Hi Arlo, Well this is interesting since it was you who brought up the "false dichotomy" in response to my post to John. The post was about freedom, the opposite is bondage.
I could provide you with the analogy of trying to push one's raft upstream a shallow river by using a pole (static) to keep pushing oneself forward, but this may be lost in your interpretation. My point was that there are other ways to see Freedom apart from you static Western representation of such. On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 7:46 PM, ARLO J BENSINGER JR <[email protected]> wrote: > [Mark] > It depends on how one sees freedom. Let me ask you this: Do we live in a > world of bondage that we are trying to instill freedom, or do we live in a > world of freedom in which we succumb to bondage? Your essay below suggest the > former, whereas, the latter seems much more reasonable. > > [Arlo] > My words suggest nothing about "freedom" or "bondage", as this sets up an > false > dichotomy. My words point out that human agency is as bound to structure as > structure is a product of human agency. > > "Bondage" is mistaking the structure for being solely constraining. "Freedom" > is mistaking that our range of agency is independent of structure. > > [Mark] > We spend (at least) 14 years or so being indoctrinated into the bondage of > words and the social level. > > [Arlo] > We assimilate a cultural milieu, and this provides us with a far richer field > of agency than a feral human devoid of "words and the social level". [Mark] This is quite true, which relegates static quality to the Social Level, and not to the personal or biological level. You are mixing up your levels when you speak of freedom. This is a common mistake, misusing a term from one level to another level. I suppose you consider a non-feral human to be something different than what we are as human. Yes?, think about it before knee jerk responding. Please try not to mix up your levels. > > [Mark] > The structures do not enable or constrain anything. They can be dismissed > with > the blink of an eye. > > [Arlo] > If you think you can dismiss the network of roads "with the blink of an eye" > and not have your agency in movement reduced, think again. > [Mark] Yes, we can dismiss them with a blink of an eye. What more can I say. Guess you got to be there. Perhaps it is your "thinking again" which has got you trapped. There is a way out, however. Try reading some DT Suzuki. > [Mark] > The road is not an agency with any power, simply a road that we build. > > [Arlo] > I did not say the road had agency. I said the road is a structure, created by > human agency, that both constrains and enables greater human agency. > [Mark] Well, I was simply restating what you presented. If you present something that does two opposite things, what are you left with? Rhetorical Question. > [Mark] > If we allow that which we build to dominate us, then freedom is lost. This is > most true of any government. > > [Arlo] > We are freer with government than we would be in a state of anarchy. Or > rather, > or range of potential is greater in a governed society than living in one > without such structure. [Mark] This freedom is a matter of interpretation. It would all depend on the intrusion of the government (Social Level) on our personal (biological) level. Again, you are mixing up your levels. Governing is a Social aspect, not to be confused with individual freedom. Anarchy is another Social term and has no place in the discussion of personal freedom. So you are comparing two things that are equivalent and are irrelevant. > > [Mark] > I do not see the structure and agency as co-evolving. I see them as two > counter currents who's friction brings about our reality. > > [Arlo] > And that is your problem, in a nutshell. > [Mark] I beg to differ, the problem is yours Arlo. > I don't have time to do it justice, but take a look at the Wikipedia entry on > "Structuration". > [Mark] I will simply respond to this with the following facts: The average age of contributors to Wiki is 26 (90% male). Just look it up on Wiki (heh, heh) if you do not believe me. To offset a contribution of mine, the person has to still be in utero. Much of what you read was posted from a high school term paper and I have no idea what kind of grade the student received. So, if you use Wiki as a reference, I can only say: "And your point is....?" Check out the history of this Wiki Post and you will see what I mean. This is just pathetic on your part, and you know better. Cheers, Mark > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structuration > > > 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/md/archives.html > 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/md/archives.html
