R U OK James? Allan On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 2:07 AM, James Lynch <[email protected]> wrote:
> 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 ยป > -- ( ) |_D Allan Life is for moral, ethical and truthful living.
