Author Archive

Free speech: its past, present and future

Posted on: March 14th, 2023 by mlpEditor

How can we better understand and conceptualise both the benefits and challenges of free speech?

It has been said that ‘free speech is the bulwark of liberty; without it, no free and democratic society has ever been established or thrived’. But how can we protect it whilst addressing legitimate concerns surrounding misinformation and hate speech?

In this online ‘in conversation’ event, Danish lawyer and human-rights advocate, Jacob Mchangama, explores the past, present and future of free speech with Paul Cartledge, Professor of Greek Culture at Cambridge University.

What lessons can the difficulties of invoking the ideal of free speech in the ancient world tell us about the difficulties of operationalizing this ideal in today’s digital world? And how can we create a resilient global culture of free speech that benefits everyone?

Interview with Professor Caroline Jay

Posted on: February 27th, 2023 by mlpEditor

Q: You work at the intersection of Psychology and Computer Science. Why is it important to consider the relationship between human behaviour and machines?

A: If we want technology to work for us, we have to study how we use it. Theories of how we think, feel and behave in general terms can be useful in informing the design process. But they only go so far. This is because using technology itself changes our behaviour. It’s essential to study these things empirically.

“We need to continually reflect on whether technology is working as it should and whether it is having a positive or negative impact on society.”

Q: What can the structure of the machines we build tell us about ourselves as individuals and as a society?

A: We think of machines as objective, but we forget that they are designed by humans. They map very closely to our thought patterns and behaviours. Inadvertently, Artificial intelligence has been great at reflecting back to us some of society’s deep-rooted inequalities.

An example of this is facial recognition technology, which works better for White people than for Black. This is because of the assumptions made by the engineers who created it. It is important to learn from these situations. We need to use their teachings to design better technology and, more importantly, a fairer society.

 

Q: You’ve been studying Psychology and Computer Science for two decades. Have there been any standout, pivotal moments for both your personal research and that of your peers during this time?

A: For many years, Artificial Intelligence has relied on large amounts of data and significant computational power. It is very energy intensive. This is not environmentally sustainable, so we really need to change our approach.

My thinking around this has been influenced by Cynthia Rudin at Duke University, and my close collaborator Alaa Alahmadi. Our work has shown that using human expertise and cognition to inform the design of AI can vastly reduce the amount of data and computation it requires to make decisions. The way in which this kind of AI works is also much more transparent and easier for humans to understand. This goes against the current rhetoric that says ‘the computer knows better than us – give it the data and it will be more efficient and effective’.

Of course, current AI can do some things more effectively than humans, but it is seriously limited in other ways.

“I think in the future hybrid approaches to AI, where humans and machines work together, will become much more widespread.”

Q: What do you think our relationship with technology will look like in 50 years’ time? For example, will the use of technology be more democratised?

A: I’d like to think technology use will become more democratised but, at the moment, it’s becoming more polarised. People who don’t have access to technology for social or economic reasons are becoming excluded from important aspects of society, like banking and education.

As we develop new technologies, we must make sure everyone’s voices are heard, and that people are able to consider how it would affect their lives.

“I’d like to see much greater use of responsible research and innovation practices.”

These ought to evaluate the benefits and harms that new technologies might pose for everyone in society. They should be used earlier on in the design process, so they are not just an add-on, but can truly direct development.

Will humans become extinct through climate change?

Posted on: February 27th, 2023 by mlpEditor

Disasters come in many shapes and sizes. One way of looking at them are by their scope: how much of the world and the future do they affect? And by their severity: how bad are they?

Global catastrophic risks are those that affect the entire world, while existential risks are those that threaten all future generations – typically extinction risks. There are many potential threats in these categories, ranging from asteroid impacts to nuclear war. Most are fortunately unlikely to spell our doom… but there are enough of them to make us rightly concerned about our well-being.

While natural risks are unlikely to cause an end of humanity, human-made risks are. What is the role of climate change in this? Direct extinction by a changed climate is very unlikely: it takes very extreme heat to stop an adaptive, technological species that is spread worldwide.

But climate change poses a systemic threat. By stressing nearly every part of the world as we move into a century with many other risks, powerful emerging technologies, and an interconnected and fragile global system, it can amplify other dangers and make them more likely to coincide into vast disasters.

Climate change may not be the end of the world, but it can certainly help it along. Conversely, some (but not all!) ways of handling climate change can reduce large risks.

Heady days of post-war happenings: the Lit & Phil at 36 George Street

Posted on: February 27th, 2023 by mlpEditor

My late husband, Tom and I became members of the Lit & Phil in 1955. We had been recruited by a Miss Blackledge, who joined in 1953. We had made her acquaintance through our involvement with the Manchester Area Youth Film Council and her Presidential role with the Girls and Lads Club Association.

The registered address at that time was the Portico Library because the Society’s original Georgian house at 36 George Street had been blown up. It was then completely demolished by the Fire Brigade to provide a much-needed fire-break during one of the air raids in the Manchester Blitz.

Lit & Phil Council meetings were held there and the occasional lecture. The first Lit & Phil event we attended was in the Reading Room at the Portico. Although the audience was necessarily small, some of us had to sit on piles of dusty tomes as the Portico itself had not fully recovered from the effects of the Blitz.

Celebrated sculptor Mitzi Cunliffe was a Lit & Phil member

The talk on ‘Abstract Impressionism’ was given by two members – Marcus and Mitzi Cunliffe. Marcus taught American Studies at the University and Mitzi was a sculptor whose best-known work is the golden BAFTA mask, which is still in use at award ceremonies. It was the first Tom and I had heard about Jackson Pollock et al. We were fascinated and decided there and then that joining the Society was a good move and promised an interesting and intriguing future.

There were about 350 members when we joined…Lectures were mostly held in the Reynolds Hall at the Manchester College of Technology (later to become UMIST), at the Whitworth Gallery, and at various venues at Manchester University.

A new home for the Lit & Phil at 36 George Street…

During this time, plans were being made for the construction of a new home on the site of the demolished building in George Street. This was officially opened in September 1960. Tom and I were present at the inaugural address given by the President of the Royal Society, Sir Cyril Hinshelwood, its title being ‘The Arts and the Sciences’, a topic much discussed in intellectual circles at that time. I have a faded photograph of much younger versions of the two of us seated on the second row, on either side of our guest, Jim Whittaker.

During the planning stage, discussions were also held about the best location for the Society’s visual aid equipment – an epidiascope and a slide projector. It just so happened that the Manchester & Salford Film Society, of which Tom was the Chairman, was desperately seeking a new home to continue in its attempts to bring art house and world cinema to the people of Manchester.

…and a new home for the Manchester & Salford Film Society

The Lit & Phil Council’s agreement was obtained for the construction of a proper projection box at the rear of the new building’s lecture theatre, which would accommodate the Film Society’s two 16mm projectors. This would kill two birds with one stone; the Film Society would have somewhere to hold its performances and the Lit & Phil would be able to offer film projection facilities to any organisation hiring the theatre for its meetings. Film Society committee members would act as projectionists when needed…

Experiments with microwaves alongside Empson’s literary criticism

Of the hundreds of lectures I must have attended at George Street, only a few are still vivid in my mind: Henry Lipson’s lecture about microwaves where he made a cake in a crude prototype oven of his own devising. He passed bits of cake to the members present; it was not very nice. Then there was Sir William Empson sporting a beard that looked like Spanish Moss telling us about ‘Seven Kinds of Ambiguity’. I am afraid it was as incomprehensible to many of us as the most erudite and obscure offerings of the Science and Technology Section.

Dreams of bringing contemporary art to the masses

The opening of the new house had a surprising and totally unexpected galvanising effect on a group of the more forward-looking members. I particularly remember Leonard Cohen who owned Henry’s department store on Market Street. His aim in life was to bring art to the masses. He exhibited Epstein’s Adam in the basement of his store and donated a fountain to Piccadilly Gardens.

The new house so inspired him, he conceived the notion that George Street could become the epicentre of artistic activity in Manchester. He actually envisaged a new Opera House could be built between 36 George Street and the Art Gallery. His idea to have an extra storey built on the flat roof of No.36 to house an Arts Workshop accessible from the car park was, as it turned out, a structural impossibility.

As a preliminary step toward achieving some of these ambitions, a group of members including Leonard in their own time and on their own initiative set up the Manchester Institute of Contemporary Art, MICA. They were not to be outdone by London where the Institute of Contemporary Art had just been opened. Most of MICA’s events took place at the Lit & Phil house. Tom was the film officer and I was a committee member. We played to packed houses when films of an experimental and avant-garde nature were screened.

Some of the Lit & Phil members involved in all this activity were, as I hazily recall, Maurice Pariser – who unfortunately died before these dreams could be fulfilled, and Robert Sheldon and Edmund Dell who departed to become Labour Members of Parliament.

But the heady days of post-war optimism didn’t last…

We had the young Seamus Heaney reading his poetry on two occasions, a whole host of North West poets and many up-and-coming artists of the day. These were heady days expressing the general air of post-war optimism that seemed to promise a life more exciting and interesting than heretofore. It was undoubtedly the presence of the new, modern and accommodating building in the centre of Manchester that triggered these ambitious but finally impossible dreams…

Unfortunately, it eventually became apparent that something was radically wrong with the fabric of the building. Cracks began to appear in the walls and the flat roof leaked. The fault lay in the use of high alumina cement in its construction. This was a wonder innovation of the 50’s lauded for its quick-drying properties. The firms involved in the building of the house had gone into liquidation and there was no alternative but to sell the site and become peripatetic until new permanent premises could be found…

 

…Tom died in 2007 at the age of 85 but if he could see us now, he would be greatly gratified to see the (Manchester) Literary & Philosophical Society, of which he was very fond, flourishing and growing in spite of its past vicissitudes. I cannot believe that I have achieved doyenneship of the Society in my 94th year and can still remember listening to Marcus and Mitzi in 1955.

 

This is an extract of an article originally published in 2014 in vol. 152 of the Manchester Memoirs. Huge thanks to Marjorie Ainsworth for her incredible support of the Manchester Lit & Phil since 1955.

Interview with Dr Anders Sandberg

Posted on: January 30th, 2023 by mlpEditor

Q: Do you believe that climate change is the greatest threat to humanity’s long-term survival? If not, what is?

A: Climate change on its own is not the end of the world… but it makes the world worse. It amplifies other risks, and it might make it harder for us to solve the problems we need to solve for our survival. Nuclear war, bioweapons, uncontrolled AI and the fragility of the global supply chains keeping us alive are more direct risks.

“We need a peaceful, prosperous world with less distractions to handle the risks.”

Q: Out of the “low probability, high risk” existential threats that you’ve studied, is there one that you think we’re not talking about enough? Conversely, is there one whose danger we are exaggerating?

A: We used to not talk enough about nuclear war. When I grew up in the 1980s, it was an ever present, ominous threat. As we later found out, there were some extremely close calls where things truly hung in the balance. Then 1990 came. The Eastern Bloc disintegrated, and people seemed to forget about the missiles in their silos. This is despite the many accidents and close calls. For more than 20 years the threat was ignored. Now it’s back in our minds again.

“The moral of this story is that, collectively, we often quickly forget about very important threats.”

One threat that people have conveniently forgotten about today is that of pandemics. We are so tired of Covid. Yet, the important lessons on how to handle the next pandemic (which could be worse) need to be learned.

 

Q: As a Fellow at the University of Oxford Philosophy Faculty, what role can philosophy play in helping us confront such existential risks?

One function of philosophy is to help us figure out the moral value at stake: how bad are these risks compared to others? How do we balance our current needs against those of future generations? How does fairness come in to play? Another function of it is helping us reason under uncertainty: how do we think well about future, unprecedented events? When we know we are uncertain about important things, how should we act? Is it better to be safe than sorry or is it better to wait and see?

“Philosophy is great at working with problems for which we do not yet have a great theoretical understanding. As we figure it out, it often moves into some other specialised department. But thinking wide and abstract about problems is a good start.”

Q: Considering how our over-reliance on technology is one of the primary causes of man-made global warming, how do you think that technology can help us mitigate its risk?

A: Not having technology can also be dangerous. Our ancestors often died from starvation, exposure and disease: they were very vulnerable. Similarly, old-fashioned industry and agriculture tends to be more polluting. It requires more land (hence leading to a shrinking global biodiversity). The solution to climate change involves using low-carbon energy sources. Making agriculture efficient enough so that less land is needed, telework, carbon capture and so on. It is not just about technology, of course, but if going green is cheaper, more luxurious and more convenient than the current practice, it will happen.

Global Citizen: reporting for duty

Posted on: December 5th, 2022 by mlpEditor

What role will today’s and tomorrow’s innovators play in helping us survive and thrive?

The global climate crisis. Famine and drought. Population growth. The battle for diminishing resources. These are no longer visions of some future nightmare. We are facing these challenges today.

Scientists have modelled where we are heading and it doesn’t look good. Protesters have taken to the streets. International targets have been agreed and Governments have laid out their plans.

But will they be enough? Pandemics and conflicts soon knock us off course; deadlines are missed and targets slip. So what can we do to protect our future, deal with today’s issues and learn to live with the extra challenges that are coming down the line?

Our world is evolving quickly. Engineering and Technology are right at the heart of the huge transformation we are experiencing. A career in STEM is becoming more than a career. It is a way of life – a consistent source of boundless creativity.

In this event recording, Yewande Akinola shares her discovery of the roles Innovative Engineering and Technology play in bringing progress and true Sustainability to our world. From the development of our built environment to more specific and intentional problem-solving.

Interview with Yewande Akinola MBE

Posted on: November 23rd, 2022 by mlpEditor

Q: Engineering is such a broad field of study. It requires artistic creativity, rational problem-solving, wild imagination, and a desire to improve the world. As a young student, what drew you to get involved in engineering? 

A: As a child, like most kids, I was drawn to the physical aspect of engineering: form, shape, colour. I didn’t know it as engineering. For a long time, I only knew it as architecture. I was very interested in how I could design better buildings for my family. I was very much drawn to the idea of using creativity to build nicer spaces to be in. 

Q: Can you recall the first time you were inspired by a particular architect, a specific building or structure? 

A: I used to spend a lot of time in the home of an incredible architect called Demas Nwoko. My mum would drop us off there when she was at work. He’s one of Africa’s finest architects. He ensures that his architecture speaks the language of the people of the land. Every aspect of his structures speaks to the history and the culture of the community.  

I loved the fact that the chairs were all hand carved. The tiles in the bathrooms had all been carefully hand-produced. They each told a very deep story. He built the house from materials that surrounded it. He produced the clay using a soil that was very much associated with the area. 

“These days, everybody’s trying to ensure that their architecture speaks to its environment. That it doesn’t take away from the context but adds to it. It tells the story or the history of wherever you are or where you’re situating the building.”

There’s a self-reflective element to the architecture that I experienced as a child. I appreciate that even more now because I can see that many people are trying to get back to that. 

Q: What does it mean for you to be a ‘Global Citizen’ and why should we strive to be one? 

A: I’ve had the incredible opportunity of experiencing many different countries and cultures. Engineering, which is such a beautiful, universal language, has opened the world to me. It’s allowed me to speak the language of lots of different countries by being able to design for them.

I’m on a bit of a mission because we’ve got so many similar challenges all over the world. Yet, we lose so much time and efficiency in our attempts to find local solutions to local problems.

“When one country has a problem, it starts trying to find a solution to a problem that another has already solved. I’ll show the audience how they can use very basic but interesting, creative tools to solve global issues.”

Engineering requires us to rise to the task of solving these problems. We must be courageous and intentional in doing so. 

Q: You’ve mentioned that you don’t consider what you do as ‘a living’ but as ‘your purpose’. Do you have an over-arching mission that you wish to achieve? If so, what is it?

A: To empower a generation of people to solve problems through engineering. By giving them access to education, we can help them understand exactly how they can use their skills to do so. 

Q: What advice do you have for those who seek to find their calling in life and their own way to contribute to society? 

A: For me, the first point is about looking at one’s journey so far, taking stock and being so grateful for it. You already have what you need to take the next step. If you’ve got experience or an interest, think about how you can use that to get yourself there. 

The other thing I would say is that you need to be curious. You need to be willing to ask questions, to Google search to find out who you need to talk to. 

“Purpose is an ongoing thing… You don’t wake up one day knowing all that you’re supposed to be about. It reveals itself through action, the process of trying things.”

By doing, you start to connect the dots.  There’s something beautiful about that. You don’t know where it will lead you but you know what you need to be doing right now, using what you currently have. 

Q: Your career has allowed you to work in many different capacities. Public speaker, TV presenter and engineer. What’s next for Yewande Akinola?  

A: I’m involved in the academic industry. I work as an engineer. I speak at events. I am currently working on a YouTube series intended to inspire young people. This means that I’m now exploring how to write scripts and direct videos.  

If a young person is thinking of becoming an engineer, I want to ensure that they have the resources to do so.

Thank you to Yewande for taking the time to answer our questions.

‘Global Citizen: reporting for duty’ takes place at the National Football Museum on the 29th of November 2022.

A gathering to discuss one of the oldest questions

Posted on: November 21st, 2022 by mlpEditor

By Liam MacGregor-Hastie

They say that “all energy used for brain metabolism is finally transformed into heat”. If so, this cold November night was no match for the neural activity that took place at the Friend’s Meeting House. 

Here, many budding philosophers gathered to carry on a discussion as old as time itself. One that has spanned over 3,000 years and which has gifted us many of our most cherished intellects. From Anselm to Avicenna, from Descartes to Leibniz, from Spinoza to Hume and onwards. Many great philosophers have found fame in their attempts to answer this question:  

“Does God exist?”

We have long been familiar with the ideas that God could either exist or not exist at all. But life isn’t black or white, the Philosophy Forum attendees know this very well. We gathered to discuss the potential alternatives to this dichotomy.

The previous month’s debate, between Philip Goff and Jack Symes, set the tone for this discussion. At Bridge 5 Mill, Manchester, they unpicked different ways of making sense of God.

Finding a rational explanation for God’s existence is no walk in the park. In doing so, we follow in the footsteps of the Enlightenment thinkers.

Those revolutionary thinkers risked their lives in the name of reason itself. Because of them, many years later, we can enjoy such civil and open-minded discussions as we did at the Forum. Here people from all walks of life, atheist and religious, young and old, gladly had their beliefs challenged. 

Between Theism and Atheism stands a chasm of possibility. Could a solution come from ‘depersonalising’ God? By not thinking about ‘it’ as having a human form, can we begin to make sense of God rationally? Can we think of it as a natural process or as a substance that pervades all things?

The aim is not to reach a conclusion but to question our beliefs. ‘Absolute knowledge’ is the antithesis of Philosophy. As one attendee put it: 

…knowledge can only be relative, not absolute. Wisdom comes from accepting this.

All in attendance left the event in good spirits, a little wiser and a little more agnostic than they walked in. 

For a more detailed understanding of what we discussed, click here to read the Focus Paper ‘Is belief beyond the natural beyond belief?’, written by Christopher Burke.

Our next Philosophy Forum meeting will take place on the 12th of December 2022. We will be discussing Utilitarianism, the belief that we should make decisions based on how much pleasure they will give us. Is ‘happiness’ a valid metric for decision making, especially on a large scale?

Manchester: what changed, and what comes next?

Posted on: November 9th, 2022 by mlpEditor

How has Manchester changed to such an extent? And what lessons does its journey hold for other places?

Guardian columnist John Harris and Sunday Times journalist Hannah Al-Othman both have a long-standing interest in how Manchester has been revived and regenerated over the last 30 years, and the big social issues its transformation has highlighted.

Where is Manchester and its surrounding region now heading?

With Boris Johnson’s ideas about “levelling up” apparently fading and Greater Manchester mayor Andy Burnham using his new job to carve out a different kind of politics, there are huge questions to address. Not just for Manchester, for the whole of the country.

John and Hannah share and explore their personal perspectives in this ‘in conversation’ style event.

The Northern Powerhouse: where are we now?

Posted on: November 3rd, 2022 by mlpEditor

The Northern Powerhouse launched over a decade ago, to boost northern economic growth and to rebalance the UK economy. But where are we now?

The government doesn’t talk much about the Northern Powerhouse now, preferring the broader ‘levelling-up’ concept.  But the challenges, and the opportunities, remain. We can’t recreate the old industries. We have to somehow re-invent and re-invigorate areas that have suffered long term economic decline. And it’s not going to be easy.

From here in Manchester, reaching out to Liverpool in the West and Leeds and Sheffield in the East, we have a population of about 8 million.  This is not too dissimilar to London. Could this area become an integrated single market for producers and consumers, with spin-off benefits for the whole of the North?

Lord Jim O’Neill is one of the Northern Powerhouse’s original architects and a major contributor to its early successes. In this talk, he names six individual challenges that have to be solved: education; skills; devolution; business connectivity; transport; and technology infrastructure.  And he is clear that all six will need to be solved if the Powerhouse objectives are to be achieved. So, is the government serious?