OK gav, so some dude put a website together but I prefer wikipedia.org.

Yes, I don't like the vibe of this new word and I throw back at you that we
are the best batch yet.

-Peter


On 23/10/2007, gav <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> another example of how wikipedia, like all conveniences, tends to low
> quality.....
> from 'pronoia.net':
> "It was brought to          our attention several years ago, via e-mail by
> Mr. Fred H. Golder, that          he believes HE in fact deserves credit for
> the revival of the word Pronoia          in 1982. To his point,
> Pronoia.net offers a taste of his serious academic          paper here.
> Writing at Queens College in October 1982 (in SOCIAL 
> PROBLEMS,V.30,N.1:82-91),          Mr.
> Golder summarizes:
>                   "Pronoia is            the positive counterpart of
> paranoia. It is the delusion that others            think well of one.
> Actions and the products of one's efforts are thought            to be well
> received and praised by others. Mere acquaintances are thought            to
> be close friends; politeness and the exchange of pleasantries
> are            taken as expressions of deep attachment and the promise of
> future support.            Pronoia appears rooted in the social complexity
> and cultural ambiguity            of our lives: we have become increasingly
> dependent on the opinions            of others based on uncertain criteria."
>               Our response: Well, maybe        feelings of pronoia are
> always just a "delusion"... or maybe Mr.        Golder just hasn't gotten
> the vibe? :-) Seriously, it seems to us as if        this pop-psych
> definition of the word Pronoia holds up a dysfunctional
> and        delusional minority to a scientific zoom lense, and reports the
> view as        if it were an accurate representation of the larger youth
> phenomenon. Pronoia.net        disagrees with this basic premise"
>
> ...are you getting the vibe yet...?
>
>
> Peter Corteen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I remembered seeing this
> word from many years ago but, although I couldn't
> recall the exact nuance, the definition given by gav didn't match my fuzzy
> memory. Being 'pronoid' is not really a good thing. As usual wikipedia
> comes
> to the rescue:
>
> "Pronoia is the positive counterpart of paranoia. It is the delusion that
> others think well of one. Actions and the products of one's efforts are
> thought to be well received and praised by others. Mere acquaintances are
> thought to be close friends; politeness and the exchange of
> pleasantriesare
> taken as expressions of deep attachment and the promise of future
> support. Pronoia appears rooted in the social complexity and cultural
> ambiguity of our lives: we have become increasingly dependent on the
> opinions of others based on uncertain criteria."
>
> I think pronoids would be accident prone and would tend to have a false
> sense of security.
>
> Are YOU one?
>
> -Peter
>
> On 23/10/2007, ian glendinning
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Akshay, Gav,
> >
> > I think I agree with Gav. Akshey when you say
> > ""The universe is a conspiracy on my behalf", the very sentence is
> > contradictory because conspiracy, like clapping, cannot happen without
> > two participating entities. .... Swearing together to harm, is that
> > the Purpose?"
> >
> > Depends what you think a "conspiracy" is.
> >
> > Natural evolution causes "harm" to some entities, making an omelette
> > breaks eggs, so causing "harm" is not the issue. The issue, even for a
> > well intentioned conspiracy (as opposed to one whose aims are malign)
> > is essentially secrecy - how aware passive participants and the
> > uninvolved are in the process and its motives.
> >
> > My theory, and the reason I tend to reject conspiracy theories
> > (conspiracies by "them", the "system", etc) and see them as natural
> > processes as follows.
> >
> > Yes, one reason is that human bystanders (even the passively involved)
> > will always have different perspectives of means and ends ... how big
> > a picture to take into account, how big an end is "justified" by how
> > many "means" - a balance of values.
> >
> > But more importantly, the means and processes are often not so much
> > secret, as un-recognised - discounted by too simple SOMist logic - so
> > that people are more blind-sided than deliberately kept in the dark by
> > anyone. Worse still we accept the blind-siding as the normal process
> > of argument and justification - the SOMist meme - the rationalistic
> > neurosis, natural hypocrisy.
> >
> > This latter case is by far the most important in the "whole world as a
> > conspiracy involving me" angle that Gav is alluding to. There is no
> > "them" here to deliberately keep secrets - but the accepted memes can
> > leave us in the dark nevertheless.
> >
> > All this talk of deliberate ends is a question of teleology - purpose.
> > For me teleology is in evolution - it's a natural direction (as
> > opposed to end). At the biological level it is in the genes (not in
> > the living beings). At the intellectual level it's in the memes (not
> > in the hosts brains). These are the much misunderstood selfish genes
> > and memes.
> >
> > Evolution is a natural conspiracy of natural processes. Whether it is
> > on our behalf or not we benefit as the (so far) most advanced meme
> > machine in our corner of the cosmos - the benefit is to the
> > advancement of genes (and now memes). It's as well to remember that we
> > are most importantly a collection of memes - the collection of genes
> > and flesh and bone (and bacteria) are baggage along for the ride. The
> > memes can keep a large part of our conscious intellect in the dark
> > (Let them eat SOM, SOMist intellect for the masses).
> >
> > Fortunately some (Gav among them) are more enlightened, and recognise
> > a good meme when they see it. We must not be uninvolved, passive
> > bystanders.
> >
> > Thanks for that opportunity.
> > Ian
> > Moq_Discuss mailing list
> > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> > Archives:
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> > http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
> >
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Sick of deleting your inbox? Yahoo!7 Mail has free unlimited storage. Get
> it now.
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/

Reply via email to