----- Original Message -----
From: "John Carl" <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, May 10, 2009 8:47 PM
On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 12:51 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:
Right. It was the intellectualism of academicians, identified as such by
Pirsig. From their ivory towers came the flowering of Subject/Object
Metaphysics (SOM) which "has no provision for morals." That's the major
defect. That's the intellectualism that bothers Pirsig. And now, me.
Well there is the point of contention then. What "they" did at this
point.
I'm no expert. I did read an interesting book on the subject by Allen
Bloom
called The Closing of the American Mind. He pointed to German
philosophers
and philosophies which directly led to the rise of national socialism in
Germany. He showed parallels to our culture which predicted the rise of a
similiar system and dictatorship. You can see the obvious evolution of
moral decadence in society wherein the state has to step in and take
control
because the moral fiber of the people is eroded.
And this was in the 80's, fer crissake, Bloom was ranting about kids
listening to Walkman music in his academic setting and how this culture
of
easily -accessed pleasure was underminning any potential for greatness in
our youth. You take a boy around puberty, and if he's real smart he's
going
to be at his peak for logic and math for the next five to ten years. If
you
destract him with a feel good pop culture sensibility his energy is going
to
be wasted. It has long term effects.
Bloom's book is on my list of all time favorites. His observations about
education and the decline in American culture are as accurate today as
they were 20 years ago.
And speaking of the state replacing conscience, I've been hearing radio
ads
lately focusing shame on a patron of a restaurant who's credit card is
denied, and everybody in the restaurant goes tsk tsk and his girlfriend
assures him there won't be another date and then a voiceover moralizes
about
the importantance of paying off one's debts.
What is so scarey to me about this is the total ignorance displayed of the
roots of moral training. If you see no reason to keep your word and pay
your bills, a radio commercial isn't going to convict you. I guess in your
terms, the statists, already confident through past victory now believe
they
can accomplish anything with their propoganda machine.
The election of Obama is a shining example of the power of the statist
propaganda machine. You can bet they will continue to use it to justify
their takeover of banks, auto companies, the health care system and
whatever else they want. Note that the first thing they do to bamboozle
the public to accept their grab for power is to create a phony crises, e.g.,
global warming.
Or how about calling them "statists?" They want to use the physical force
of
the state to dominate society. They consider conservatives enemies
because conservatives object to their schemes to spread "caring and
compassion" at the point of a gun.
If the Pen is mightier than the Sword, the Videocracy of the Technocrats
is
the atom bomb of all thought control and much more powerful than any gun.
I don't know from conservative and liberal... I stay mostly away from
politics and politicians. I do think that GW Bush was probably about the
worst president we've ever had. Texas always gives us sucky presidents.
There is a huge difference between dictators and capitalists. Capitalists
can't round up dissidents and send them to death camps.
I disagree. Russia seems to have had absolutely no trouble switching
economic systems from Communism to Capitalism while maintaining the same
sorts of authoritarian social controls. And couldn't you look at the US's
recent record as to detention and torture and admit that not every singe
person killed by our guns and our planes is a non-innocent? In some
situations and for a certain time, Capitalism seems to be more efficient
as
an economic system than communism.
The controls you mention are government controls legally enforced at the
the point of a gun. Capitalist corporations have no such power.
. But plainly it is running out of steam and I'd be reluctant to tout it
as
the ultimate or ideal goal of society.
> And they suppress good ideas that threaten their system. The goal then
is
> to earn their outright hostility and not just their feigned
> indifference.
Not a problem. Note the hostility to conservative views on this site.
Well I'm fairly new here, and unsure as to why there should be any
hostility
at all in the free interchange of ideas. But I'm aware it exists. It's
an
old problem, the blind men beating each other with their definition of the
elephant.
The reason for hostility to the free exchange of ideas -- political
correctness.
Can you tell us a bit more about your attraction to Josiah Royce's
philosophy? Are you familiar with the philosopher David Stove?
I plan on talking about Royce a great deal. My attraction stems from his
Quality as a philosopher and his obscurity and the many parallels I find
in
his Absolute Idealism and the MoQ as I understand it. I'm studying him
now
and making notes and will post them soon - at least what I've found so
far.
Never heard of David Stove, thanks for the tip.
Looking forward to more about Royce.
Regards,
Platt
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/
