Umm the Neil-Molly deck!
On 3 Sep, 13:39, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
> A Pollard hung high - what a metaphor. Molly as the pink Springer.
> The Dark Lady with crystal balls. Is this the new Tarot?
>
> On 3 Sep, 13:05, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > My daily horoscope is telling me I should have a word with Ian for
> > neither following what is going on, nor contributing to the course of
> > events here other than ostentatiously dusting his high hung rules and
> > regulations. Although it must be said that Molly’s dreams of pink love
> > wonderfully antagonize his fading “stop it”-cries. What do you think?
> > They’ve got their minds elsewhere, too?
>
> > On 3 Sep., 06:10, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > I sort of scanned you BB. There feels to be some kind of rage being
> > > expressed. I sort of rage against the world - it doesn't have much in
> > > it I want. I would like a lot of things to change, my guess being
> > > they will in some future I won't have a human part in. All that's
> > > left really is to wonder whether there is something worth having a go
> > > at now, some means perhaps for us to be able to make more informed
> > > decisions being my bag - wondering if there is some means by which we
> > > can get information to work for us instead of just being another
> > > commodity. All the books can seem pretty worthless in the current
> > > freezing moral climate - weirdly a book by Saul Bellow (The Dean's
> > > December) I bought but never read says a lot of this - I know its
> > > content from discussions with others about the circumstances in which
> > > I had it and never got to read it, which peculiarly was in Bucharest
> > > in the Soviet times where part of the book is set. The theme, in a
> > > way, is that the Chicago of the free world was as bent as the
> > > Bucharest of the Soviet days.
> > > Most of the discussion in here has been done before and usually
> > > 'better' in the academic world - but as Bellow pointed out this is a
> > > corrupt world too. I used to wonder if my rile as an academic was to
> > > read so that my students didn't have to go through the agonies of
> > > discovering it's all pretty much been said by inevitably smarter,
> > > faster guns, to somehow get over that they didn't have just to be
> > > members of the church listening to my sermons - that they idea was
> > > something else - maybe that I could put over my reading so that they
> > > could make use of the work I had done to grow something else, tend the
> > > ground, improve it, use the produce, build anew for themselves without
> > > having to reinvent the wheel. I have been disappointed - education
> > > has become the ultimate commodity, qualifications worn like smart
> > > clothes.
> > > There is work similar to your attempt above - Veblen, Lukacs - many
> > > others writing on fetish and the inequalities of education, the lack
> > > of education as an aim in itself and the bullying nature of Bildung.
> > > Management has been my field and this is a classic area of wheel re-
> > > invention and bullshit with fashion posing as new ideas. Weber and
> > > others pointed to the evils of bureaucracy a century ago, yet it can
> > > seem all we have done is found ways to increase bureaucracy at the
> > > expense of freedoms we could have shared.
> > > My grandson (11) hasn't read much - his mates have no clue about
> > > reading in the sense I do. They get better quicker on video games
> > > than I do. I recently explained puberty to them and they derided the
> > > basic biology as fantasy, a somewhat offensive response if I chose to
> > > be offended - they are still clueless as to what a biologist might be,
> > > let alone to the idea that I might once have studied at university.
> > > My father ( a headmaster despite leaving school at 13 to be a Bookies
> > > runner) was once derided as a queer because he could read. Students
> > > in my classes have often discussed whether it is appropriate to read
> > > critical material as telling the truth at work is akin to writing a
> > > suicide note. Much, in fact, is written about this. One group,
> > > concerned about swearing at work (concerned it was a major part of
> > > normal life and yet barred by workplace rules), were surprised to
> > > discover a number of learned articles about this that conclude it is
> > > wrong to summarily ban it. One woman commented 'fuck me Neil, you
> > > know some shit' - with the class joyously refraining this was the best
> > > offer I'd had all day. I replied, that in the dismal context of my
> > > life, it was the best for several years. The ultimate point (this was
> > > a class on research methods well bored with ogives and frequency
> > > distributions) was that if you learn to dig about (generally
> > > electronically) you can find stuff on almost anything and codge
> > > together a report for your masters. We adjourned to the pub to watch
> > > football, the class educated enough to know a couple of pints would
> > > stop me showing them how to use excel to produce a histogram rather
> > > than a bar chart.
> > > I guess if the point is to know more about epistemology, then the
> > > Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy (free on line) is much more
> > > magnificent than this group. I am about to codge together an
> > > apparently learned article (broadly on Darwin) from this source for my
> > > masters (to get me a trip to Porto). I would broadly say I learn more
> > > from Ian, Slip, Gruff, Molly and others here and can put up with the
> > > odd jibe - perhaps from Francis - that I would not make much of a
> > > priest given I did take up the offer from the mature student (perhaps
> > > I am a future Bishop of Galway?) - buck up BB and work out we
> > > generally only score points in here for a giggle and share such
> > > erudition as we have in this spirit.
>
> > > On 2 Sep, 16:33, Ian Pollard <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > Hi BB,
>
> > > > It is a fundamental principle of this group that other members should
> > > > not be
> > > > viewed as potential converts (or, in your analogy, "customers"). We're a
> > > > sounding-board for ideas.
>
> > > >http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye/web/posting-guidelines
>
> > > > Ian- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
