Commemorating Bertrand Russell’s 150th birthday: Is the Universe or the Multiverse (Un) just?

 

By Dr Myint Zan

Tributes to Bertrand Russell in newspapers in Burma on his death in February 1970

 

O NE hundred and fifty years ago on 18 May 1872, the philosopher Bertrand Russell (18 May 1872- 2 February 1970) was born. During his long life, Bertrand Russell wrote many philosophical and related books, and treatises: their length might well exceed a million words. Books about him and his philosophy written before and after his death may also exceed a million words.

 

When Russell died on 2 February 1970, The Working People’s Daily (predecessor to The Global New Light of Myanmar) carried the news on the front page in its 4 February 1970 issue. The Guardian (Rangoon, Burma not from the UK) which ceased publication sometime after September 1988 editorialized under a two-word headline ‘Bertrand Russell’ in its 5 February 1970 issue. Another article ‘Russell: The Logician’ written by then Lecturer in the Department of Philosophy at the University of Mandalay (Daw) Kyi Kyi Hla (born 1932) was published in the 27 February 1970 issue of The Working People’s Daily. These are only a few of the articles (written in English there are quite a few written in Burmese also) that appeared in newspapers and magazines in the aftermath of Russell’s death.

 

Russell as a sceptic: editorial of 1970 and title of the book published 1958

The first sentence in The Guardian [Rangoon] editorial of 5 February 1970 was ‘World’s greatest philosopher and sceptic died at the age of 97’ [It is reproduced here as it was published, shouldn’t it be ‘one of 20th century greatest philosophers’?].

 

This comment on the occasion of the 150th anniversary of Russell’s birth would focus on the four words that he apparently uttered in an interview. Those were stated to one of his biographers Alan Wood whose book Russell: The Passionate Sceptic was first published in 1958. In the book (from what I recall) his biographer asked Russell why there shouldn’t be an after-life somewhere (in the Universe if not on Earth) so that people who have suffered injustice, deprivations and suffering in this life can be compensated in the after-life (or to put in more religious terms) in the ‘hereafter’.

 

‘The Universe is Unjust’?

From what I recall Russell then (i.e., the year 1957) in his mid-eighties pondered a while before apparently answering ‘The Universe is unjust’. In that particular context the comment revealed Russell’s scepticism of, indeed non-belief, in an after-life as befitting both the title of Alan Wood’s biography The Passionate Sceptic and the first sentence of The Guardian (Rangoon)’s editorial ‘... World’s greatest philosopher and sceptic’. Russell’s statement could well be responded to as a friend of this writer did by asserting that ‘it is futile to even attempt to ascribe justice or injustice to the universe. The universe simply just is’.

 

Bertrand Russell certainly realized that it is ‘futile to even attempt to ascribe justice to the universe’. He was responding to the belief or perhaps to him (though not to hundreds of millions of other persons throughout the world and through the ages) the pious hope for better things in an after-life. In order to compensate for the deprivations, suffering, and injustices suffered by some (good) people there should be someplace on Earth (or elsewhere in the Universe!) where the injustices and suffering in the previous life were to be compensated was perhaps the point of the query posed to Russell.

 

I submit that when Russell expressed his scepticism if not rejection of that proposal expounded above, he was not (not) being amoral: he would have said he was being both sceptical and realistic.

 

One could add that the desire, the wish, the act of ‘attributing’ good/bad, justice/injustice, pleasing the gods/fear of angering the gods and propitiating them were the factors that led to the development of at least primitive religions and perhaps not so primitive ones as well.

 

The ‘Big Bang’ as the Beginning?

Several decades ago, I recall reading somewhere that ‘the Universe is a phenomenon flowing from the infinite past to the infinite future heedless of our miseries and desires’.

 

Later, I came to learn that at least as far as the ‘Big Bang’ model in cosmology is concerned the Universe did not ‘flow’ from the ‘infinite past’ since the (current?) universe came into being? /existence/ from a ‘singularity’ through the ‘Big Bang’ about 13.8 billion years (1,380,000,000) years ago. The Big Bang model of the (THIS, see below) Universe was first proposed mainly by the astronomer and cosmologist George Lemaitre (17 July 1894-20 June 1966) in the early 1930s. In the mid1950s the ‘Big Bang’ theory came to be generally accepted by perhaps most cosmologists. That was the time when Russell used the word ‘the Universe’ as a singular noun denoting, arguably, the (philosophical) monist position. One cosmological query: under the Big Bang theory or postulate is would the Universe expands forever (and forever) or at some point, billions and billions of years in the future will it collapse on itself in a ‘Big Crunch’? This issue or problematique (to use a French word) is cosmological, not philosophical or ethical in that concerns about human justice do not factor in here. (But see the concluding sentences of my tribute to Russell below).

 

Multiverse: ‘Infinite Past to the Infinite Future’?

Arguably, in the 1950s, the cosmological concept of ‘multiverse’ has not been seriously or even tentatively proposed by some astronomers and cosmologists. Perhaps it was in the 1980s that cosmologist Andre Linde (born 2 March 1948) and others proposed the ‘multiverse’ theory (in cosmology not in poetry!) where THIS Universe is (was?) one among many other (countless) Universe(s) (so to speak). That idea, hypothesis (or is it a ‘construct’?) is designated as ‘multiverse’ by cosmologists. The late theoretical physicist Victor Stenger (29 January 1935- 25 August 2014) in his posthumously published God and the Multiverse also endorsed the ‘multiverse’ hypothesis. Hence instead of a beginning in THIS Universe, there could be no beginning or indeed no ‘end’ in the multiverse cosmology. The statement that the Universe is a phenomenon ‘flowing from the infinite past to the infinite future’ apparently does/did not fully ‘fit’ the Big Bang hypothesis. But it may be applicable to the multiverse cosmology except that the phraseology would be ‘multiverse is/are (rather than ‘the Universe is’) flowing from the infinite past to the infinite future’. Still, it should be mentioned that multiverse cosmology is not (from this writer’s limited understanding) — to paraphrase a law term ‘settled law’ — ‘settled science’. It could perhaps ‘complement’ rather than replace the Big Bang hypothesis for THIS Universe.

 

Bertrand Russell’s dedicated efforts for social justice and the welfare of humanity

It is to be repeated and emphasized here that Bertrand Russell was not attributing unjustness to the Universe (or for that matter) multiverse. As a philosopher who apparently adhered to no religion, Russell was using it as a metaphor to state his (again) scepticism of certain metaphysical claims or hopes.

 

‘The Universe is or may be unjust’ but Bertrand Russell had for most of his long life right into his late 90s made tireless efforts for social, political and economic justice and the welfare of humanity. On the occasion of his 150th birthday tributes and recognition are due again to what Time magazine in its obituary of Russell in the February 16, 1970 issue described as the ‘colossus of 20th-century philosophical thought’.

 

ဘာထရွန်ရပ်ဆယ်သို့

ဘာသာပြန်သူ- ဒေါက်တာမြင့်ဇံ

မူရင်းစာဆို- မမှတ်မိ

ကမ္ဘာတလွှား၊ ငြိမ်းချမ်းလေအောင်

သူစွမ်းဆောင်လည်း

ငြိမ်းချမ်းသည်မှာ၊ သူလျှင်သာတည်း

မြေမှာဆိတ်ဆိတ်၊ လျောင်းအိပ်လျက်တည်း။

 

A short poem in Burmese (I have forgotten the name of the author) which I recall reading a few months after Russell’s death reads in my translation:

 

To Bertrand Russell

(I forgot the name of the author who wrote in Burmese)

Translated by Myint Zan

 

for peace throughout the world

he strived

now he is at peace himself:

silently reposing on the earth

 

Dr Myint Zan, a retired Professor of Law, taught human rights law, international law and Jurisprudence (legal philosophy) at Multimedia University, Malacca, Malaysia from 2007 to 2016. He has established a Myint Zan Fellowship in Philosophy for early career researchers at one of his alma maters The Australian National University (ANU) for the years 2018 to 2021. Four academics have visited the ANU for Myint Zan Fellowship in Philosophy. He had also established in perpetuity the Myint Zan prize in the Philosophy of Science for undergraduates at the Department of Philosophy at ANU. Three students have been awarded the Myint Zan Philosophy of Science prize between 2018 and 2020.