Category Archives: Uncategorized

‘How were the unforeseen consequences of human actions and choices explored in ancient cultures – including the flawed idea that might is always right?’

Posted on by


AI – ‘Ancient cultures primarily explored the unforeseen consequences of human actions through mythology, tragedy, and philosophy, emphasizing themes of divine justice (Nemesis), the fatal flaw of pride (hubris), and the limits of human knowledge. The idea that “might is always right” was presented as a flawed, cynical view that inevitably led to downfall and chaos. 

Exploration of Unforeseen Consequences

  • Greek Tragedy: This genre was a primary vehicle for exploring how individual choices, often driven by ignorance or passion, could lead to catastrophic, unforeseen outcomes that fulfilled a predetermined fate.
  • Mythology and Divine Punishment: Myths across many cultures featured gods who enforced a cosmic order and punished mortals who transgressed their boundaries.
    • Icarus: He ignored his father’s warnings not to fly too close to the sun with his wax wings. His overambition and disregard for limits led to his sudden, fatal plunge into the sea.
    • The Tower of Babel (Abrahamic tradition): Humans united to build a tower to the heavens to “make a name for themselves,” a clear act of collective hubris. The unforeseen consequence was divine intervention, resulting in the confusion of languages and the dispersal of humanity, thwarting their original goal.
  • Environmental Awareness: The Roman writer Pliny the Elder noted in his Natural History examples where human actions, such as draining lakes or changing a river’s course, led to observable, negative climate changes in a region (e.g., loss of certain crops due to new frosts). 

The Flawed Idea that Might is Always Right

The assertion that “might is right” (kratocracy) was generally treated as a dangerous and ultimately unsustainable principle in ancient thought. 

  • Philosophical Debate (Plato and Aristotle): This idea was explicitly challenged in philosophical discourse.
    • In Plato’s Republic, the Sophist Thrasymachus argues that “justice is nothing but the interest of the stronger”. Socrates systematically counters this, arguing that true justice involves pursuing the common good and that power used merely for self-interest leads to internal and external disharmony.
    • Aristotle recognized the role of power in governance but maintained it must be directed toward the well-being of the community and the rule of law, not the arbitrary will of the strong.
  • Consequences of Tyranny: Ancient narratives often depicted the downfall of arrogant rulers and empires that relied solely on force.
    • Aeschylus’s play The Persians portrays the defeat of King Xerxes I, who embodied hubris by attempting to “bind” the Hellespont sea with chains as punishment for a storm that destroyed his fleet, a clear transgression of natural limits. His military might, presumed to be “right,” was ultimately proven fleeting against natural and divine forces.
  • The Inevitability of Moral Order: The belief was that while force might prevail temporarily, a moral or cosmic order (often personified by the goddess Nemesis, who enacted retribution) would eventually restore balance and punish those who overstepped their bounds. The might of the gods always superseded temporary human might.’ 

In other words, the ancients believed that eventually Moral Order would always prevail over the arrogance and hubris of the immoral exercise of military might – as right.

So, they believed in the inevitability of moral order.

My 2nd Q. – ‘How were Hubris and Nemesis symbolized in Ancient Art?’

AI – ‘In ancient art, Hubris was represented conceptually through mythological narratives and real-world consequences rather than a single personified figure with specific symbols. Nemesis, the goddess of divine retribution who punished hubris, was consistently personified and depicted with specific iconographic elements. 

Nemesis’s Symbolism

Nemesis was usually portrayed as a beautiful, winged goddess (symbolizing the swiftness of her vengeance) carrying several objects that represented her function of measuring and dispensing justice. 

Common symbols in her iconography included:

  • Scales or Balance: To represent the weighing and maintenance of cosmic equilibrium and justice.
  • A Sword or Scourge (whip): Symbols of her power to exact punishment and vengeance against wrongdoers.
  • A Measuring Rod (cubit ruler): Emphasizing the measuring out of fate and the enforcement of boundaries that mortals should not overstep.
  • The Wheel of Fate (sometimes on a griffin chariot): Symbolizing the cyclical nature of fortune, the constant turning of destiny, and that no one can escape their due. The griffin was a creature associated with guarding roads to salvation and was seen as an agent of Nemesis.
  • A Bridle or Rein: To “bridle vain men who roil in vain” and restrain the “frivolous insolences of mortals”.
  • A Crown adorned with stag horns:  Seen in some depictions. 

A famous example of Nemesis’s artistic representation is the statue at her sanctuary in Rhamnous, sculpted from a block of Parian marble that the overconfident Persians had brought to Greece to build their own victory monument at the Battle of Marathon in 490 BCE. 

Hubris’s Symbolism

Hubris (excessive pride or arrogance that defies the gods) was not typically personified as a singular figure in ancient art with standard attributes. Instead, it was an abstract concept or a “tragic flaw” demonstrated through the actions of characters in myths and literature. Artistic depictions illustrated the consequences of hubris through specific narrative events, such as: 

  • Icarus falling from the sky: Showing the result of ignoring divine law and overestimating human capabilities.
  • Narcissus gazing at his own reflection: A punishment for vanity and self-love, ultimately leading to his demise (and transformation into a flower).
  • The Persian defeat at Marathon: The actual event was viewed by the Greeks as a prime historical example of Nemesis punishing Persian hubris, and the creation of the Nemesis statue from Persian marble served as a permanent artistic and symbolic reminder of this moral. 

In essence, Nemesis was a specific divine figure with clear visual symbols, while Hubris was an action or attitude whose representation in art was the ensuing downfall and punishment meted out by Nemesis or the Fates.’ 

My 3rd Q. – ‘What was the sanctuary in Rhamnous?’

AI – ‘The sanctuary in Rhamnous was the most important ancient Greek sanctuary dedicated to Nemesis, the goddess of divine retribution, famously punishing hubris (excessive pride). It featured two temples—one smaller (late 6th century BC) and a larger Doric one (c. 460 BC) for Nemesis and Themis (order/law)—and housed a famous cult statue of Nemesis, believed by some to have been carved from Parian marble left by the Persians after their defeat at Marathon. 

Key Aspects of the Sanctuary:

  • Goddesses: Primarily Nemesis, linked with Themis; Nemesis delivered divine vengeance when Themis’s order was disregarded.
  • Significance: It was the principal cult center for Nemesis, a crucial deity in Greek tragedy and belief.
  • Statue: A famous cult statue of Nemesis by sculptor Agorakritos was housed in the larger temple, according to Pausanias.
  • Strategic Location: Rhamnous was a fortified town guarding important sea routes, and the sanctuary was a key religious site within its lower city.
  • Architecture: Ruins of two 5th-century BC temples remain, with the larger one exhibiting experimental Doric features. 

Why It Matters:
The Sanctuary of Nemesis was a powerful religious center, especially renowned for its connection to the downfall of arrogant invaders like the Persians, reinforcing beliefs in divine justice and the punishment of hubris.’

My 4th Q – ‘What is the Imperial Boomerang?’

AI – ‘The imperial boomerang is the concept that the repressive techniques, surveillance, and violence developed by colonial powers to control overseas territories eventually “boomerang” back and are used against marginalized populations within the colonizing country itself. Originating with writers like Aimé Césaire and Hannah Arendt, it highlights how colonies act as “laboratories” for methods of social control, like racial profiling and militarized policing, that then become normalized domestically, creating cycles of state repression at home, as seen with European fascism or modern policing tactics. Key Aspects

  • Colonialism as a Testing Ground: Empires used colonies to test new forms of counter-insurgency, surveillance (like fingerprints in India), and violence.
  • Return to the Metropole: These methods, originally designed for “foreign” populations, are later applied within the imperial center, often against minority or immigrant groups.
  • Examples:
    • Nazism: Césaire argued that European fascism was a product of colonial brutality, applied to Europeans within Europe.
    • Modern Policing: Tactics used in the French banlieues or US policing in the Philippines have been linked to domestic police practices and militarization.
  • Key Thinkers: The idea is associated with Aimé Césaire, Hannah Arendt, and Michel Foucault, who expanded on the idea of imperialism’s self-destructive potential. 

In essence, The imperial boomerang shows how the brutal tools of empire, intended for the “other,” inevitably corrupt and shape the colonizing power’s own society, turning its repressive apparatus inward.’

Se also:

‘Escaping the Prisoner’s Dilemma in Contentious Probate Disputes.’

Posted on by

Game Theory provides a framework for analysing the parties’ rational, self-interested decision-making in interdependent situations.

Even purely self-interested parties can achieve a better outcome through cooperation, i.e. settlement as a result of Mediation, than through pure competition, i.e. Litigation.

If all parties litigate aggressively, then they both ‘betray’, and thereby each incur high costs and stress, resulting in a ‘suboptimal’ outcome for everyone involved compared to a negotiated settlement.

In the context of the Mediation of a Contentious Probate dispute, ‘betraying’ might equate to litigating to the fullest extent, hoping for a big win; while ‘cooperating’ means compromising in Mediation.

Mediators must recognize that each party’s outcome depends not just on their own actions, but critically on the other parties’ decisions.

This inherent interdependence is the foundation of ‘Game Theory’, and highlights why a facilitated negotiation process is crucial.

The classic Game Theory Model is the ‘Prisoner’s Dilemma’ analogy.

This illustrates a scenario in which two rational, self-interested individuals choose not to cooperate, even though they would both be better off if they did.

The Mediator’s role is to help the Participants in Mediation to escape this ‘dilemma’, by creating an environment in which trust and the benefits of cooperation are clear, i.e. self-evident, making a mutually acceptable agreement more likely.

By applying Game Theory Principles, Mediators and Mediation Advocates can help ‘reframe’ a dispute from being a ‘zero-sum’ battle, into a transformative ‘collaborative problem-solving exercise’, by guiding self-interested parties toward a mutually beneficial resolution.

I am available to be appointed as a Mediator or Mediation Advocate from 1st March. To enquire about my services please contact clerks@1ec.co.uk.

For a detailed discussion of both Mediation and Mediation Advocacy, see my recent book published by the Law Society, the 2nd Edition of the Contentious Probate Handbook (2025), which is available to purchase on Amazon.

I will also discuss Game Theory Principles in my forthcoming book – ‘Mediation of Cultural Heritage Disputes,’ including how a Mediator can help Participants to identify the ‘Nash Equilibrium’ in the context of their ‘Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement’ (BATNA), by showing them that continued confrontation/litigation is unlikely to yield a better result than a proposed settlement.

‘Inalienability of sovereignty through unilateral action of a foreign power.’

Posted on by

At the intersection of ‘Law’ and ‘Ethics’ in the Mediation of a Cultural Heritage Dispute lies the ‘Fiduciary Principle’ under ‘International Law’, of the ‘Inalienability of Sovereignty’ through the unilateral action of a foreign power.

This is relevant when considering the circumstances in which an artefact/antiquity was acquired, e.g. by transfer as a result of ‘Coercion’ during a period of occupation.

‘Fiduciary principles play a prominent role in the International Law of Occupation. As one leading scholar has observed, the foundational principle upon which the entire law of occupation is based is the principle of Inalienability of Sovereignty through unilateral action of a foreign power.

Accordingly, when a state establishes effective control over foreign territory, its international legal status is conceived to be that of a Trustee who exercises only temporary managerial powers until the occupation ends. …

An occupant also bears a variety of proscriptive fiduciary duties. It must respect unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country. … Nor may an occupant confiscate private property, [or] destroy property without military necessity. …

Moreover the occupant serves only as administrator and usufructuary of public buildings, [and] real estate … belonging to the hostile state, and situated in the occupied country.

It must safeguard the capital of these properties, and administer them in accordance with the rules of usufruct, avoiding wasteful or negligent destruction of the capital value … Contrary to the rules of good husbandry. … [This principle for example obliges the occupier to protect public monuments].

For centuries, international lawyers and statesmen have endorsed the principle that a State’s Sovereign authority is held in Trust for the benefit of its people.’

(Criddle, Paul B., Miller, Paul B., & Robert H. Sitkoff , Editors (2019) The Oxford Handbook of Fiduciary Law, Oxford University Press, pp.356 & 358-9).

I will examine and discuss this foundational legal principle of ‘Civilization’ in my forthcoming book – the ‘Mediation of Cultural Heritage Disputes.’

This also bears upon the availability of remedies in the English High Court based upon the Tort of ‘Conversion’ (which protects property rights), and ‘Constructive Trust’.

Under the English Law principle of ‘Nemo Dat Quod Non Habet’, a person cannot transfer a better title to goods than they possess.

Thus, a thief cannot:

(i) acquire legal ownership of stolen property; and

(ii) pass valid title to a buyer, even if the buyer is innocent and pays good money.

The rule operates subject to statutory exceptions which exist to protect bona fide purchasers in specific and limited commercial situations.

Conversion is a strict liability Tort.

So, the state of mind, knowledge or intention of the defendant, e.g. an Art Dealer/Auction House, is irrelevant.

For a detailed discussion of the Law of Constructive Trusts, see my book, the ‘Contentious Trusts Handbook’, published by the Law Society in 2020.

For a rigorous commentary on the Law of Conversion, see the 3rd Edition of ‘The Law of Personal Property’ by Michael Bridge, Louie Gullifer, Kelvin Low and Gerard McMeel (2021)(Sweet & Maxwell).

In my forthcoming book, I will be writing a detailed section about the burden of proof (i.e. about the elements of these claims which must be proved in order to win at Trial), and litigation risks, including potential limitation defences, and in the case of Equitable Remedies such as Constructive Trust – laches.

‘In classical thought was peace linked to the rule of law?’

Posted on by


AI – ‘Yes, in classical thought, particularly in Greek and Roman political philosophy, peace was strongly linked to the concept of the rule of law, as a bulwark against arbitrary power and a foundation for a just, stable, and prosperous society. 

Greek Philosophy

The idea of lawfulness was central to Greek identity and a measure of governmental legitimacy. 

  • Opposition to Tyranny: The rule of law was consistently juxtaposed with the arbitrary rule of a tyrant or monarch. Greek orators and playwrights emphasized that living in a state governed by established laws was essential for liberty and justice.
  • Plato and Aristotle: While Plato initially favored the rule of enlightened philosopher-kings, he later conceded that a strict rule of law was the “second-best” practical option for societal happiness and stability, calling for all citizens to be “slaves to the law”. Aristotle explicitly argued that “it is more proper that law should govern than any one of the citizens,” believing the law to be a rational standard that transcends individual desires and forms the bedrock of a just society, allowing people to coexist peacefully.
  • The Koinē Eirēnē (Common Peace): In international relations between Greek city-states, the diplomatic concept of a “Common Peace” emerged, advocating for peace treaties that recognized the autonomy of all states and were intended to be permanent, reflecting a desire for a stable order based on shared principles rather than temporary power balances. 

Roman Thought

The Romans further developed this association, with their concept of Pax (peace) often viewed as the order that resulted from agreement (pacisci) or, frequently, the stability achieved through the imposition of Roman power and a universal legal framework. 

  • Cicero the Roman statesman emphasized that everyone is a servant of the laws in order to be free, a concise articulation of the intrinsic link between law and liberty which underpins social harmony and order.
  • Pax Romana: The long period of relative peace and stability under the Roman Empire (starting with Augustus) was known as the Pax Romana (Roman Peace). This peace was maintained through the emperor’s power to limit unrest within the empire and by the application of Roman law, illustrating a practical link between a pervasive legal system and domestic tranquility. 

In both traditions, the rule of law was considered essential for preventing internal conflict (civil war) and ensuring the stability and prosperity that peace brings’. 

My next Q. – ‘In Ancient Art was there a single motif which represented the interdependent relationship between peace and the rule of law?’

AI – ‘While there was no single universal motif, the ancient Greeks and Romans personified the interdependent relationship between peace and the rule of law through linked goddesses. 

Greek Mythology: The Horae

In Greek mythology, the goddesses Eirene (Peace), Dike (Justice), and Eunomia (Good Order/Legality) were sisters known as the Horae, daughters of Zeus and the Titaness Themis (goddess of divine law and order). 

  • This familial relationship in myth symbolically represented that true peace could only exist in the presence of justice and good order, and vice versa. Ancient sources stressed that you could not have one without the others. 

Roman Mythology and Art: Pax and Iustitia

The Romans adopted these concepts with their own goddesses, Pax (Peace) and Iustitia (Justice). 

  • Pax was the Roman equivalent of Eirene and was highly promoted by Emperor Augustus to symbolize the Pax Romana (Roman Peace), a period of stability and prosperity across the empire. She was often depicted in art holding an olive branch and a cornucopia, symbolizing the abundance that peace brings.
  • Iustitia was the personification of justice, depicted with scales and a sword. 

While they were distinct figures, the Romans considered Pax to be the daughter of Jupiter (king of the gods) and Iustitia. This established a direct mythological link, illustrating that peace was the result of a just and ordered system of rule. In later Western art, especially from the Renaissance onwards, Justice and Peace were often explicitly paired in allegorical paintings to illustrate this ongoing interdependence. 

Conclusion

So, rather than a single abstract symbol, the ancients used the pairing of these specific personified goddesses to represent the strong and necessary link between the rule of law and a peaceful, flourishing society.’

‘How were Peace, Freedom of Speech and Equal Rights symbolized in Ancient Art?’

Posted on by

There is no single, specific ancient motif that explicitly combines the modern, abstract concepts of ‘Peace’, ‘Freedom of Speech’, and ‘Equal Rights’ into one symbol.

These concepts, as understood in contemporary terms (e.g., individual human rights against the state), did not exist in a fully developed or universally accepted form in most ancient societies. 

However, ancient art features distinct symbols that represent these ideas individually or in related forms.

So, intellectually, thinkers in Antiquity did not make this connection.

In other words, they did not work out that ‘Peace’ is intrinsically linked to the presence of both: (i) ‘Freedom of Speech’; and (ii) ‘Equal Rights’.

Thus, axiomatically, this gap in reasoning, existed in the foundational doctrines of every major religion.

AI – ‘In ancient art, concepts like peace, freedom of speech, and equal rights were symbolized through specific motifs, personifications, and allegories rooted in mythology and political philosophy. 

Peace

The primary ancient symbols for peace were natural elements that represented abundance, the cessation of hostilities, and divine favor: 

  • The Olive Branch: Dating back at least to the 5th century BC in Greece, the olive branch was a potent symbol of peace and plenty. It was an attribute of Eirene, the Greek goddess of peace (known as Pax to the Romans), who was often depicted on Roman Imperial coins holding a branch. The olive tree took years to bear fruit, implying that those who planted groves expected a long period of peace.
  • The Dove: In ancient Greek mythology, the dove was a symbol of love and the renewal of life. Early Christians adopted the dove with an olive branch in its beak to symbolize the peace of the soul and the end of divine wrath after the story of Noah’s Ark, as seen in Roman catacomb art.
  • The Rainbow: Across various ancient cultures, the rainbow often represented a connection between humans and their gods and served as a universal sign of peace after a storm or flood.
  • Predator and Prey in Truce: The Lydian King Croesus minted a coin around 700 BC depicting a lion and a bull facing each other in truce, symbolizing peace between the Lydians and the Greeks of Asia Minor. 

Freedom of Speech and Equal Rights

Explicit symbols for modern concepts of “freedom of speech” or “equal rights” as universal human entitlements were less common in ancient art, as these concepts were often tied to specific civic or social contexts within a given culture, rather than universal abstract rights. However, related ideas of liberty and justice were personified: 

  • The Pileus (Phrygian Cap):  This soft, conical cap was an ancient symbol of liberty in the Roman world. Freed slaves and prisoners of war would obtain one upon receiving their freedom. It became a powerful symbol of libertas and was depicted on coins and in allegorical paintings. The later red Phrygian cap of the French Revolution was inspired by the ancient pileus.
  • Libertas: The Roman goddess of liberty was personified in art and on coinage, serving as an early representation of the concept of civic freedom.
  • The Scales of Justice: While primarily a symbol of law and justice, the image of a balance scale is an ancient motif. Lady Justice (or Themis in Greek mythology) is often depicted holding scales, which represent the weighing of evidence and an impartial application of the law, a foundational aspect of equality and rights.
  • Personifications in Democratic Athens: In Classical Athens, the concepts of isēgoriā (equality of public speech) and parrhēsiā (the license to speak freely, even critically) were central to the democratic ideal. While not a single visual symbol in ancient art in the modern sense, the dramatic arts (such as the ribald comic theatre) served as a venue for exercising and symbolizing this right.’

Peace is intrinsically linked to the presence of freedom of speech and equal rights.

This connection is a foundational principle of classical liberalism and the core idea behind the modern democratic peace theory. 

Key figures and concepts supporting this argument include:

(i) Immanuel Kant – In his 1795 essay Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch, Kant argued that stable peace could only come about when all nations were constitutional republics that respected the rights of their citizens. He posited that in such systems, citizens, who would bear the costs of war, would be less likely to consent to it.

(ii) John Stuart Mill – A strong defender of ‘absolute freedom of opinion and sentiment,’ Mill argued in On Liberty that free speech and open debate are foundational to human well-being and progress. He believed that suppressing opinions harms society by preventing the exchange of error for truth and that a healthy state requires the clash of adverse opinions.

(iii) The prominent modern political science ‘Democratic Peace Theory’ suggests that democracies, characterized by institutions like free speech, equal rights, and the rule of law, are significantly less likely to engage in war with one another.

The internal mechanisms of accountability and public debate in free societies are seen as fostering peaceful foreign relations.

(iv) The authors of the ‘Universal Declaration of Human Rights’ intended the protection of freedom and equality as a lasting basis for international peace, establishing a moral and political criterion by which state orders should be judged in terms of their potential to promote or threaten world peace.

(v) Alexis de Tocqueville and Karl Popper both noted the importance of ‘liberty’ for a ‘peaceful society’.

Popper argued that the attempt to enforce equality at the expense of freedom endangers freedom itself, leading to societies where neither freedom nor equality among the unfree is present.

De Tocqueville noted that freedom is a more fundamental value for a peaceful society than equality (in the sense of equal outcomes).

(vi) Enlightenment thinkers like John Locke and Voltaire were staunch advocates for civil liberties, including freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and equality before the law, challenging authoritarian regimes that suppressed these rights and often engaged in conflict. 

These thinkers and theories collectively assert that a society that respects individual rights, encourages open discourse, and treats its citizens as equals is inherently more stable, just, and peaceful, both internally and in its relations with other nations.

Since ‘Peace’ cannot exist without: (i) ‘Free Speech’; and (ii) ‘Equal Rights’, then logically these are ‘Foundational Rights’ in ‘Peacebuilding’.

‘There can be no peace without free speech.’

Posted on by

The idea that ‘There can be no peace without free speech’ stretches back to antiquity.

My 1st Q. – ‘How as the idea that there cna be no peace without free speech explored in Antiquity?‘

Google AI – ‘In antiquity, the relationship between expression (artistic and rhetorical) and societal harmony was a central theme in philosophical and literary discourse, primarily viewed through the lens of whether expression should be an unfettered pursuit of truth or a controlled tool for moral and civic education. 

The Philosophers: Control vs. Catharsis:

The main philosophical debate in the West was between Plato and Aristotle, who held contrasting views on the role of expression in the ideal polis (city-state). 

Plato’s Censorship and Utility: In his Republic, Plato argued for strict censorship of literary and musical expression. He believed that art (mimesis, or imitation) was a mere shadow of reality and had the power to evoke dangerous, irrational emotions, thus corrupting individual character and societal stability. For Plato, expression needed to be regulated by the state to promote virtue and ensure a harmonious, just society where everyone fulfilled their duties without question. He advocated that only tales depicting gods and heroes in a morally upright manner should be permitted to shape the minds of the future guardians of the state.

Aristotle’s Catharsis and Insight: Aristotle, Plato’s student, offered a more positive view in his Poetics. He argued that art, particularly tragedy, was a natural human expression and a valuable form of learning. Through the process of catharsis, the audience could experience intense emotions like pity and fear, leading to a purification or release of these feelings, which restored inner balance and, by extension, social equilibrium. For Aristotle, art did not need to be suppressed; it could provide profound insights into the universal truths of the human condition and help individuals develop a stronger moral character. 

The Literary Discourse: The Power of Expression:

Literary works often served as the very ground for these philosophical debates, showcasing the tensions and dynamics of expression within society. 

Greek Tragedy: As explored by Aristotle, tragedies like those of Sophocles and Euripides confronted audiences with moral dilemmas and human flaws, allowing for a public examination of complex social values and the consequences of transgression. This public engagement with difficult themes, culminating in catharsis, was essential for the community’s emotional and social well-being.

Rhetoric: The Sophists, as noted in the discourse on aesthetics, emphasized the power of expression for persuasion and emotional impact. The debate around rhetoric centered on whether persuasive expression should be tied to truth (as philosophers like Socrates and Plato argued) or if its effectiveness in achieving public ends was enough. The goal of powerful public discourse was to create a convincing argument to ensure the community’s welfare and order. 

Eastern Perspectives: Harmony as Process:

In ancient Chinese philosophy, the concept of harmony (he) was not about a pre-set order or the suppression of difference, but rather a dynamic process of harmonization and balance among different elements. 

Confucianism: Confucius emphasized interpersonal and social harmony through self-cultivation, ethical conduct, and the observance of rituals (li). Expression (such as music and poetry) played a role in reflecting this internal harmony, but the focus was on achieving a “harmony but not sameness” within society, a balance that allowed for coordination and mutual affection rather than strict uniformity. 

In summary, antiquity explored the balance between creative and rhetorical expression and societal well-being through different lenses, ranging from Plato’s restrictive, utilitarian control to Aristotle’s view of art’s inherent educational and therapeutic value, and Eastern philosophies’ emphasis on dynamic harmonization.’

My 2nd Q. – ‘Is freedom of speech an inalienable right under natural law?’

AI – ‘Yes, under natural law theory and Enlightenment philosophy, freedom of speech is widely considered an inalienable right, inherent to human nature, alongside rights to life, liberty, and property, though its practical application and limits are debated across different legal and philosophical traditions. Thinkers like John Locke influenced the American Founders to view it as fundamental, while documents like the French Declaration of the Rights of Man explicitly enshrined it as a natural right, even as legal systems impose necessary limitations for public good. 

Key Concepts:

  • Natural Law: Rights given by nature or God, not by government, making them universal and inherent.
  • Inalienable: Cannot be taken away, given up, or transferred.
  • Connection to Self-Expression: Philosophically tied to human autonomy and the ability to form and share ideas, essential for human dignity. 

Historical & Philosophical Support:

  • John Locke: His ideas on natural rights (life, liberty, property) laid groundwork for free speech as an inalienable aspect of liberty.
  • American Founders: Influenced by Locke, they enshrined freedom of speech in the First Amendment, seeing it as a natural right.
  • French Revolution: The Declaration of the Rights of Man (1789) calls freedom of expression “one of the most precious of the rights of man,” making it an inalienable right. 

Legal vs. Moral Rights:

  • Moral Right: The philosophical ideal that speech shouldn’t be suppressed.
  • Legal Right: Actual laws (like the First Amendment) protect speech but allow for restrictions (e.g., incitement, obscenity) to balance with public safety and order. 

In essence, natural law posits that the ability to express oneself freely is a core part of being human, even if societal laws must define the boundaries of that expression.’

‘My 3rd Q. – ‘How was  the concept that there can be no free speech without equal rights  explored in Antiquity?’

AI – ‘In Antiquity, particularly in ancient Athens, the concept that there can be no free speech without equal rights was explored through the ideal of isegoria, the equal right of all citizens to participate in public debate in the democratic assembly. This concept was foundational to their democracy, though its application was limited to male citizens. 

Isegoria: The Foundation of Equal Speech

  • Definition: Isegoria (ἰσηγορία) literally translates to “equality of public speech” and guaranteed all eligible male citizens, regardless of wealth or social standing, an equal opportunity to address the ekklesia (public assembly) and propose policies.
  • Connection to Equality: This was more than just a privilege; it was considered an essential institutional tool to prevent elite or oligarchic domination of the public agenda and ensure popular control. The historian Herodotus even used isegoria interchangeably with demokratia to describe the Athenian form of government, highlighting its centrality to the ideal of equality.
  • Practical Implementation: To make this equality effective, practical steps were sometimes taken, such as paying poorer citizens to attend the assembly, ensuring their voice counted equally with the rich or well-born. 

Parrhesia: Uninhibited Expression

Alongside isegoria, the Greeks had another concept: parrhesia (παρρησία), the license to speak freely, frankly, and uninhibitedly, saying what one pleased to whom one pleased. 

  • Relationship to Isegoria: While often translated as “freedom of speech,” parrhesia was a broader cultural expectation rather than a formal political right, and it was often practiced outside of formal institutions, such as in the comic theater or the marketplace.
  • Tension: There was an inherent tension between isegoria‘s emphasis on ordered, equal public debate and parrhesia‘s potential for disruptive, potentially offensive speech. Philosophers like Plato were critical of parrhesia, seeing it as potentially leading to social instability and challenging necessary traditions or hierarchies.
  • Risk and Responsibility: Unlike modern free speech which protects the speaker from state action, parrhesia inherently involved risk. A speaker (parrhesiastes) had to sincerely believe their statement was true and helpful to the community, and accept potential consequences for speaking an unwelcome truth to power, such as social isolation or even legal prosecution (as seen in the trial of Socrates). 

Roman Antiquity

In Republican Rome, there were laws concerning slander (iniuria) and regulations on public expression, but the idea of a universal, individual “right” to free speech, as understood through the Athenian lens of isegoria, did not exist in the same way. Roman ideals focused more on a “legal liberty” based on the rule of law and equal rights to due process, rather than an inherent right to political participation or uninhibited public address. 

In sum, the idea that equal rights are a prerequisite for free speech was a foundational principle of Athenian democracy, deeply embedded in the concept of isegoria and distinct from the broader, riskier cultural ideal of parrhesia.’ 

‘My 4th Q. – ‘Is the concept that there can be no free speech without equal rights  a rule of natural law?’

AI – ‘Whether the concept that there can be no free speech without equal rights is a rule of natural law is a subject of philosophical and legal debate, not a definitively established fact.

  • Natural Law Perspective: Natural law posits that certain rights and moral values are inherent in human nature or discoverable through reason, independent of specific government laws. Proponents of this view might argue that both free speech and equal rights are fundamental to human dignity and self-realization, and thus are intrinsically linked as universal, self-evident rights.
  • Contrasting Views: Critics might argue that while desirable, these concepts are social constructs that evolve with societal norms and legal systems, rather than timeless, inherent truths. This perspective holds that rights are the result of legal and political agreements within a society, not a “natural” rule.
  • Legal Systems: In many modern legal frameworks and international declarations, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the U.S. Constitution’s First and Fourteenth Amendments, the two concepts are intertwined and legally protected. For example, a legal challenge to free speech might involve arguing that restrictions unequally affect certain groups, thereby violating equal protection principles. 

In essence, whether this link is considered a “rule of natural law” depends on one’s specific philosophical interpretation of natural law itself. There is no universal consensus on this matter. ‘

‘Wishing a Merry Christmas to all members of Air and Cabin Crew on my LinkedIn Network’

Posted on by

Now, if in a blink of an eye, you think that you saw a kindly looking gentleman with a long white beard, wearing a bright red suit emblazoned with gold buttons, sitting on a sleigh, pulled by 8 reindeer, pass you by in the clear night sky, leaving in their wake a trail of glitter; …

and if Air Traffic Control ask your Chief Pilot – ‘Do you hear what I hear?’ as Santa urges:

‘On Dasher!, On Vixen!, On Dancer!, Prancer!, Comet!, Cupid! and Blitzen! [who incidentally are not professional ballroom dancers on Strictly Come Dancing], On Donner! [nothing to do with kebabs kids], – On Rudolf! – Ho!, – HO!! – HO!!! … ‘,

then you did not imagine it, because NORAD are tracking Santa’s journey around the world in 2025.

See:

https://lnkd.in/eHqMhvfc

In 12 seconds Santa will be flying over Kyoto in Japan!

So, they better watch out!

Meanwhile, wishing all who believe in Santa Claus and read my posts – a ‘Merry Christmas!’

If you need to uplift your spirits, I recommend the following Christmas videos on YouTube:

– ‘Meet Me In St. Louis | Have Yourself A Merry Little Christmas | Warner Classics’.
– Bing Crosby, David Bowie – ‘Peace On Earth / Little Drummer Boy.’
– Andrea Bocelli and the Muppets – ‘Jingle Bells.’
– Andrea Bocelli – ‘Santa Claus Is Coming To Town’.
– ‘Elmo and Michael Bublé’.
– Jose Feliciano – ‘Feliz Navidad.’
– Frank Sinatra and Seal – ‘Santa Claus Is Coming To Town’.
– Michael Bublé & Bing Crosby – ‘White Christmas.’
– Johnny Mathis – ‘Caroling, Caroling / Happy Holiday (from Home for Christmas)’.
– Perry Como – ‘Christmas Dream.’

For all flying tonight, wishing you clear skies and joy at Christmas!

In 32 seconds Santa will be flying over the Great Wall of China!

One hour and 10 minutes until I close up and indulge in a Mince Pie while sitting beside the fire.

The Amazon Christmas sleigh is also on schedule for 4pm, delivering an emergency Cliff Richard CD – ‘Christmas With Cliff’ – so a Christmas 2025 Crisis has been averted on Christmas Eve!, as I discovered yesterday morning that my copy of the great ‘Cliff at Christmas’ CD was worn out. So once Mince Pie hour chimes, I will be singing out loud along to – ‘Let it snow, let it snow, let it snow’ – which is possible, because it is freezing where I am. Brrr … and Yet, with a cheery disposition, I am still dreaming of waking up tomorrow morning to Peace on Earth, and snow on the ground …

In 2 minutes Santa will be flying over Christmas Island! (15:30) (24.12.2025).

Merry Christmas 2025!

Posted on by

Some of my favourite Christmas songs of all time are listed below, and you can download the videos by searching on YouTube:

Merry Christmas!

  • ‘Meet Me In St. Louis | Have Yourself A Merry Little Christmas | Warner Classics’.
  • Bing Crosby, David Bowie – ‘Peace On Earth / Little Drummer
  • Andrea Bocelli and the Muppets – ‘Jingle Bells.’
  • Andrea Bocelli – ‘Santa Claus Is Coming To Town’
  • Elmo and Michael Bublé
  • Jose Feliciano – ‘Feliz Navidad.’
  • Frank Sinatra, Seal – ‘Santa Claus Is Coming To Town’.
  • Michael Bublé & Bing Crosby – ‘White Christmas.’
  • Johnny Mathis – ‘Caroling, Caroling / Happy Holiday (from Home for Christmas)’
  • Perry Como – ‘Christmas Dream.’

YouTube Links:

·        ‘Meet Me In St. Louis | Have Yourself A Merry Little Christmas | Warner Classics’: Meet Me in St. Louis | “Have Yourself a Merry Little Christmas” | Warner Bros. Entertainment

·        Frank Sinatra, Seal – Santa Claus Is Coming To Town: Frank Sinatra, Seal – Santa Claus Is Coming To Town

·        Michael Bublé & Bing Crosby – White Christmas: Michael Bublé & Bing Crosby – White Christmas

‘And on behalf of the Human Race – welcome to this crazy place!’

Posted on by

That phrase is from the lyrics of ‘I watch you sleeping’ – which is a little known and hauntingly beautiful song composed and written by Mike Batt.

The song was written about his son who was born two months prematurely, while he was in the hospital, lending a deep personal resonance to the lyrics. It was for an album Cameron Macintosh was making about Christmas, and Mike Batt later said in an interview that he thought it might be like a ‘little nativity song’.

I am surprised that it has not been performed in a musical in the West End or on Broadway.

The song is on the Album ‘A Songwriter’s Tale by Mike Batt, released in 2008.

You can listen to the song on Amazon Music by searching for the Album.

It may move you to tears!

The song speaks to several profound human truths regarding parenthood, vulnerability, unconditional love, hope, and the desire to protect innocence in a complex world.

I think that the song resonates and holds great meaning today, speaking to innocence, dreams, hope and above all, the unconditional duty of all humanity to watch over and protect children everywhere, irrespective of culture, tribe or religion.

I can imagine this song being adapted for a powerful dramatic performance on the stage, e.g. in a musical about the innocence of children born during war.

Mike Batt is widely considered a significant, though sometimes overlooked, great of the UK music industry, known for diverse success as a songwriter, producer, and conductor, creating iconic hits like ‘Bright Eyes,’ nurturing Katie Melua, masterminding The Wombles, and working with major orchestras, despite being overshadowed by his Wombles work in the public eye. He’s a maverick, mixing pop, rock, and classical, and is admired for his entrepreneurial vision and artistic range.

So perhaps writers and producers will be inspired by ‘I watch you sleeping’, to create a musical about victims of war who have no voice of their own – all children born during war!

A Songwriter’s Tale: A Songwriter’s Tale by Mike Batt: Amazon.co.uk: CDs & Vinyl

‘Quam fluctus diversi, quam mare conjuncti – though the waves are many, the sea is one.’

Posted on by

The overview effect in mediation is a theoretical framework in conflict resolution that adapts the psychological shift experienced by astronauts to help people resolve emotionally charged conflicts.

It proposes expanding a person’s sense of identity and consciousness to facilitate resolution, contrasting with the ‘Tribes Effect’ which can narrow one’s perspective and impede agreement.

The term ‘Overview Effect’ was coined by author Frank White to describe the cognitive shift that astronauts experience when viewing the Earth from space.


This profound experience often leads to:


(i) An intense sense of awe and appreciation for the planet’s beauty and fragility.

(ii) An increased understanding of global interconnectedness.

(iii) A shift in identity from being a citizen of a single nation to an ‘Earthling’ or member of a single humanity.

The phrase ‘Quam fluctus diversi, quam mare conjuncti’ – ‘Though the waves are many, the sea is one’, encapsulates the underlying Mediation and Mediation Advocacy Principle.

In the context of the Harvard International Negotiation Program, the overview effect is used as a metaphor and a methodology to help individuals trapped in conflict situations.

The goal is to induce a similar cognitive shift without going to space:

(i) Expanding Identity: Mediators work to help participants shift from a narrow, conflict-driven identity (e.g., ‘opponent’, ‘victim’) to a broader, shared human identity.

(ii) Broadening Perspective: By encouraging a wider viewpoint, participants are better able to see the ‘whole picture’ rather than being stuck on their immediate grievances, much like an astronaut sees the entire Earth.

(iii) Fostering Empathy and Connection: The process aims to evoke feelings of compassion and connection to others, which can help regulate negative emotions like anger and open new avenues for creative solutions.

This approach draws on Relational Identity Theory to transform how individuals perceive themselves and their relationship to the conflict, thereby improving the chances and quality of a resolution.

The ‘Tribes Effect’ in mediation, a concept built upon relational identity theory by Daniel Shapiro, is an adversarial mindset where parties in a conflict strongly identify with their own group (“tribe”) and view the opposing side as an unchangeable rival. This effect creates several challenges in the mediation process:

  • Ossification of divisions: It hardens the lines between the groups, making the conflict seem like a “we versus they” battle rather than a shared problem to solve.
  • Skepticism about resolution: Parties may become highly doubtful that a peaceful or mutually beneficial resolution is possible.
  • Ethical blind spots: Loyalty to one’s own group can overshadow universal principles of justice or fairness.
  • Out-group bias: It fosters distrust, stereotypes, and prejudice against those outside the immediate group, making collaboration difficult. 

A key aspect is that parties may feel they have limited authority to settle without consulting their influential outside constituents or “tribes,” which can become a barrier to agreement in negotiations. To overcome the ‘Tribes Effect’, mediators may try to induce an “overview effect”, which is an experience that broadens perspectives and creates new possibilities for resolution by emphasizing a shared humanity or common goals that transcend the immediate conflict. Mediators use techniques such as building dialogue, focusing on common interests, and encouraging open communication to mitigate this effect. 

Relational Identity Theory (RIT) is a framework, developed by Daniel L. Shapiro, explaining how group conflicts arise from unaddressed emotional needs for connection (affiliation) and independence (autonomy) within relationships, viewing groups as ‘tribes’ bound by emotion, not just logic, and showing how threats to these bonds cause identity rigidity (the “tribes effect”) leading to polarization, applicable in everything from international disputes to workplace dynamics. It posits identity is fluid, shaped by roles (like manager-subordinate) and relationships, challenging static self-views. Core Concepts

  • Tribes : Groups connected by kind, kin, or emotional investment (e.g., nations, companies, families).
  • Relational Identity Concerns: Fundamental needs for affiliation (belonging) and autonomy (independence) within relationships.
  • Tribes Effect: When relational identity concerns are threatened, emotions trigger rigidification, causing groups to become more polarized and conflict-prone.
  • Role-Relationships: Identity is also shaped by specific roles (e.g., “manager,” “coworker”) and how much individuals identify with them. 

Applications

  • Conflict Management: Helps leaders understand the emotional, tribal underpinnings of conflict, moving beyond objective issues to address deep-seated identity needs.
  • Organizational Behavior: Explains how identities form within workplace roles and relationships, influencing collaboration.
  • Sustainability: Analyzes how perceptions of relationships with others (e.g., nature, future generations) shape motivations for sustainable actions. 

In Contrast to Social Identity Theory:

  • While Social Identity Theory focuses on large, abstract groups (in-groups vs. out-groups) and categorization, RIT emphasizes the specific, emotional bonds within relationships and “tribes,” focusing on affiliation and autonomy needs rather than just social comparison. 

See – ‘Relational Identity Theory A Systematic Approach for Transforming the Emotional Dimension of Conflict’: relational_identity_theory.american_psychologist.pdf

While the term ‘Overview Effect’ is modern (coined by Frank White in the 1980s for astronauts seeing Earth from space), ancient art hints at its core themes—cosmic perspective, interconnectedness, and the fragility of Earth—through early astronomical depictions (Lascaux caves), cosmological maps (Babylonian tablets), philosophical representations of the world in Greek/Roman frescoes (Pomeii), and allegorical scenes showing humanity’s place in the vast cosmos, like in Cicero’s Dream of Scipio. 

Early Celestial & Cosmic Views

  • Lascaux Cave Paintings: These ancient artworks (c. 17,000 years ago) feature animal figures alongside star-like dots, suggesting early humans observed and integrated the cosmos into their worldview, a precursor to understanding Earth’s place in space.
  • Mesopotamian Astonomy: Babylonian clay tablets mapped stars and constellations, showing a deep understanding and reverence for celestial order, a key aspect of cosmic perspective. 

Philosophical & Mythological Interpretations

  • Cicero’s Dream of Scipio (Roman): This literary work describes a vision where Scipio sees Earth as a tiny, fragile speck, realizing its limited habitable space and the fleeting nature of earthly glory, a classic Overview Effect scenario.
  • Greek Philosophers: Thinkers like Plato and Heraclitus explored universal connections and cosmic scales, influencing later artistic interpretations of humanity’s relationship with the vast universe, notes The Cosmologist

Early Attempts at Spatial Depth

  • Egyptian Art: Focused on symbolic representation (profile views, size = importance) rather than realistic space, but laid groundwork for spatial understanding.
  • Roman Frescoes (Pompeii): Artists used layering and diagonal lines to create illusionistic depth, hinting at a desire to depict space and distance, a technical step towards broader spatial awareness. 

Connecting Ancient Art to Modern Themes

  • Ancient art, though lacking satellites, conveyed wonder, scale, and humanity’s small yet significant place within a larger divine or cosmic order, much like the astronauts’ cognitive shift from space, creating a shared human experience of perspective.