An Interview with Tiberiu Sammak on Philosophy, Metaphysics, Science, and Religion (Part Two)

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

Publication (Outlet/Website): In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2020/06/22

Abstract

Tiberiu Sammak is a 24-year-old guy who currently lives in Bucharest. He spent most of his childhood and teenage years surfing the Internet (mostly searching things of interest) and playing video games. One of his hobbies used to be the construction of paper airplanes, spending a couple of years designing and trying to perfect different types of paper aircrafts. Academically, he never really excelled at anything. In fact, his high school record was rather poor. Some of his current interests include cosmology, medicine and cryonics. His highest score on an experimental high-range I.Q. test is 187 S.D. 15, achieved on Paul Cooijmans’ Reason – Revision 2008. He discusses: political philosophy; economic philosophy; social philosophy; system of ethics; an aesthetic philosophy; the political, economic, social, ethical, and aesthetic, philosophies; metaphysics; raising awareness about a specific issue and coming up with a feasible solution; religion; and science.

Keywords: metaphysics, religion, philosophy, science, Tiberiu Sammak.

An Interview with Tiberiu Sammak on Philosophy, Metaphysics, Science, and Religion (Part Two)[1]^,[2]*

*Please see the footnotes, bibliography, and citation style listing after the interview.*

1. Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Within the last session, we talked about some of the earlier moments in life and the areas of emphasis relevant for personal development, intellectually and emotionally. Today, I want touch more on some philosophical subject matter for you. The philosophical foundation of some of the thinking for you. Your formal thoughts and informal sensibilities about particular topics found within the generalized discipline of philosophy. To open on some of the basic subdiscipline questions of philosophy, what political philosophy makes the most sense to you?

Tiberiu Nicolas Sammak: I would like to stress that politics is not a topic that I am particularly fond of and my stance on it is probably rather ignorant and uninformed. I do not have a preferred political philosophy. However, not having a well-defined ideology does not stop me to identify some of the valuable (in my view) concepts presented in the tenets of the current political philosophies. For example, I support the idea of universal health care. Of course, this may have its disadvantages as well, but I think they are greatly outweighed by the benefits. I also believe that a state should be secular; religion and politics should not be intertwined, in my opinion.  Iwon’t enter into further detail on elaborating more because my knowledge on this subject (namely politics) is scant.

I will keep this brief and I will highlight a few of my ideas pertaining to some of the overarching political issues that are still present today, mainly due to corruption or grave incompetence (this is a bit off-topic, but I thought it was worth mentioning).

To begin with, a rampant phenomenon that is present in many political organizations is represented by gaining positions of power through nepotistic connections. Not choosing people by their ability in a certain domain and allowing many who are unqualified to rule and exert influence in state organizations is a safe way to a steady decline, resulting in a system wherein kakistocracy prevails.

Another serious issue is the abuse of power by some politicians who use their authority in order to gain certain advantages or just to get richer. It is very difficult to control this if we are dealing with a system in which corruption and venal arrangements between institutions are thriving.

What a state needs is a government led by competent people, devoid of graft and fraudulent members, a government genuinely concerned about the commonweal. Such expectations are probably utopian, but it is something that should be striven for nonetheless.

2. Jacobsen: What economic philosophy makes the most sense to you? The system of economics to organize and guide the exchange of goods and services in a society.

Sammak: I think the best economic model would be one where innovation, inventiveness and hard work are rewarded accordingly and where the poverty rate is as low as possible (preferably non-existent). A significant dent in the poverty levels is a step ahead towards a better functioning society, perhaps even contributing to a decrease in criminal activities.

3. Jacobsen: What social philosophy makes the most sense to you? The social organization and principles of human relations best suited to human nature.

Sammak: I cannot think of a desired social framework, mainly because there’s so much diversity and a lot of what is deemed acceptable in some groups may not apply to others. Well-established principles that might be deeply rooted into certain traditions or local philosophies shape and define the relations between individuals.

Many communities function as a homogeneous group, sharing the same cultural and social background, all of them having their peculiarities and ways of dealing with certain things. These characteristics, which are now commonplace within different societies and which are part of their identity were defined and established as appropriate throughout history. The genesis of the exact mechanisms leading to what we now find in these groups can probably be traced back to a particular period in time.

4. Jacobsen: What system of ethics makes the most sense to you? A morality to set common ground rules of the ways in which human beings relate to one another, community, and the rest of the natural world (of which we are merely an outgrowth).

Sammak: I like to believe that every person has a system of moral principles and is able to discern between good and bad.

In a perfect world, a deontological approach would always work, because there would be no exceptions (something similar to the trolley problem), errors or some unusual circumstances allowing a position that might question the soundness of deontological ethics. There is no doubt that certain actions are inherently wrong, e.g., stealing, lying, murdering, deceiving and any other reprehensible behaviour.

I suppose both utilitarianism and the absolute nature of deontology have their own drawbacks, both being somewhat untenable in specific situations.

It is my contention that the philosophy of aretaic ethics is superior to both of the aforementioned axiological doctrines. As taught in the ancient schools, this system encourages righteousness and moral excellence. It is not represented by a strict set of rules one should follow; it is an amalgam of theories emphasizing and trying to hone and strengthen the foundation of everything that is good, virtuous. Morals are internal and everyone should always think and reason out why a certain deed is right or wrong. It is a lifelong commitment to perfecting and always improving one’s character.

5. Jacobsen: What about an aesthetic philosophy? Is there a preferred aesthetic sensibility for you?

Sammak: As I have previously mentioned in our last encounter, I have a soft spot for barren, derelict places. I have always found them to be intriguing. There’s a certain, understated beauty and sometimes an eerie aura that surrounds them. Abandoned factories, withered crop fields, deserted and forlorn locations, the fall drawing to an end and leaving an austere landscape behind – all of these images are part of the foundation of my favored aesthetic patterns.

I even tried to capture and recreate the very essence of their desolation in some of my drawings, attempting to incorporate distinctive features and elements into my design. While the results were not always the expected, the whole process of projecting my perceptions on paper proved to be really satisfying. These images are also evocative of distant memories from my childhood, memories I treasure.

6. Jacobsen: Bringing these together as one, the political, economic, social, ethical, and aesthetic, philosophies, what framework puts them into one place for you?

Sammak: Trying to enframe all of my preferred ideologies and glue them together into a construct is perhaps too complex a task and it would probably lack cohesion, since the divergence of some ideas would be difficult to be contained within a conceptual framework. Or maybe I cannot come up with one, I really don’t know.

However, to give a definite answer, I presume all of these philosophies may coalesce into some quixotic framework, characterized by its impossibility to be transposed into a real-world setting.

7. Jacobsen: Is there a use for metaphysics to you?

Sammak: As defined, metaphysics is a major branch in philosophy dealing with the understanding of the fabric of reality. All of the philosophical matters it addresses are highly intricate and thought-provoking.

If I were to think of some benefits, all would be found within the sphere of mental activities.  All of the subfields of metaphysics encourage thinking and pondering over some of the fundamental questions they pose.

8. Jacobsen: As we examine some of the pressing of issues of the day, how might some of the philosophies remedy them?

Sammak: Honestly, I do not see how that could be achieved. Perhaps raising awareness about a specific issue and coming up with a feasible solution would be a first step. To implement a particular philosophy that could change the course of events, no matter how ambitious and compelling, is a very difficult feat. A lot of people are usually reluctant to change their views, even when confronted with better alternatives.

9. Jacobsen: What is religion to you? Do any seem true to you? If some more than others, which, and why?

Sammak: To me, a religion is characterized by a set of tenets and teachings wherefrom one may infer various meanings.

Even though most religions are based on faith in a primordial deity, this is not always the case (for example, Buddhists do not necessarily believe in an all-powerful divinity).

Personally, I think every religion has some nuggets of truth. Some might argue that these “truths” are masterfully interwoven with fictitious and ludicrous statements. I believe many have quite a few positive teachings to offer, providing guidance for those in need. They also bring communities together, many people finding solace in prayer. Some religious organizations even help and donate goods and money to the poor.

10. Jacobsen: What is science to you? How do those philosophical positions mix together with the scientific or natural philosophic tradition dominant in the world today?

Sammak: Science is the observation and the attempt to understand how the nature and the universe work. By definition, philosophy tries to find answers to the major questions concerning reality. Science tries to bring proof and evidence and to explain how stuff works.

Ultimately, the goal of both is finding the truth, both being inextricably connected. I am not aware of a main scientific or philosophical trend, but I believe my views to be somewhat reasonable.

I am certainly not a cognoscente in the field of philosophy, my outlook on the topics being just a layman’s perspective.

Appendix I: Footnotes

[1] Reason – Revision 2008, IQ 187 (S.D.15).

[2] Individual Publication Date: June 22, 2020: http://www.in-sightjournal.com/sammak-two; Full Issue Publication Date: September 1, 2020: https://in-sightjournal.com/insight-issues/.

*High range testing (HRT) should be taken with honest skepticism grounded in the limited empirical development of the field at present, even in spite of honest and sincere efforts. If a higher general intelligence score, then the greater the variability in, and margin of error in, the general intelligence scores because of the greater rarity in the population.

License

In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. Based on a work at www.in-sightpublishing.com.

Copyright

© Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing 2012-Present. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing with appropriate and specific direction to the original content. All interviewees and authors co-copyright their material and may disseminate for their independent purposes.