Other means would also include the shuffle of paper and a work force
making money off of other people's money or assets= huge. Is the
barter system a fairer means of exchange?

On Sep 7, 4:40 pm, ashok tewari <[email protected]> wrote:
> " I think this is an important thread, Vam."
>
> It could be, Molly, but is not yet. In a sense, we all have ' arrived at '
> ideas and values, whatever that might be. That per se may not thwart having
> a dialogue amongst us. What would is this inability to ensure or readiness
> to correct so that our ideas and values include all, here and now, and not
> in some future that ' history ' will unfold, even if there are people who
> are not even aware of those same ideas and values, much less subscribe.
>
> To be true, honest dialogues and true discussions are rarely possible,
> anywhere at any age. Because what we espouse, seek to advance and are
> protective about, excludes the others, even if they profess to speak ' in
> the name of the people.'
>
> On an immediate level, dialogue with some individuals becomes impossible
> because they can brook no disagreement, or because they find you
> disagreeable. That's pretty straight forward and happens all the time, a
> mere fact of life.
>
> But Humpty Dumpty and Alice can still have a dialogue, with a simple query :
> so, what do YOU mean when you use the term ' capitalism ?' So long as the
> two are ready to include each other in their understanding. A discussion
> would be impossible if that readiness to include were not there. For
> instance, it's when either of them are unmindful of huge populations that
> the system does not serve and, in fact, marginalise, with just the Hegelian
> trust in history for them, for now, that the dialogue would become
> impossible.
>
> It is this readiness to include each other in our understanding that makes
> discussions and dialogues possible, despite cultural and perspectival
> diversity, past disagreements and disagreeability.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 7:51 PM, Molly <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Wonderful quote, Francis.  Alice's bigger viewpoint of the Logos of
> > the words we use may be lost on Humpty Dumpty in his need to express
> > authority through "mastery", of words, identity of view, and
> > reluctance to consider another meaning.  This may indeed be the crux
> > of the barriers to communication on the topic of capitalism or any
> > other, as " people began ' arriving ' at their fixed and
> > hardened perspectives, views or values. Which makes an open
> > conversation impossible, for there is mere reiteration of known
> > positions"
>
> > By Logos, I mean the traditional sense of the word, the "meaning that
> > passes between you and me," which takes into account connotation,
> > denotation, linguistics and semantics.  These are the processes
> > fleshed out in honest and open dialogue.  Groups often get stuck in
> > defining terms. Anyone entering the dialogue with an ax to grind, a
> > need to be right or feel injured, stops dialogue and keeps the group
> > stuck in argument (or outright abuse), and there are thousands if not
> > millions of places in cyberspace ready to engage on this level.
> > Violent language, fallacious arguments, cynical humor and personal
> > attacks are all barriers to communication, often by design if a person
> > in the group is more interested in talking only about themselves or
> > what they make the words mean as masters of them.  But we all know the
> > story of Humpty Dumpty.
>
> > Dialogue takes a knowledge of other group members and respect for
> > differences in language and culture before semantic differences can be
> > flushed out, and common understanding of terms agreed upon.  Then,
> > different viewpoints can be expressed and appreciated. There are then
> > those wonderful moments when we can experience our own viewpoints
> > expanding, as the meaning that passes between you and I gains
> > dimensionality.
>
> > I think this is an important thread, Vam.  Thanks for starting it.
>
> > On Sep 5, 5:37 am, frantheman <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > Like many terms used in public discourse, Ashok/Vam, sometimes the
> > > only answer is that given by Humpty Dumpty :-):
>
> > > "`When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone,
> > > `it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less.'
>
> > > `The question is,' said Alice, `whether you can make words mean so
> > > many different things.'
>
> > > `The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, `which is to be master --
> > > that's all.'"
>
> > >http://www.sabian.org/Alice/lgchap06.htm
>
> > > Francis
>
> > > On Sep 4, 5:17 pm, ashok tewari <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > little time ? !  ... indeed.
>
> > > > But that's not the issue I'd highlighted, Fran. It was about " what
> > *people
> > > > mean when they use the term* ' capitalism.' "  Not how it means in Das
> > > > Kapital.
>
> > > > On Sat, Sep 4, 2010 at 7:25 PM, frantheman <
> > [email protected]>wrote:
>
> > > > > Well, if anyone's got a little time on their hands, here's an
> > > > > introduction to the subject of capitalism :-)
>
> > > > >http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Das_Kapital
>
> > > > > Francis
>
> > > > > On Sep 3, 7:56 pm, Vam <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > I do sense an aspect of timelessness in the platform, on which
> > people
> > > > > > with fundamental questions or doubts met and discoursed to clarify.
>
> > > > > > What happened was people began ' arriving ' at their fixed and
> > > > > > hardened perspectives, views or values. Which makes an open
> > > > > > conversation impossible, for there is mere reiteration of known
> > > > > > positions. Like, it would be disappointing if we came to clear the
> > > > > > ground and found it littered with buildings of all sorts, including
> > > > > > those one may disagree with or dislike.
>
> > > > > > I believe the developments take nothing away from the timelessness
> > of
> > > > > > ME. But we need to go back to discussing fundamental issues,
> > aspects
> > > > > > or terms. For instances, I am till date intrigued by what people
> > mean
> > > > > > when they use the term ' capitalism.' Ideally, the user should be
> > able
> > > > > > to enlighten us with all ideate dimensions to the term -  practice,
> > > > > > structure, economic values system, moral values, ethical values,
> > and
> > > > > > way - of - life beliefs and philosophy.
>
> > > > > > The discussion would of course veer to alternate systems and
> > > > > > philosophies ... and so on. The participants definitely make their
> > own
> > > > > > informed or cultural choices along the way. Life itself clarifies
> > the
> > > > > > rest of the way. And perhaps the discourse gets upgraded ...
> > > > > > sometime ... if there are enough interested members to infuse life
> > !!
>
> > > > --
> > > > ASHOK TEWARI
>
> --
> ASHOK TEWARI- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Reply via email to