Still the age old dilemma, damsel in distress. Your the hero arch,
called to the rescue, slay the slip and save the day. I'm quite
devastated by the rejection and will resign to the temperate zone of
the cooler where I may turn Blue, thereby delaying your poetic
recital. I had a moment when I was Green with envy but my skin tones
returned to fleshly hues, not that I didn't feel a bit Yellow after
the suggestion of a firearm attack against me. Orange you glad it
didn't have to happen? Better this than maybe Molly had given me a
Black eye. It's all quite embarrassing really and I'm slightly Red in
the face. I'm just a Silver tooth devil anyway, what the heck, so I
don't have any Gold teeth. There may be Gray skies but it's still a
colorful world isn't it? {;-)
On Feb 23, 7:36 pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
> Long gone Molly - though I've just dug them up for a novel. Sex in
> the sequel to Catch 22 (Closing Time) was merely the touch of a hand
> to a slip. I am merely the Horse from Don Quixote thrown up again to
> wonder what the fools are up to in my sense of reality. We could do
> with Bat Masterson around here - though my guess is he used a large
> piece of wood. Decent jobs and dignity would kill off more crime
> round here than even one of my old teams. I'll read some of my poetry
> if Slip turns purple!
>
> On 23 Feb, 16:00, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > I can see that Neil, the chaperon, will be needed to maintain social
> > propriety. Don't forget your firearm and badge, Neil.
>
> > On Feb 23, 10:11 am, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > So now I'm your Pink Slip! Yeehaaa! Fire and Wine! I'm howlin!
>
> > > *running the cold shower*
>
> > > On Feb 23, 8:59 am, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > My mom taught me never to let my slip show, but I can see we are back
> > > > to the fire lit night and bottle of wine, good for a group howl.
>
> > > > On Feb 22, 4:48 pm, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > Well I'm thinking that I'm either Molly's "Friend Slip" or her
> > > > > "Freudian Slip", hoping to find out soon!
>
> > > > > On Feb 22, 3:40 pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Fiend might be better than Saint Slip given the sanctification of
> > > > > > Foucault by some! Wait until the moon is up before you howl Slip
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > you'll hear my echo ...
>
> > > > > > On 22 Feb, 21:07, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Fiend? *howls really loud*
>
> > > > > > > On Feb 22, 2:57 pm, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > Very insightful, as usual, my fiend Slip.
>
> > > > > > > > On Feb 22, 3:49 pm, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > Gee Molly, you must have much To Do to typo a To To for a Do
> > > > > > > > > To. Busy
> > > > > > > > > are we?
>
> > > > > > > > > Miss your more in depth out looks. {:-)
>
> > > > > > > > > On Feb 22, 12:08 pm, Molly Brogan <[email protected]>
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > And by the way, moderators, many, many thanks for all that
> > > > > > > > > > you to to
> > > > > > > > > > allow these conversations. You are appreciated.
>
> > > > > > > > > > On Feb 22, 11:01 am, Kierkecraig <[email protected]>
> > > > > > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Betty,
> > > > > > > > > > > You probably joined the group and choose to receive
> > > > > > > > > > > updates via
> > > > > > > > > > > email. Change your settings to no email if you do not
> > > > > > > > > > > wish to receive
> > > > > > > > > > > email updates.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > On Feb 22, 1:18 am, Betty Boop <[email protected]>
> > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Sun, 2/22/09, Vamadevananda
> > > > > > > > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > ok im a bit lost as to why i am recieving everyones
> > > > > > > > > > > > mail but none is directed at me????/ could you answer
> > > > > > > > > > > > that for me
> > > > > > > > > > > > From: Vamadevananda <[email protected]>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: [Mind's Eye] Re: Say it ain't so....
> > > > > > > > > > > > To: ""Minds Eye"" <[email protected]>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Date: Sunday, February 22, 2009, 8:16 AM
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Could we keep Goffman, Ludwig, Lyotard, etc. aside for
> > > > > > > > > > > > a moment,
> > > > > > > > > > > > Neil ! It is very easy to lose focus between the two
> > > > > > > > > > > > virtues of
> > > > > > > > > > > > listening and expressing, the kind you espouse.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > The point is you like Chaz and would like to have him
> > > > > > > > > > > > back. Keeping
> > > > > > > > > > > > KC's offering in mind, the question was of maintaining
> > > > > > > > > > > > order on this
> > > > > > > > > > > > forum. Which that involves isn't restrictive at all :
> > > > > > > > > > > > it just
> > > > > > > > > > > > requires that one is verbally meaningful, polite and
> > > > > > > > > > > > respectful
> > > > > > > > > > > > towards each other. Do you disagree with that, this one
> > > > > > > > > > > > basic need of
> > > > > > > > > > > > ensuring order ?
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > And, how does one ensure that order without shutting
> > > > > > > > > > > > out the spammers
> > > > > > > > > > > > and the deviants, the latter who continue to display
> > > > > > > > > > > > obnoxious
> > > > > > > > > > > > ( verbal ) behaviour despite having been given a long
> > > > > > > > > > > > rope in terms of
> > > > > > > > > > > > caution and warnings ?
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > I see this happenning as being more procedureal than
> > > > > > > > > > > > philosophical !
> > > > > > > > > > > > Much as I envy your erudition, I also suspect that it
> > > > > > > > > > > > can be
> > > > > > > > > > > > debilitating.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > On 21 Feb, 20:22, archytas <[email protected]>
> > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > The question, I guess Molly, would be how we might
> > > > > > > > > > > > > get the spirit into
> > > > > > > > > > > > > our due process. We fail almost entirely in the UK
> > > > > > > > > > > > > because we can't
> > > > > > > > > > > > > work out what fair expression is and don't do proper
> > > > > > > > > > > > > investigations.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Goffman got a lot right in terms of what is said in
> > > > > > > > > > > > > different places
> > > > > > > > > > > > > and contexts, and I remember a reference to a British
> > > > > > > > > > > > > bureaucrat in
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 1941 pointing out the 'economical with the truth'
> > > > > > > > > > > > > strategy - the best
> > > > > > > > > > > > > answers one could ever draft being so meaningless as
> > > > > > > > > > > > > not to allow
> > > > > > > > > > > > > critique or even understanding. Aggression is often
> > > > > > > > > > > > > conflated with
> > > > > > > > > > > > > frustration and a kind of righteous indignation we
> > > > > > > > > > > > > should take more
> > > > > > > > > > > > > account of. I guess the need to sort out spam and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > snerting etc. must
> > > > > > > > > > > > > run up against the ideal of wanting anyone to be able
> > > > > > > > > > > > > to have their
> > > > > > > > > > > > > say. What kills me off in the general run of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > information in the media
> > > > > > > > > > > > > is that they never get beyond a class view or seem to
> > > > > > > > > > > > > understand this
> > > > > > > > > > > > > isn't balance, but prejudice. Even this runs to a
> > > > > > > > > > > > > defence of the Sun
> > > > > > > > > > > > > if not careful (our main grim tabloid). I often get
> > > > > > > > > > > > > a 'let them eat
> > > > > > > > > > > > > cake' feeling.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > There is a need to spit in the face of smiling
> > > > > > > > > > > > > brotherhoods - yet the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > spit is often merely to say this isn't working for me
> > > > > > > > > > > > > and is hurting
> > > > > > > > > > > > > me. There is a key inertial violence in our systems
> > > > > > > > > > > > > - standard
> > > > > > > > > > > > > academic work would refer to paranoid-schizoid and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > depressive
> > > > > > > > > > > > > positions - but even to say this is to be confused
> > > > > > > > > > > > > with claiming
> > > > > > > > > > > > > people are paranoid-schizoid as an insult. One is
> > > > > > > > > > > > > generally forced to
> > > > > > > > > > > > > be a supplicant to those with the power to exclude
> > > > > > > > > > > > > evidence. Evidence
> > > > > > > > > > > > > itself becomes an instrument of torture - perhaps as
> > > > > > > > > > > > > claims to provide
> > > > > > > > > > > > > evidence might be used against some of your
> > > > > > > > > > > > > prose-ideas (which are
> > > > > > > > > > > > > often a source of comfort to me). I really don't
> > > > > > > > > > > > > want to be
> > > > > > > > > > > > > distracted by bone pointers when trying to discuss
> > > > > > > > > > > > > methyl effects in
> > > > > > > > > > > > > epigenetics - but there is an equal distraction from
> > > > > > > > > > > > > scientistic
> > > > > > > > > > > > > boneheads amongst the phenomenological-experiential.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > This used to be put in terms of competing paradigms,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > or analytic
> > > > > > > > > > > > > versus immanent critique - my view was that we do
> > > > > > > > > > > > > this at some speed
> > > > > > > > > > > > > in scientific hypothesising and trying to understand
> > > > > > > > > > > > > others - moving
> > > > > > > > > > > > > as quickly as we could towards observational data in
> > > > > > > > > > > > > an understanding
> > > > > > > > > > > > > of its theory-ladenness and critical experimentation.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > None of this
> > > > > > > > > > > > > was about trashing someone talking about treating
> > > > > > > > > > > > > traumatised kids as
> > > > > > > > > > > > > an idiot because her work couldn't generalise (which,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > of course, it
> > > > > > > > > > > > > could if one looked hard at its conditions of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > possibility) because it
> > > > > > > > > > > > > was only her experience.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Gabby said something about repetition that seems
> > > > > > > > > > > > > tangentially
> > > > > > > > > > > > > relevent. We all repeat. Indeed, her posts repeat
> > > > > > > > > > > > > some kind of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > enigmatic message, always welcomed even when I'm
> > > > > > > > > > > > > confused. 'You poor
> > > > > > > > > > > > > little wain' she might reply - and there would only
> > > > > > > > > > > > > be an exchange of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > smiles. Your response on the return of logos
> > > > > > > > > > > > > certainly made me
> > > > > > > > > > > > > smile. Polite postmoderism only demands a lack of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > seriousness along
> > > > > > > > > > > > > with a refusal to dance on graves. I can't remember
> > > > > > > > > > > > > a bunch of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > politicians so serious as we have now, ceding
> > > > > > > > > > > > > opposition merely to the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > satirists and the dire smalltalk of the pub. Of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > course, postmodernism
> > > > > > > > > > > > > forgets it demands anything. In Lyotard's version it
> > > > > > > > > > > > > arises before
> > > > > > > > > > > > > modernism - I guess as a critical (pretty scientific)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > moment in
> > > > > > > > > > > > > hypothesis to move to a rationalism again subject to
> > > > > > > > > > > > > the moment of the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > postmodern. We had heard this long before his report
> > > > > > > > > > > > > in 1979. One
> > > > > > > > > > > > > might wonder how we can progress past the hostile
> > > > > > > > > > > > > barriers of the old,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > repeated arguments people want to ascribe importance
> > > > > > > > > > > > > to. This might
> > > > > > > > > > > > > be the highly impolite Wittgesteinian deconstruction
> > > > > > > > > > > > > moment of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > noticing the same old sets at work in all side of an
> > > > > > > > > > > > > argument.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Everyone hates this smartass, though the matter is
> > > > > > > > > > > > > key in the Ludwig
> > > > > > > > > > > > > (not Witters) and Snell programmes that have
> > > > > > > > > > > > > identified approximation
> > > > > > > > > > > > > in all research programmes. Negotiation and argument
> > > > > > > > > > > > > have, sadly,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > become forms of life that
>
> ...
>
> read more »
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
