examples of topics available for Presentations & Speaking
arrangements by Hans L.D.G. Starlife. This is only a partial
list. For further topics and ideas for your event, please
The Case Against Believing
Do you believe in God? Or do you believe in your football
team? And do you say 'believe' when you actually mean hope
or wish? Perhaps you believe or even 'know' that your team
will win? It's time to refocus the discussion from the various
objects we may have chosen to believe in, to the act of believing,
versus the act of knowing. Also, how come students believing
in a God attend universities fostering a scientific view?
Should religious groups enjoy government benefits? And isn't
religion nowadays more about collective, social and cultural
Natural vs. Cultural Realities
What is real, fair and objective? Basically everything in
society is man-made. We always picture our own realities in
our mind, so called "mindsets". Parents, businesses
& governments also make up various "truths"
fitting their respective objectives. "Truths" which
shapes our values, worldviews & legal systems. But what
about Nature? If conflicting, should invented truths stand
above natural truths? "Political correctedness"
can cause censorship of scientific findings. Could we create
a more fair society based on scientific realities?
Intelligence & Interactivity in Nature
What is Life & Intelligence? Today we know it may not
a biological body; probably not a body at all. What will that
make of our future? Will we become intelligent machines, or
a conscious 'internet'? Scientists now think that consciousness
may arise anywhere you have sufficient neural-like networking.
The key seems to be interactivity. We Humans like to label
things as "either or". But our new holistic view
of Nature rather mirror that of some native peoples, revealing
an interactive, interconnected "weave" where everything
is just "more or less". More or less alive, aware,
etc... a grade difference.
Feelings & Flexibility in Future Society
predict that our machines will soon become so smart they take
over the evolution of civilization. Already, we Humans are
starting to merge with our technologies. Will we lose something
in the process? Our computerized society tends to become less
personal and flexible, forcing us into unwanted standardization
& uniformity. It's either yes or no, nothing in between.
And what about feelings? Can future Human-derived intelligence
still feel love, joy and beauty? Can emotions evolve just
like intelligence, or are they a temporary primitive feature?
Shall we continue to adapt to our systems, even if we lose
this side of ourselves - or should our systems be adapted
Humankind vs. Planet Earth
Western world is poorer now than a couple of decades ago.
We have been taught that in order to save ourselves, we must
limit our activities, resources and growth. But what defines
"ourselves"? In public debate, "Humankind"
and "the Earth" are often used to describe the same
thing. But while our planet may have reached its limits, we
haven't. Growth is natural. It's in our genes, it's the survival
instinct of every life form. If you can expand somewhere,
you will do it. So is it natural or unnatural for our species
to stay on Earth?
Humans, Aliens and Universes
The universe is very old. If advanced alien civilizations
evolved long ago, they should already be here. Unless we are
among the first, the "rare Earth" principle. So
where are they? Maybe they always perish for some reason -
meaning we will too. Or maybe they are here, but being so
godlike we really can't understand it. Or maybe they turn
inwards, living solely in virtual universes. Or maybe they
created us inside a virtual universe? As we seek the
answers, we may also be able to predict our own future destiny,
and that of our universe.
The Globalization of East & West
Public debate is seldom objective on different political systems.
Old "truths" persist in our minds, though the world
is changing. Using two nations he knows well as example, Sweden
and China, Hans turns the usual cliches upside down, discussing
ignored factors behind China's progress and West's decline.
Telling loads of both funny and serious stories, he also explains
how cultural and political globalization leads East and West
to edge closer to each other - from both directions - for
better or for worse.
Who Speaks for Europe?
Some early EU visionaries dreamt of a 'United States of Europe'.
But many citizens & governments didn't share the vision,
afraid of loosing national powers & identities. Too much
compromises, however, may have dilluted the EU into a soulless
and even less popular body. Powers like China & USA also
began with different peoples. Today nobody questions them.
So why EU? Did they fail with the marketing? Who speaks for
Europe? Is there a European interest, or is Europe just the
sum of all its national interests?