Oops, wrong thread! Ringing head, dizziness, and nausea are starting to bug me, distracting too. Enough already. Be well everyone. :)
On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 7:04 PM, James Lynch <[email protected]> wrote: > If you don't think your students pick up on a slight hesitation or > unconscious facial signal that a theory is bunk I think you are > selling yourself short Neil. We are in a rapidly changing world, but > some things haven't, conscience for example, you have the haves and > have-nots. I think there is compelling evidence that we could live > more fulfilling lives in the service to mankind, but when faced with > the decision to sink or float/soar many are doing what they think is > necessary even if it is rotting at the core of civilisation. We will > craft our beliefs of right and wrong to fit the world we know, mostly > I think. Identity and seeing oneself in the mirror helps but requires > more than a single image as we need comparisons, it would help to say > hey something else would work and people are doing it. A new labor > class perhaps, philosophically motivated? > > > On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 6:40 PM, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: >> I think we are always stuck in an irrational situation, generally the >> makings of others. Science makes some kind of clearing for >> rationality and inventiveness. Heidegger opined on clearings as being >> amongst the real things of the world rather than facing them in >> thought 'where the backs were missing, but that didn't help him see >> the Nazis for what they were. One can probably "curl up" by taking >> action - as a cop in a pub brawl or whatever our countries ask of us >> as soldiers, our societies of mothers and so on. I've found myself >> coping in action fully aware of its ludicrous nature and wondering if >> there is any freedom from it other than that given by adrenaline and >> the steel put in in training to do the noxious. >> There's a strange rationale that we somehow have to do what's right in >> what is already an irrational mess and act as though rational against >> some bigger picture that we are the good guys - a view unseated >> everywhere by realistic history. The question for me is whether we >> can do much with our knowledge in a world in which few will give up on >> the comfort of knowing very little. >> >> On Feb 1, 11:50 am, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Also- I think if we really knew the consequences of our acts and >>> choices we might just curl up into a ball and do nothing. One friend >>> and I chuckle that we're all pretty much on an assembly line... >>> >>> On Feb 1, 5:27 am, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> > Just to clarify my thought- that luck and timing can be good, bad or >>> > indifferent. Also rather than active thinking being a debate, it is >>> > more like selection. Literature and social sciences deal with layered >>> > communication- for instance, withholding facts, feelings or motives. >>> > It is often called discretion. :-) How do you mean "identity"? >>> >>> > On Jan 31, 11:09 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> > > The 'making sense of things later' seems true even in the split second >>> > > in brain research. I regard all strategy as retrospectively devised! >>> > > There's a book just out by Hill and Myatt (economists) on just how >>> > > facile economics teaching is in universities - but this contains >>> > > nothing on how this has happened. Some of this seems to me connected >>> > > with a lack of movement beyond identity Molly. >>> >>> > > On Jan 31, 1:30 pm, Molly <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> > > > Part of human nature is to identify with people, thoughts, ideas >>> > > > around us. Being able to witness your identification, and moving >>> > > > beyond it is the real treasure. >>> >>> > > > On Jan 29, 9:10 pm, Allan H <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> > > > > Molly your question has my mind running around its dust bins. Most >>> > > > > my >>> > > > > thoughts are not original but more composites of other ideas. They >>> > > > > are like >>> > > > > hand me downs,, like the 3D image comes from watching how people >>> > > > > search >>> > > > > for treasure on sunken vessels, it is rags from a different ?idea?. >>> >>> > > > > My world is a world of rags in the form of other ideas. >>> > > > > Allan >>> > > > > On Jan 29, 2012 8:21 PM, "Allan H" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> > > > > > Yeah it is kind of like an old dog sappen on his favorite bone. >>> >>> > > > > > it is trying to understand others, and what I have experienced >>> > > > > > As I have >>> > > > > > very few friends that like discussing God I talk to myself a >>> > > > > > lot..which is >>> > > > > > no problem as I am never really alone,. >>> > > > > > Allan >>> >>> > > > > > On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 3:05 PM, Molly <[email protected]> >>> > > > > > wrote: >>> >>> > > > > >> Not at all irrelevant. did you have more thoughts about this? >>> >>> > > > > >> On Jan 28, 10:19 am, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote: >>> > > > > >> > Hi Mol&Rigs, listening to you two I've been asking myself why >>> > > > > >> > none of >>> > > > > >> > you mentions Jung and his description of the collective >>> > > > > >> > unconscious. I >>> > > > > >> > haven't read the Red Book yet, but maybe of of you has and >>> > > > > >> > could tell >>> > > > > >> > me why this is irrelevant to what you are discussing. >>> >>> > > > > >> > On Jan 27, 2:35 pm, Molly <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> > > > > >> > > The paramount paradox. >>> >>> > > > > >> > > On Jan 27, 8:21 am, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> > > > > >> > > > Yes- I've read a lot of Campbell and admire his efforts. >>> > > > > >> > > > In fact, I >>> > > > > >> > > > was going to put the Oriental Mythology of his Masks of >>> > > > > >> > > > God series >>> > > > > >> > > > aside to reread- Indian, Chinese and Japanese chapters. I >>> > > > > >> > > > wish I >>> > > > > >> could >>> > > > > >> > > > keep certain studies on top of my thinking but maybe I >>> > > > > >> > > > have read so >>> > > > > >> > > > much there is a chute to forgetfulness or a pit of >>> > > > > >> > > > scrambled >>> > > > > >> > > > ideas! :-) Oh, dear! >>> >>> > > > > >> > > > However, back to your comment about looking back/within. I >>> > > > > >> > > > consider >>> > > > > >> > > > there is impossible split between the spiritual and >>> > > > > >> > > > material and yet >>> > > > > >> > > > that is our struggle to bridge- if possible. >>> >>> > > > > >> > > > On Jan 27, 6:32 am, Molly <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> > > > > >> > > > > Do myths disappear? Joseph Campbell mapped common human >>> > > > > >> > > > > myth >>> > > > > >> around >>> > > > > >> > > > > the word and through time to discover a mechanism >>> > > > > >> > > > > something close >>> > > > > >> to >>> > > > > >> > > > > common memory - the expression of the same archetypes in >>> > > > > >> > > > > real >>> > > > > >> time, >>> > > > > >> > > > > isolated incidents around the globe and at the same >>> > > > > >> > > > > time. This >>> > > > > >> > > > > phenomena has occurred throughout human history. This >>> > > > > >> > > > > may tell us >>> > > > > >> > > > > that it is not the looking back that is important, but >>> > > > > >> > > > > as Vam >>> > > > > >> says, >>> > > > > >> > > > > looking within. >>> >>> > > > > >> > > > > On Jan 26, 5:54 am, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> > > > > >> > > > > > What is original? I might argue that one is simply >>> > > > > >> > > > > > explicating >>> > > > > >> what >>> > > > > >> > > > > > already exists. >>> >>> > > > > >> > > > > > Each generation assumes it has a distinct character- >>> > > > > >> > > > > > or needs >>> > > > > >> to prove >>> > > > > >> > > > > > that it has. >>> >>> > > > > >> > > > > > Was thinking the reason myths disappear is because >>> > > > > >> > > > > > they were >>> > > > > >> oral and >>> > > > > >> > > > > > native languages are usually suppressed by the >>> > > > > >> > > > > > conquerors. One >>> > > > > >> also >>> > > > > >> > > > > > carries family myths- which interfere with deep >>> > > > > >> > > > > > communication. >>> >>> > > > > >> > > > > > Yes- there are terrible inequities- all the more >>> > > > > >> > > > > > scandalous >>> > > > > >> because >>> > > > > >> > > > > > there really is plenty to go around so the root is >>> > > > > >> > > > > > greed and >>> > > > > >> distain >>> > > > > >> > > > > > for others. Governments only pretend to care for all >>> > > > > >> > > > > > its >>> > > > > >> citizens- it >>> > > > > >> > > > > > picks and chooses. >>> >>> > > > > >> > > > > > We passed the Gilded Age- I would call this the Tinsel >>> > > > > >> > > > > > Age. >>> >>> > > > > >> > > > > > On Jan 25, 9:45 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > I would say, Vam, that you often jump in the water >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > with an >>> > > > > >> 'entourage' >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > of assumptive baggage. I probably dislike citation >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > more than >>> > > > > >> you and >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > am not the first. Veblen would be a good start (to >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > use some >>> > > > > >> rough >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > citation). These days, you can at least Google the >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > name. >>> > > > > >> When I >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > started it meant a trip to the library. Anyone who >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > has the >>> > > > > >> chance to >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > read a lot of what's available (this is still >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > remarkably few) >>> > > > > >> should >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > discover most of what they thought their own ideas >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > have been >>> > > > > >> done >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > before. The idea is no doubt to try to 'stand on >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > the >>> > > > > >> shoulders of >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > giants' (itself a wisecrack by Newton on Hooke's >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > dwarfish >>> > > > > >> stature). >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > The 'giants' always turn out flawed. Moses is a war >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > criminal >>> > > > > >> in >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > Numbers 31, the Greeks, for all their argument, never >>> > > > > >> produced a >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > decent one against slavery (the lunatic-religious >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > John Brown >>> > > > > >> being >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > better). Many, because they don't read enough, >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > attribute >>> > > > > >> 'relativity' >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > to Einstein, but it has a longer and wider history. >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > The >>> > > > > >> chattering >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > class reinvents the square wheel all over the place. >>> >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > What if the best of our system is fascist and we >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > have grown >>> > > > > >> in such >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > culture, or a caste system? By what processes do we >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > get an >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > understanding for change from such? Western >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > propaganda would >>> > > > > >> have us >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > believe pouring resources into the gullets of the >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > rich is >>> > > > > >> sensible. >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > We all live in the gutter. Only some of us lift >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > our eyes to >>> > > > > >> the >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > stars. If only I was smart enough to have been >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > first to >>> > > > > >> that! (Oscar >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > Wilde) A common jibe by academics is that common >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > sense is >>> > > > > >> that which >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > allows us to believe the world is flat - yet >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > flat-earth was an >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > academic construction - one can actually see the >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > curvature of >>> > > > > >> the >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > Earth. >>> >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > What we need is reliable collective memory. Given >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > our >>> > > > > >> capacity to >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > pervert, citation is usually used in a highly >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > selective >>> > > > > >> manner, >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > usually along with a core academic (religious etc.) >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > narrative >>> > > > > >> of >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > exclusion of competing argument. Control of what is >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > reliable >>> > > > > >> memory >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > is, of course, just what those in power want to >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > maintain - >>> > > > > >> perhaps >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > through principles of Home and Vanity. I will >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > always prefer >>> > > > > >> the >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > margins to this, remembering that to oppose tyranny >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > can >>> > > > > >> pervert into >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > its support. >>> >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > Deconstruction is only a beginning. I believe its >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > spirit >>> > > > > >> concerns a >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > defeat of madness that includes rationalist fantasy >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > and animal >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > consensus (which I sense as grasping, selfish >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > individualism >>> > > > > >> easy to >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > rule). >>> >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > On Jan 25, 3:26 am, Vam <[email protected]> >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > wrote: >>> >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > "Is this not an important part of the dynamic >>> > > > > >> multidimensional mind >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > Vam, can you find nothing of value with meeting >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > this view >>> > > > > >> at least as >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > a challenge?" >>> >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > James, starting with God is a bad idea. Perhaps, >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > ending up >>> > > > > >> at it is >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > what needs to happen. Dawkins was in Jaipur here >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > and I >>> > > > > >> found his view >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > a lot more balanced, less bigoted and militant. >>> >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > And Neil is right : it must deal with morality. >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > Where his >>> > > > > >> discourse >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > runs dry is when he is quoting other people ! That >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > is also >>> > > > > >> my >>> >>> ... >>> >>> read more »
