*Caveat emptor.  *
*
*
*Maybe she means sellers of ideas but I'm not entirely sure. It's fun to
guess though! I'm always asking my boy if he understands what's going on so
I can hear it in his own words. He's usually close if not always right. They
certainly do need to think for themselves as much as possible.
*
*
*
*dj*
*
*

On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 3:42 AM, Lee Douglas <[email protected]>wrote:

> Meh! I'm still confused.
>
> On Aug 22, 4:25 pm, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote:
> > God wants to see strong children who know what they know and therefore do
> > not fall prey to future sellers.
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 4:41 PM, Lee Douglas <[email protected]
> >wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > Hey Gabs,
> >
> > > Wot?  Now you have confussed me again.
> >
> > > What are you talking baout now?
> >
> > > On Aug 22, 1:52 pm, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > Argh, Lee, you fell for Molly's imagery and forgot to put enough wax
> into
> > > > your ears!
> >
> > > > Do you remember how proud you felt when your younger son apologized
> for
> > > > being selfish over not wanting to lend the PS3 game to his brother to
> > > take
> > > > it out of the house? Although his saying no in the beginning was
> probably
> > > > the most sensible reaction considering the experiences he had made
> and
> > > had
> > > > heard of up to that day?
> >
> > > > Seeing Rome burn and asking oneself what does this mean for me and
> mine
> > > > could have been the incentive to grab the bucket and extinguish the
> fire!
> > > > Which would have been a very social thing to do at that time!
> >
> > > > Another moral: Give your children time to find their own words for
> > > > their/they're meanings of our brandings.
> >
> > > > On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 1:04 PM, Lee Douglas <
> [email protected]
> > > >wrote:
> >
> > > > > Because as a speices we are all rather insulare.  We can't help but
> > > > > think and act according to 'how it effects us' as individuals, as
> > > > > small family units.
> >
> > > > > Instead of seing Rome burning and asking what does this mean for
> > > > > humanity we see it burn and ask instead, what does this mean for me
> > > > > and mine.
> >
> > > > > On Aug 20, 1:51 pm, Molly <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > Creating order from chaos requires entering into the chaos. We
> are
> > > > > > often too content to rest in outdated but comfortable social
> orders.
> > > > > > The balance of individual and consensus reality becomes infinite
> in
> > > > > > mutual creativity.  Finding and maintaining that point in
> experience
> > > > > > is a real challenge.  Once found, old orders fall away, new
> orders
> > > are
> > > > > > created, the circles of familiarity become smaller and at the
> same
> > > > > > time eternal as folks capable of sharing the unseen unite in
> action.
> > > > > > Rome burns, and a new order emerges.  Yet all we can see or feel
> is
> > > > > > Rome burning.  Why?
> >
> > > > > > On Aug 20, 2:57 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > >http://www.economist.com/blogs/bagehot/2011/08/civil-disorder-and-loo.
> > > > > ..
> >
> > > > > > > We had riots in England a couple of weeks ago.  Our media was
> full
> > > of
> > > > > > > people, including reporters, stating this was a new issue and
> > > > > > > unprecedented.  I did not believe this as I watched - though I
> did
> > > see
> > > > > > > a great deal I recognised from GTA games.  The above link to
> the
> > > > > > > Economist makes use of a book by Pearson I read years ago - it
> > > casts a
> > > > > > > very different view that our riots were really only history
> > > repeating
> > > > > > > itself.
> >
> > > > > > > I don't believe human thought can 'rid itself' of emotional
> > > response
> > > > > > > (or should).  I do believe we can do better than 'knee-jerk
> > > reactions'
> > > > > > > - but I also believe this is quite difficult and beyond many
> people
> > > > > > > left to their own devices.  I believe our democracies are weak
> at
> > > the
> > > > > > > moment and that this is because we can't argue very well -
> hence
> > > > > > > politicians appeal to much that is populist and wrong using
> highly
> > > > > > > dubious techniques.
> >
> > > > > > > I'm sure I could identify the protocols that appeal to
> 'ignorant
> > > > > > > Idols' that lead to situations of 'nopolitics' in our societies
> and
> > > > > > > thus the rule of the very rich through "economics" in a way far
> > > more
> > > > > > > centralised than any politburo.
> >
> > > > > > > I've pretty much given up on democracy.  Teaching is very
> > > frustrating
> > > > > > > because you want to encourage self-learning and resourceful
> human
> > > > > > > beings and also know this is too much for most - democracy is
> > > > > > > similar.  The struggle is knowing this and not wanting to be
> > > elitist
> > > > > > > and sneer at others.  I succeed a bit in 'adventures with
> ideas'
> > > but
> > > > > > > the same mistakes in reaction crop up time and time and time
> again
> > > in
> > > > > > > wider social action.
> >
> > > > > > > I wonder if outing the protocols of the dreary positions people
> > > take
> > > > > > > in reaction could help us actually find dialogue?- Hide quoted
> text
> > > -
> >
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > - Show quoted text -

Reply via email to