Beer And Enlightenment-era Thinkers - An Observation...

Australia & New Zealand Homebrewing Forum

Help Support Australia & New Zealand Homebrewing Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Lecterfan

Yeast, unleashed in the East...
Joined
15/8/10
Messages
2,062
Reaction score
333
Greetings to anyone bored enough to be reading this thread.

I have been on and off this site for about 5 years now (never really posted and always forget my login and password so have to make a new profile every 18 months haha). It has consistently been a robust and reliable source of information. It has also, as with all open internet forums, been a highly entertaining, if somewhat voyeuristic, exercise in observing the interactions of people with vastly different views etc.

And because I finish Uni early on a Friday afternoon, I have had a couple of ales and thought I'd offer an observation.

There seem to (very roughly) be 3 Enlightenment-era categories of brewer that predominate.

The first is the Kant-ian brewer. The Kant-ian brewer is a deontologist. For them it is the act of brewing that is important. If things are done correctly (and in many cases this is what many non-Kant-ians would consider a reasonably complex procedure), then no major forethought need be devoted to the consequence of the brewing (other than to avoid making poor choices e.g. temperature, recipe formulation etc...but even these are considerations to be made in the actions of brewing, and mostly to avoid negative consequences). The deontological brewer decrees "if things are done correctly then by necessity a delightful and technically superior beer will follow". And I am sure that they are absolutely validated in their motto.

Then we have the Mills and Bentham brewer (MBB). The MBB is a Utilitarian...whatever results in the best beer with the least pain is the path followed by the MBB. The MBB is entirely concerned with the consequences of their actions...taking cues from the Empiricists, the MBB cries "it is with mine own senses that I doth drinketh of this beer, no other. To me the final product is of utmost importance; if the quality of the final product outweighs the initial effort and expense which the product demands then all is good". And I am sure also that they are validated in their thinking.

Finally we have the Hegel-ian Brewer. The Hegel-ian brewer sees the Thesis (the most technically superior brew can only come from intensive and rigorous scientific method using a number of traditional and progressive techniques with a certain quantity of traditional and progressive equipment), then sees the Antithesis (the end result is the most important, I cannot afford/understand and/or am unwilling/unable to worship at the feet of the Thesis and as long as my product tastes great I don't care if I was out by a few degrees or dont sparge the same way as others), and naturally moves finally to a Synthesis (while my end product is very important, there is much to be learned from the traditional AND the progressive and a certain amount of rigorous technique will improve both my beers and my knowledge). They also are validated in their thinking.

So, as we seenone are objectively better, but all are different. It is in this variation that we should rejoice. And finally, lets not forget that it is often the attempt to objectively judge things that leads to homogenous, unsound and unsustainable outcomes (just look at what international standards have done to some show dogs). Consistency within one brewer's practices is great, consistency between all brewers leads to megaswill. At the end of the day (to borrow from more Enlightenment thinkers, Berkeley and Hume) one persons Duvel is another persons cat piss flavour may well be objective (two people can identify the same hop), but whether it is nice or not is subjective (person A loves Amarillo, person B cant stand it).

Hope this didnt annoy anyone (hopefully it made someone chuckle), and if you think the Enlightenment era is too recent, I have an excellent analogy about homebrewing and ancient Greek philosophy also. Socratic brewing...hmmmm

Great site, great bunch of brewers.

Have a great weekend everyone.

Edit: Apologies if this should have been posted elsewhere on the forum.
 
And the wise men did came and said unto Jesus "You are the eschatological manifestation of the ground of our being, the kerygma of which we find the ultimate meaning in our interpersonal relationships"

And Jesus said "What?"



Welcome to the forums....
 
Welcome to the forum

I'm particularly interested in the Millsean aspects of brewing, as Utilitarianism - at first glance - seems to recommend that we should all do whatever we want as long as it does not harm others. However over the subsequent couple of centuries, Utilitarianism has been hi-jacked by most Western Democratic civilisations as a working plan, but has been corrupted into areas such as:

You must wear a bike helmet because if you fall off and break your skull you are harming other taxpayers who have to pay for your medical bills.
You must not drink more than a couple of trivial beers a day for similar reasons.

The thing I love about Hegel is that his philosophy spawned two threads:

Right Hegelism that was adopted ultimately by Fascists (especially during the rise of the German Right) and:
Left Hegelism that was developed by Marxism and Communism

Leading eventually to arguably the most catastrophic War in the history of mankind, the deaths of tens of millions and the destruction of entire cities. By which time Hegel was dead a century.


******* <_<
 
Which school of philosophy best describes the choice of acting the victim as a means of waiving one's responsibilities in the citizenry, Bribie? Life ain't that grim, fella. Turn the telly off once in a while.
 
That's all I need. The application of philosophy into my brewing process :) The minimalist can just stick some grain into hot water, stir, decant and ferment.
 
Aha Bum you've hit it in one, and nothing to do with TV.

Most people live their life without ever thinking about how things "came to be" . "Reality is reality and if you can't hack that then there's something wrong with you, stop dreaming loser ."
I was the same, but a few years ago I had the opportunity to go to UNE to study philosophy and in my first semester got my eyes opened.

For example ask somebody today what their main values are, then go back 400 years ago in your time machine, grab Mr or Mrs Average and ask them:

I love my family, my main aim is to be a normal citizen of my village, to go to heaven,by living without sin and damnation following the orders of my priest, to obey and love the King and realise my true place in society.

I love my family but I am an individual and want to travel, go to uni and get degrees, have a full and varied sexual life, make heaps of money, drive a superb car..................................

What's changed?

Yes Phil 101 is a good start, it gives you the good oil. It can do your head in as well :icon_cheers:
 
I'm sure there is something in this topic....will re-read after 6 tallie's..... :)
 
Some Plagiarism...................but still

free-sign-smileys-982.gif


Screwy
 
You sir have earnt a beer, deeply insightful however I get that way after a few brews myself.
 
Greetings to anyone bored enough to be reading this thread.

I have been on and off this site for about 5 years now (never really posted and always forget my login and password so have to make a new profile every 18 months haha). It has consistently been a robust and reliable source of information. It has also, as with all open internet forums, been a highly entertaining, if somewhat voyeuristic, exercise in observing the interactions of people with vastly different views etc.

And because I finish Uni early on a Friday afternoon, I have had a couple of ales and thought I'd offer an observation.

There seem to (very roughly) be 3 Enlightenment-era categories of brewer that predominate.

The first is the Kant-ian brewer. The Kant-ian brewer is a deontologist. For them it is the act of brewing that is important. If things are done correctly (and in many cases this is what many non-Kant-ians would consider a reasonably complex procedure), then no major forethought need be devoted to the consequence of the brewing (other than to avoid making poor choices e.g. temperature, recipe formulation etc...but even these are considerations to be made in the actions of brewing, and mostly to avoid negative consequences). The deontological brewer decrees "if things are done correctly then by necessity a delightful and technically superior beer will follow". And I am sure that they are absolutely validated in their motto.

Then we have the Mills and Bentham brewer (MBB). The MBB is a Utilitarian...whatever results in the best beer with the least pain is the path followed by the MBB. The MBB is entirely concerned with the consequences of their actions...taking cues from the Empiricists, the MBB cries "it is with mine own senses that I doth drinketh of this beer, no other. To me the final product is of utmost importance; if the quality of the final product outweighs the initial effort and expense which the product demands then all is good". And I am sure also that they are validated in their thinking.

Finally we have the Hegel-ian Brewer. The Hegel-ian brewer sees the Thesis (the most technically superior brew can only come from intensive and rigorous scientific method using a number of traditional and progressive techniques with a certain quantity of traditional and progressive equipment), then sees the Antithesis (the end result is the most important, I cannot afford/understand and/or am unwilling/unable to worship at the feet of the Thesis and as long as my product tastes great I don't care if I was out by a few degrees or dont sparge the same way as others), and naturally moves finally to a Synthesis (while my end product is very important, there is much to be learned from the traditional AND the progressive and a certain amount of rigorous technique will improve both my beers and my knowledge). They also are validated in their thinking.

So, as we seenone are objectively better, but all are different. It is in this variation that we should rejoice. And finally, lets not forget that it is often the attempt to objectively judge things that leads to homogenous, unsound and unsustainable outcomes (just look at what international standards have done to some show dogs). Consistency within one brewer's practices is great, consistency between all brewers leads to megaswill. At the end of the day (to borrow from more Enlightenment thinkers, Berkeley and Hume) one persons Duvel is another persons cat piss flavour may well be objective (two people can identify the same hop), but whether it is nice or not is subjective (person A loves Amarillo, person B cant stand it).

Hope this didnt annoy anyone (hopefully it made someone chuckle), and if you think the Enlightenment era is too recent, I have an excellent analogy about homebrewing and ancient Greek philosophy also. Socratic brewing...hmmmm

Great site, great bunch of brewers.

Have a great weekend everyone.

Edit: Apologies if this should have been posted elsewhere on the forum.

I disagree i think?
 
You sir have earnt a beer, deeply insightful however I get that way after a few brews myself.


Yeah me too... but nowhere near as coherent :icon_drunk:

-edit-
e.g.: I once posted that I thought I could easily make a brew that tasted better than a Coopers Sparkling..... (but then again I was drinking it "warm" because the fridge was full)
 
Well, sorry to those who I upset, sorry to those who think I was plagiarising (not sure who precisely I was allegedly plagiarising) , this was meant to be a lighthearted commentary on brewing. Anyone who read more into it than that is illustrating post-modernism in action.

In fact it is fair to say that any derogatory comments towarrds this post are wonderful examples of why this is probably also my last post. Life is too short to care what faceless others say (although to be fair I wouldn't have posted in the first place if I was truly that at-peace with myself). I shall silently return to the realm of the internet lurker who reads but does not comment for fear of upsetting those who have lots of stars (or kegs or other internet icons) next to their online log-in name.

Thank you to those who took it in the spirit it was intended.
 
I don't think anyone got upset.

I think most/all comments were positive.

Philosophers are sensitive types.
 
Yeah, tue, I re-read that post after another beer and realised what a sook I sounded like haha. Anyway, whatever, I'm just having a laugh, hopefully everyone else is. I guess maybe I'm just not cut out for the medium...

I must say many of your posts have been very informative though. Good on ya Manticle.
 
Yeah, tue, I re-read that post after another beer and realised what a sook I sounded like haha. Anyway, whatever, I'm just having a laugh, hopefully everyone else is. I guess maybe I'm just not cut out for the medium...

I must say many of your posts have been very informative though. Good on ya Manticle.

It's all good mate, the more view points/jokes/laughs the better......hope you continue to post.
 
Well, sorry to those who I upset, sorry to those who think I was plagiarising (not sure who precisely I was allegedly plagiarising) , this was meant to be a lighthearted commentary on brewing. Anyone who read more into it than that is illustrating post-modernism in action.

In fact it is fair to say that any derogatory comments towarrds this post are wonderful examples of why this is probably also my last post. Life is too short to care what faceless others say (although to be fair I wouldn't have posted in the first place if I was truly that at-peace with myself). I shall silently return to the realm of the internet lurker who reads but does not comment for fear of upsetting those who have lots of stars (or kegs or other internet icons) next to their online log-in name.

Thank you to those who took it in the spirit it was intended.

You'll excuse me for pointing out that you haven't taken that one comment very philosophically!! I recommend Socrates & and particularly Seneca.
All the same it'd be a pity to have one less
 
Completely correct, I concede. It was an emotive and acohol fuelled "knee jerk" reaction. I am new to posting and overly sensitive. Still, you could say I reacted from an existential perspective, so just not in a stoic, or a Socratically logically fashion (but philosophical none the less haha).

I'm over it but alas the tragedy of the interent means that unless I delete/edit my post (forever acknowledging the disgrace and shaming myself in the act) I have to deal with the repercussions of sounding like a bloody idiot haha.

Oh well, in another week or so someone will bring up some topic about hops or mash technique that will draw attention away from me. Not quite the illustrious debut I could have wanted, but only myself to blame. An interesting pattern in my life.

Still, how about I shut the f*ck up and we just talk about brewing beer and I'll post feeble attempts at humour in another forum haha?!

NEXT TOPIC... :icon_cheers: (shakes head in embarrasment)
 
Or just don't worry about it and continue as you were?

There's been more embarssing gaffes on here than that and those people are still posting.
 
bloody social science students.... ;)

or are you doing the brewing diploma at UB?

Welcome aboard - great way to make an entrance!
 

Latest posts

Back
Top