderson who was arguably Australia’s most original thinker and whose philosophy has had a very important influence in my own life.

Jim obtained a Bachelor of Arts (BA) degree with double firsts in Philosophy and History from the University of Sydney and, awarded the Wentworth Travelling Fellowship, which is designed to assist graduates of Arts and Social Sciences at the University of Sydney to undertake research work in Europe, Jim went on to obtain the intellectually demanding two-year taught graduate degree Bachelor of Philosophy (BPhil) in Philosophy degree at the University of Oxford. 

In the 1950s he lectured in philosophy, and was a colleague of Professor Anderson’s, at the University of Sydney. He also taught at Macquarie University in metropolitan Sydney as well as in Scotland, New Zealand and the United States of America. For many years he was a prominent member of the University of Sydney’s Libertarian Society (the 'Sydney Libertarians') and the Sydney Push. In fact, Jim was a founding Libertarian. The Libertarians were the philosophic core of what became known as the Sydney Push. While a student at the University of Sydney, he had been an active member of two famous Andersonian societies of the era, namely, the Sydney University Freethought Society and the Sydney University Literary Society.

Jim is perhaps most famous – and rightly so – for having written two scholarly books on the realist philosophy of John Anderson, namely, Anderson’s Social Philosophy (Angus & Robertson, 1979) and Australian Realism: The Systematic Philosophy of John Anderson (Cambridge University Press, 1986). In his lifetime John Anderson never actually fully systematized his philosophy in book form. At the time of his death he was working on the index for a collection of his philosophical essays, the posthumously published Studies in Empirical Philosophy (Angus and Robertson, 1962). It was Jim Baker who subsequently systematized Anderson’s philosophy and he deserves enormous credit for that achievement. 

Jim acknowledged that there were 'difficulties' with certain aspects of Anderson's philosophy and he openly admitted to having 'criticisms here and there' with Anderson's presentation of realism. I do, too. I now think there are some fundamental weaknesses with Anderson's philosophy that prevent it from being fully coherent and internally consistent as a systematic realism (eg a certain undisclosed idealism, problems with Anderson's treatment of negative propositions, the essential unspeakability of the categories, etc). However, that is not important for present purposes. Jim always ackowledged the greatness of Anderson, and the depth of his thinking, without ever treating him as if he were a God ('the Master') and his teaching some sort of sacred doctrine. In short, Jim was very much his own man and not a sycophantic follower of his former teacher.

In his two books on Anderson’s philosophy, especially Australian Realism, Jim sought to demonstrate that the Australian (or Sydney) realism of Professor Anderson is a systematic and coherent philosophical position. Jim also penned the article on Anderson in the Concise Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed E Craig (Routledge, 1999), vol 1. He was also the author of Social Pluralism: A Realistic Analysis (A J Baker/Fast Books, 1997) as well as many articles on philosophy and social theory appearing in journals such as the Australasian Journal of Philosophy, Mind, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, Philosophical Magazine, Dialogue, Australian Journal of Politics and History, Australian Quarterly, Arna, Heraclitus (being his own private circulation journal and newsletter) and Broadsheet.

I met Jim several times at the Sydney Realist Group where he would occasionally speak, as have I once or twice. Jim also penned articles for the group’s journal The Sydney Realist, as have I. I remember once asking Jim if he would autograph my copy of his book Australian Realism. He looked at the book for some time, then looked at me rather oddly, before finally saying, ‘Where do you want me to sign it?’ (I think he must have been accustomed to more difficult problems.) I said, ‘Anywhere.’ He thought for a moment, and then signed the book at the very top of the inside front cover. So much for literalism and realism. No, Jim was a giant of a man and a deep thinker and he deserved to be much better remembered than he was when he left us a week ago. His funeral was held at Sydney’s Northern Suburbs Crematorium on March 9, 2017.

Opposite the title-page of Jim’s book Australian Realism there stand two epigraphs. Both are from the pre-Socratic Greek philosopher Heraclitus or, more precisely, from the Scottish classicist John Burnet’s translation of Heraclitus’s Fragments in his book Early Greek Philosophy. The first of the epigraphs is this:

‘The world, which is the same for all, no one of gods or men has made; but it was ever, is now, and ever shall be an ever-living Fire, with measures kindling and measures going out.’ 

John Anderson loved and often quoted those words. Jim Baker must have liked them, too. So do I.

Thank you, Jim.


Note. Since writing this post, a well-written obituary for Jim Baker, penned by the Australian businessman and former trade union official Dr Michael Easson AM, who is also a member of the Sydney Realists, has appeared in The Sydney Morning Herald. IEJ. March 25, 2017.

RELATED POSTS

JOHN ANDERSON, PHILOSOPHER AND CONTROVERSIALIST EXTRAORDINAIRE

MINDFULNESS, PROFESSOR JOHN ANDERSON AND THE FACTICITY OF THINGS

JOHN ANDERSON AND THE BUDDHA

MINDFULNESS ACCORDING TO HERACLITUS

EARLY GREEK PHILOSOPHERS AND MINDFULNESS [PART 1]

EARLY GREEK PHILOSOPHERS AND MINDFULNESS [PART 2]

EARLY GREEK PHILOSOPHERS AND MINDFULNESS [PART 3]

EARLY GREEK PHILOSOPHERS AND MINDFULNESS [PART 4]

DON’T MEDITATE TO ‘GET’ SOMETHING!

‘Meditation is a state of mind which looks at everything with

complete attention, totally, not just parts of it.’ J. Krishnamurti.

I have a good friend (let’s call him Steve) who is a scientist---a physicist, to be exact. He taught physics in universities in Australia and Canada. Steve and his wife regularly attend meetings of my home fellowship. He is one of the most learned and scholarly persons I’ve ever known, but he finds it extremely difficult to meditate.

Yes, when it comes to our guided meditation, Steve seems either unable or unwilling to ‘let go’, even to the extent of closing his eyes and staying still for just a few seconds. He fidgets and constantly moves around in his chair and is clearly uncomfortable at the thought of any form of meditation, even meditation of the most naturalistic kind.

Perhaps the reason for Steve's 'resistance' is that, as a disciplined scientist, he always wants to know and control. he is also a skeptic, which goes with the territory, so to speak. A good thing, skepticism. Doubt, not faith, is the name of the game. Steve relies entirely upon facts and evidence, that is, on what he can see and know, and also on inferences and conclusions that can be drawn rationally from the available evidence. 

Now, I admire that, for I, too, am very much the empiricist. I, too, reject supernatural, occult and all other unobservable explanations of the otherwise observable conditions of existence. ‘The things that can be seen, heard and learned are what I prize most,’ wrote Heraclitus. True, very true, but meditation can indeed be ‘something’ that is seen, heard and learned.

Steve recently said to me, ‘I have trouble with mindfulness meditation.’ I say to him, ‘Steve, you do practise mindfulness all the time, but you don’t seem to realize it. Mindfulness is paying attention, on purpose. It is being aware, including being aware of your awareness---and even your unawareness. Mindfulness is doing one thing at a time, purposefully and knowingly---like when you're reading a scientific journal article which requires all of your focus, awareness and and attention. That is mindfulness, and you are engaged in a form of meditation more often than you think---even when you're driving your car or washing the dishes. You get my point, don’t you?’ Steve, ever the skeptic, begrudgingly answered, ‘Yes. I suppose I do.’

Many people have a terrible fear of ‘losing control’. Ironically, a lot of these people are already ‘out of control’ in that their lives are controlled by fears, phobias, addictions and compulsions that are seemingly beyond their personal or conscious control. Now, one thing meditation is not is this---it is not ‘mind control’ in the sense of subjugation, sublimation or suppression. Meditation is being choicelessly (that is, non-judgmentally) aware of what is.

In order to properly meditate you must go gently … and take it easy. More importantly, the ‘effort’ involved in meditation is of a relaxed albeit deliberate kind. It has been described as the ‘effort of no-effort.’ ‘Resist not’ is the important principle involved.

Back to Steve. I said to him, ‘When it comes to our group mindfulness, or your own practice of it, you will never lose control, go into some trance, or otherwise lose contact with external reality. At any time you can cease your meditation and go about your ordinary business.’ He seemed a bit happier, but I don’t think I have fully convinced him. He’s a hard case, but I love him. He is a man of integrity---and great intelligence. That may sound patronizing, but it’s damn true.

One more thing. We must never meditate to get something---not even peace of mind or happiness. If you meditate to get something, more often than not you will fail. If you want peace of mind or happiness you need to ‘let go’ of everything that is holding you back from enjoying peace of mind and happiness. The Buddha was right when he spoke of the need to eradicate the causes of our unhappiness in order to be happy. Listen to these nuggets of wisdom from the great Buddhist teacher Ajahn Chah [pictured right]:

‘Remember you don't meditate to “get” anything, but to get “rid” of things. We do it, not with desire, but with letting go. If you “want” anything, you won't find it.’

‘We practise to learn letting go, not to increase our holding on. Enlightenment appears when you stop wanting anything.’

Krishnamurti [pictured top left] made a similar point when he said, ‘Meditation is not a means to an end. It is both the means and the end.’

Letting go is never easy. All too often, we hold on to things, including negative emotions and states of mind, that are making and keeping us sick and unhappy. We get a perverse pleasure from being miserable.

Take charge---and let go.

RELATED POST

THE ‘PURPOSES’ OF MEDITATION

MINDFULNESS ACCORDING TO HERACLITUS

In an earlier post I discussed the ideas and teachings of the enigmatic Presocratic philosopher Heraclitus (c535--c475 BCE) [pictured], and sought to show how those ideas and teachings relate to the practice of mindfulness.

The Scottish-Australian philosopher John Anderson wrote of Heraclitus’ ‘wide awake approach to problems’, by which he meant that Heraclitus adopted and advocated a rigorously empirical and logical methodology in the pursuit of truth (that is, reality, or what is). Heraclitus was known as the ‘flux and fire’ philosopher. He wrote, ‘All things are flowing’, ‘There is nothing permanent except change,’ ‘No person ever steps in the same river twice, for it's not the same river and they're not the same person,’ and ‘The sun is new each day.’

Heraclitus also famously said, ‘Let us not conjecture at random about the greatest things. We must follow the common.’ In other words, if we would know the conditions of existence we must look for that which is ‘common’ to all things. This means, among other things, that we should reject supernatural, occult and all other unobservable explanations of the otherwise observable conditions of existence. ‘The things that can be seen, heard and learned are what I prize most,’ he writes. Indeed, Heraclitus eschewed all notions of the occult and the supernatural. He wrote, ‘this world [or world-order] did none of the gods or humans make; but it always was and is and shall be: an ever-living fire, kindling in measures and going out in measures.’ Note, especially, those words 'was and is and shall be.' The world is, was, and ever will be what is is now. There is only the now. That is why it is often referred to as being the 'eternal now.' That is the logos of Heraclitus. And what of time? 'Time is a child playing draughts; the kingdom is a child's.'

Such is the cosmology of Heraclitus and the other exalted thinkers of his day. How ancient, and yet how very modern! Everything---and I mean literally every thing---is in a constant state of flux. ‘A thing rests by changing,’ he wrote. ‘Everything flows and nothing abides, everything yields and nothing remains permanent.’ Whatever lives does so by the destruction of something else. Things wax and wane, and come and go. We, too. We come, and in a very short time we vanish from view. We go. Only life itself, in the form of change and the eternal now, remains. In the words of Heraclitus, 'all things are steered through all things.'

Here’s another gem from Heraclitus in the form of some not-so-new New Thought. It highlights the importance of keeping your thoughts pure and noble, for as you think so you are:

The soul is dyed the colour of its thoughts. Think only on those things that are in line with your principles and can bear the light of day. The content of your character is your choice. Day by day, what you do is who you become. Your integrity is your destiny---it is the light that guides your way.

Heraclitus also wrote that most people are ‘asleep,’ so to speak. Even in their waking moments most people are far from ‘awake,’ that is, mindfulness. Yes, many people ‘live’ their whole lives that way. One may as well be dead. There is little difference between the two states. Here’s what Heraclitus wrote:

Men are as forgetful and heedless

in their waking moments

of what is going on around them

as they are during their sleep.

Fools, although they hear,

are like deaf;

to them the adage applies

that whenever they are present

they are absent.

One should not act or speak

as if he were asleep.

The waking have one world in common;

sleepers have each a private world of his own.

Whatever we see when awake is death,

when asleep, dreams.

How true all that is! All too often we go through the day ‘forgetful’ and ‘heedless,’ unaware of what is happening and going on around us. It is as if we were asleep---or worse, dead. Heraclitus calls such people ‘fools,’ for ‘whenever you are present / you are absent.’ In truth, we can hardly be said to be ‘present,’ for that requires an awareness of awareness---that is, an awareness or mindfulness of the content of one’s consciousness from one moment to the next. 

Here's some more good advice from Heraclitus on the subject of mindfulness, which Heraclitus refers to as the 'ground of being' ('God' according to the 20th century Christian existentialist theologian Paul Tillich):

Since mindfulness, of all things,

is the ground of being,
to speak one's true mind,
and to keep things known
in common, serves all being,
just as laws made clear
uphold the city,
yet with greater strength.
Of all pronouncements of the law
the one source is the Word
whereby we choose what helps
true mindfulness prevail. 

When we do not practise mindfulness in our daily lives we are, ‘whatever we see when awake is death,’ writes Heraclitus. Yes, death! Because whatever was the action---internal or external---of the then present but now gone moment has died on us. Yes, died on us. It is like watching a motion picture film; the picture is moving, but what is being screened is not happening now. It’s in the past.

Heraclitus also wrote that we do not learn what we should, largely because we go through life mindlessly. ‘Many do not understand such things as they encounter, nor do they learn by their experience, but they think they do.’ So, how are we to learn? Certainly not from books. ‘Knowing many things doesn’t teach insight,’ wrote Heraclitus. Insight comes only from awareness and observation---that is, mindfulness. That’s why it’s called ‘insight meditation.’ Heraclitus also urged people to ‘look within,’ saying, ‘I searched into myself,’ and ‘Those who love wisdom must investigate many things.’

Don’t spend your whole life as if you were asleep---or dead. Wake up! Live with awareness. Live with attention. Watch. Observe. Learn by your experience. Live!

RELATED POSTS

EARLY GREEK PHILOSOPHERS AND MINDFULNESS [PART 4]

MINDFULNESS ACCORDING TO EPICTETUS

THE AWARENESS OF AWARENESS

BE NOT DETAINED: DON’T LET YOUR MIND STOP

PIERCING THE MOMENT WITH MINDFULNESS

MINDFULNESS AS SOFT FOCUS AWARENESS

EARLY GREEK PHILOSOPHERS AND MINDFULNESS [PART 4]

This is the fourth and final blog in a series of blogs discussing the ideas of some of the early Greek philosophers with a view to delineating what there is of value to us today as regards our mindfulness practice.

As previously mentioned, mindfulness is not a philosophy in itself. However, there are a number of philosophical ideas and principles that can be said to underlie the practice of mindfulness in its secular and non-sectarian form, and some of those ideas and principles are of quite ancient provenance.

Let’s look at the ideas and teachings of the nobleman Heraclitus of Ephesus (c535-c475 BCE) [pictured left and below] – my favourite Presocratic philosopher – and examine how those ideas relate to the practice of mindfulness.

Professor John Anderson wrote of Heraclitus’ “wide awake approach to problems”, by which he meant that Heraclitus adopted and advocated a rigorously empirical and logical methodology in the pursuit of truth (reality ... what is).

Heraclitus was known as the “flux and fire” philosopher. He wrote, “All things are flowing”, and “There is nothing permanent except change”. (How very Buddhist!) He also famously said, “Let us not conjecture at random about the greatest things. We must follow the common.”

What that means is that if we would know the conditions of existence we must look for that which is “common” to all things. In addition, we should reject supernatural, occult and all other unobservable explanations of the otherwise observable conditions of existence. “The things that can be seen, heard and learned are what I prize most,” he writes. In other words, naturalism, for Heraclitus eschewed all notions of the occult and the supernatural. He wrote, “"this world [or world-order] did none of the gods or humans make; but it always was and is and shall be: an ever-living fire, kindling in measures and going out in measures." Such is the cosmology of Heraclitus and the other exalted thinkers of his day. How ancient, yet so very modern.

Heraclitus warns us that we need to be prepared to be surprised by our discoveries. He writes, “If you do not expect the unexpected, you will not find it; for it is hard to be sought out and difficult.” How often life teaches us what we thought we knew was not at all in accord with things as they really are. “The sun is new every day,” writes the anything but world weary Heraclitus.

All things are in a state of flux, says Heraclitus. Everything is in process and no single element is ever predominant for there is a contrary tension of things by means of which there is a resolution (an "attunement", cf "at-one-ment") of conflicting opposites. Nothing is simple, indeed all things are complex, have internal differentiation, and interact with other things ... all on the same level or order of reality and observability. In addition, things are constituent members of wider systems and exchanges of things. The forms of things are constantly being transmuted.

For Heraclitus change is the unity of all things, and there is a single logic that applies to all things and how they are related. (By now readers should be aware that logic is about things, not thought, and how things are related. Sound logical thinking means relating [that is, putting together or distinguishing] different pieces of information about actual or alleged facts. “Reality is propositional,” writes John Anderson, for there is a logical direct relationship between any proposition and the way things actually are.)

The unity underlying all change and opposition is the Logos [λόγος] – a term first used by Heraclitus in around 600 BCE to refer, not to any theological abstraction, but to the organised and co-ordinated way in which, as Heraclitus discovered, all things work and are constituted. That is, the logic (or “formula”) of things. Not surprisingly, Heraclitus also taught that the single logic applying to all things also manifested itself as objective moral law.

Mindfulness is a lifelong inquiry into what it means to be fully present and alert in the present moment. (Heraclitus was right when he said that most people “sleep-walk” their way through life. How very relevant that is to the successful practice of mindfulness!) Each moment of our existence is but a brief occurrence in what is otherwise a state of flux. Life is nothing but the very livingness of all things living out their livingness from one moment to the next. The unity of all things derives, not from all things being one, but simply from the fact that a single logic applies to all things.

In our mindfulness practice thought will follow feeling, feeling will follow thought, and so on. Nothing is predominant even if from time to time some particular thought, feeling or sensation is particularly strong. Mindfulness enables us to look at ourselves thought-less-ly and feeling-less-ly such that in time our minds become free from notions of self (that is, notions of “I” and “me”). Notions of self have the appearance of solidity and continuity, but that is only by reason of habit and memory. The only solidity (if there be any at all) and continuity there is subsists in the seemingly endless process or flow of things and their transmutation.

I hope you have enjoyed these blogs on the ideas of some of the more important Presocratic philosophers.

Recommended Reading: John Burnet, Early Greek Philosophy, 3rd ed (A & C Black, 1920); John Anderson, Lectures on Greek Philosophy 1928 (Sydney University Press, 2008). 

RELATED POSTS

MINDFULNESS, PROFESSOR JOHN ANDERSON AND THE FACTICITY OF THINGS
EARLY GREEK PHILOSOPHERS AND MINDFULNESS [PART 1]

EARLY GREEK PHILOSOPHERS AND MINDFULNESS [PART 2]

EARLY GREEK PHILOSOPHERS AND MINDFULNESS [PART 3]