Bruno: you wrote:

*The US constitution is very good, but is not really followed, and things
like prohibition have put bandits into power, who have broken the important
separation of powers.*
*Lobbying and the role of money in politics should be revised. But we are a
bit out of topic here, I think.*
*
*
Out of topic of "everything"? OK, OK, I know. But the US Constitution (IMO)
HAS BEEN very good in a 300+ year old societal view - drawn by duelling,
pipe-smoking, hunting male chauvinist slave-owner despots to organize the
'colonies' NOT TO PAY taxes to the King of England. Now, the Supreme
Court's "oldies" (probably younger than me) valuate the 18th c. language
for the 21st c. life in a many times skewed sense.
*Lobbying *I call "buying votes" for a special interest, *money* is not
"talk" and *corporation* is not a 'person' (as e.g. a citizen). And so on.
JM


On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 3:39 AM, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:

>
> On 06 Oct 2013, at 18:08, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
>
> Some academies are just prostituted to rotten (sometime) politics, often
>> just to get enough funding to survive.
>>
>> Money is not the problem. Black, obscure and grey money is the problem.
>>
>> Wait, this is indeed the most fundamental question!
>
> *How knowledge interact with money and power in society and convert
> itself in beliefs as a system that prevent further knowledge must be an
> integral part of research. *
> *
> *
> *For me this meta-knowledge about knowledge faith and power is a more
> fundamental question than knowledge itself.*
>
>> -------
>
> I think that people don' t want knowledge primarily.
>
>
> Ha Ha ... That reminds me when my father told me that truth is what humans
> fear the most and like the less.
>
>
>
> What they aim at, is like any living being, and in fact, like any stable
> dynamic auto-regulated structure, is * to reduce uncertainty*.
>
>
> The humans oscillate between security/certainty/control and
> freedom/uncertainty/universality. Basically that is why we vote, to have a
> sort of equilibrium in between.
>
>
>
>
> That fit with many considerations at different levels, and embrace
> conclussions of evolution, game theory, computability, social science
> psychology and entropy.
>
>
>  That explain how knowledge interact with power (and money and you wish)
> and faith. As I will explain:
>
> To reduce uncertainty can be achieved adquiring pure knowledge of the
> world around in order to predict better the future.
>
> But it can also be achieved by adquiring for themselves money or power, or
> love from other people, or commitment from tem, or respect, or common
> commintment to something or someone.
>
> The fact is that pure knowledge is not enoug. Money is not enough, power
> is not enough, since neither of them work without a committed society that
> make use of this knowledge in an organized way, that respect the money
> value and other properties, that has fair mechanism for adquiring power and
> legitimacy, and more that that, a society with a  clear plan for our
> sibiling and generations to come.
>
> Thinking materialistically (I´m not but for a matter of argument) there is
> no social vehicle for our genes if the society have all these requirements,
> and, more important, no people that had not these requirements ullfilled
> survived, so we have inherited this natural seeking for all these kinds of
> uncertainty reduction mechanism around us.
>
> Some societies make enphasis in one kind of uncertainty reduction. Others
> rely more in other different in this equation. These different uncertainty
> reduction alternatives are one against the other. A strict hiearchi of
> power and legitimacy based on an enforced supernatural plan is a excellent
> uncertainty reduction for a stable society that does not need to change. In
> the other side, adquring knowledge is good, but that may challenge the
> structure, questionin legitimacies and creating civil wars, that can be
> pacific or violent. When there is no common plans nor loyaltyes, the
> pacific disputes become violent almos by defintion.
>
> A lot of philosophy on all their branches can be extracted from this
> starting point.
>
>
> The US constitution is very good, but is not really followed, and things
> like prohibition have put bandits into power, who have broken the important
> separation of powers.
>
> Lobbying and the role of money in politics should be revised. But we are a
> bit out of topic here, I think.
>
> Bruno
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>
>
> http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
>
>
>
>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to