Do we share the same bullshit coach Slip? Very much my train of thought. I'd add though that I'm tired of the same old positions and lack of thought experiment in moral-political dialogue. Our art and literature just don't seem to hack it anymore on originality and provocation.
I'd say my coach has been riding me heavily as of late so I did catch the 3:30 train, of thought that is. I'm as tired if not more of the old guard, the puppets that look different but have the same puppet master. Art, literature and music are all but dead in my world and so I live in the confines of past eras of wellness and value. The decadence of society is evidenced by the offerings on the tube and airwaves and what is considered all the rage by the masses. Trash is the accepted level of success now as the bar has been lowered. From the heights to the depths seems to be a trend of humanity, out with the old in with the new. As the matter of class goes it seems another debatable issue as even if there is any class, or in ME vain, the existence of class. Not to be construed as social class but of sophistication and integrity. On Sep 24, 10:44 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > Do we share the same bullshit coach Slip? Very much my train of > thought. I'd add though that I'm tired of the same old positions and > lack of thought experiment in moral-political dialogue. Our art and > literature just don't seem to hack it anymore on originality and > provocation. I polled a few women recently on childbearing and they > all said they would do it all again (two exceptions). Not 'poled' you > b'stards! They all described pain that seemed a bit similar to losing > a particularly brutal game against Bradford Northern a week after an > operation on a rectal fissure. I suspect much of our argument is the > product of trauma and not being able to recognise the context in which > it arose. What would the answers of such women be in an era in which > babies could be made outside bodies? And made 'better'? This is only > the start of the reasoning process - what might we find at the root of > opinion? If people always told the truth, Italy would hardly be a > place of one child families would it? Porkies and mimicking what is > assumed to be polite, moral and so on abound in our dialogues. > > Stoned Lee? I haven't even got any baccy in the house and with the > jump-jet decommissioned Chris' place is a bit of a trek! The idea > that we could put ourselves around the universe (as we currently see > it) in about a third of a lifetime at least challenges the notion we > are 'alone and stuck in the vastness' until some prawn blows the sun > out). Neil has not had a beer for three weeks, not even the smell of > a barmaid's apron. Hardly surprising the stars look closer! For what > is sobriety other than an illusion caused by a deficiency of alcohol? > Thanks for the greeting Matt - let's just say we know where the > surgeon should place them mate! You could have been right, but I'm > actually as serious as a girl sticking a flower down the soldiers' > rifle spouts - gesturing at the postmodern, howling at the Moon (don't > do this now, since the dog died). > I leave you with the picture of departing on the voyage, leaving wife > and family behind to voyage in the stars (presumably the bits between > them), knowing that in what will be 30 years to you they will be less > than dust. As the tedious moral arguing goes on, Chris and I sneak > our own nearest and dearest on board and hit the on button. It's not > that we wanted to go, we just couldn't bear to hear any more of the > moral bleating! > > On 24 Sep, 15:32, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Seems clear to me, the swaying of writing content for fiscal > > advantage. How much of the need to generate funds influences the way > > we write. Discard the functionary, the need, the peer appeasement and > > what is left is the freedom to wholly express raw thought, thought > > without the sieve of processing and without having a reason. That is > > the plight, the eddy of constants in academia elevation, achievements > > even by way of public recognition. Perhaps the earliest of writers > > experienced what it is you are presenting, pure thought without a > > designed end. Still there does seem to be a necessity beyond the > > singular, the other ears to hear, to understand. What is a great > > oration in solitude but the expansion of self to self. There must be > > others to receive, lest the end of the universe be an openness for > > simple primal screaming. > > > On Sep 24, 4:23 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Two colleagues once wondered what it might be like to write other than > > > as a functionary. The problem is related to Lee's pondering on music > > > rights and illegal downloading. The problem of not being a > > > functionary is that there is no 'money' in it. Even writing something > > > for Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy online (free to users) could > > > be regarded as 'money connected' - there would be certain 'credits' > > > for an academic career. > > > > I find myself wondering how we might establish something free of our > > > early twenty-first century plight. I see some answers in future > > > memories, perhaps ones in which we write from the perspective of the > > > current plight having destroyed itself. I catch glimpses of a world > > > where much we now take seriously is so old hat it could only be part > > > of a ridiculous history (like Blackadder). One of these worlds has us > > > genuinely trying to leave Earth with the technology to do so. I > > > posted recently on what I believe the case for space-time travel is. > > > Essentially, the equations (sadly based on currently inadequate data > > > on exotic substances like 'dark energy') tell us that travelling at > > > acceleration acceptable to our bodies, we could reach the 'expansion > > > horizon' (edge of the universe) in what we would experience as 30 > > > years in 'planet of the apes time'. We could not come back, in the > > > sense that all we left behind would be gone, except a bleak, dark > > > place - as 'here' would have experienced eons of 'time'. > > > > In some sense, my questions are about the 'freedom' such a trip > > > involves. We get the freedom to roam space-time vastness, but > > > presumably need to arrive somewhere in which we can enjoy something > > > similar to Earth that has not undergone 'eon decay'. If possible, > > > great questions about what we are leaving behind arise, as well as > > > what we would be seeking to do. A myriad of 'Mayflowers' becomes a > > > possibility. No doubt some sect of 'believers' might well stay behind > > > for the 'second coming' at the time of the heat death of the sun. > > > > Much that we value, like family, friendship, neighbourliness and so is > > > challenged in this experiment, as well as much of the moral circling > > > we do. In my science fiction, I'm concerned with what such a future > > > does to philosophy (I take this from Popper). What would a woman in > > > such times regard childbirth as? What would we consider 'natural'. > > > In another post, Chris and I are wandering back from Europa, already > > > substantially changed by genetic splicing (he, in fact, is a 'built > > > man' not born of woman - so no change there mate as I plagiarise > > > MacBeth!), unaware in early chapters a new lifeform has entered > > > symbiosis with us from Europa's underground ocean). We made the > > > mistake of running out of whiskey and cactus juice and drank the > > > water. Earth is recovering from war and asteroid catastrophe and > > > survivors are focusing on relativity travel (there are new worlds out > > > there to royally screw-up!). Would 'morality' at such a time be to > > > sabotage the space-time travel to save the universe from humanity? > > > > I've been on the fringes of a few physics symposia ('pose' being the > > > key term) at which such stuff is trolled out over too much beer and > > > too little female company (sort of Mind's Eye plus beer?). My own > > > science isn't good enough to know who is talking rot or not really. > > > What I'm on about, should anyone have survived this far, is changing > > > the 'black boxes' of philosophy to see if we can open up free space. > > > One could imagine in the novel, that when Chris attacks me with a > > > knife, he understands I had always really accepted his view of gun- > > > control as he looks down the barrel of the cocked .38 Magnum I've just > > > raised from under the table. Or one could wonder, accepting that the > > > science works, just how daft our current values are, being little more > > > than the good intentions that lined the path to Hell (two more world > > > wars precede the time of the novel). My plan is a genre of > > > deconstruction-reconstruction (of mice and men). Those in the know > > > may suspect I am somewhat shackled by 'strategic scenario building' > > > here, but I hope there is no return of managerial desire and I'm more > > > concerned with the impact on knowledge of where is knows it 'has' to > > > go, and that we can cut through that straitjacket. Relativity travel > > > can remain a fantasy and still provide some direction on how we might > > > better await future generations pass into entropy. Those who think > > > religion has no part to play might reflect that such a future moment > > > might well be the triumph of the Cathars (the return to nothingness > > > and final defeat of the material devil). --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
