Hi Platt Funnily enough I thought I was agreeing with you, a correct summary is what I wrote, your summary says something else.
The main thrust is that I consider technological advancent as a whole to be a set of cultural patterns, and like with any cultural patterns, some of these will support intellect and some will inhibit. The intensity of the factors pulling in all directions is increased and the likely net movement may well be nil. > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 13 June 2007 17:38 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [MD] The Trouble With Wilber > > > Quoting "Laycock, Jos (OSPT)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > Hi Platt > > > > Recent advancements increase the intensity and quality of > all sorts of things. > > More arrete(acute) has been injected on all sides - but > unfortuamtely this also > > means that we increase the quality of the things that we > dont like. (judge > > stupidity from stupidity's standards not erudition's) > > We also become far "better" at being ignorant, "better" at > being beligerant, > > prejudiced and artless. Can we say that the most shoddily > constructed cheapest > > product possible is absolutely the "best" (highest quality) > one available in the > > eyes of the ruthless fat cat counting his resultant fortune? > > > > All these things are "better" according to their own > standards, but what of the > > whole? > > If the social elements that are "improved" are not > condusive to intelectual > > emergence/re-enforcement, then they are bad and > "advancement" will only drive us > > backwards. > > > > That said "us" is a big group - If the tv is crap, turn it off. > > Would you say that you are reaching a higher level of > insight through these online > > discussions as compared to what you would be able to > achieve through written > > correspondence? How would any of us have even met in the > first place? > > Your point if I understand it right is that with advances in > technology we > (as a broad generality) have become wiser intellectually in > spite of being > exposed to a lot more low quality biological and social > patterns. If that's > a correct summary of your view, I respectfully disagree. I > see little evidence > of an increased intellectual acumen over previous generations. > > As for this group, it's the exception. I've personally > learned a lot here. > For that I'm indeed grateful to technology. > > Regards, > Platt > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: 13 June 2007 13:40 > > > To: [email protected] > > > Subject: Re: [MD] The Trouble With Wilber > > > > > > > > > Quoting Krimel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > > > All this while virtually ignoring the emergence of real > > > expanded awareness > > > > and consciousness that is booming around us in the form of > > > cell phones, > > > > instant messaging, e-mail, Google Earth, GPS, webcams, > Alternative > > > > Intelligences, the expansion of identical shared memory in > > > the form of film > > > > and voice recording and the sum total of human knowledge > > > instantly available > > > > at the touch of a button. All of this higher level > > > consciousness emerges > > > > specifically from the direction of rational thinking > > > suggested by Piaget > > > > whom Wilber butchers while you applaud. > > > > > > You invited me to jump into the discussion you are having > > > with DMB, but since > > > DMB is more than holding his own I see no reason to. But, I > > > couldn't help but > > > point out in your description above of "expanded awareness" > > > that you cited > > > only the means by which awareness has spread horizontally but > > > nothing about > > > the meanings or depth of understanding of this broader > > > dispersion of data brought > > > about by technology. There is precious little evidence that > > > the new gimmicks > > > of communication have made us any wiser or brought us to a > > > "higher level of > > > consciousness." Expansion in breadth doesn't promise > > > penetration in depth. Flatland > > > is not conducive to insight. > > > ------------------------------------------------- > This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/ > 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/ > > This email was received from the INTERNET and scanned by the > Government Secure Intranet Anti-Virus service supplied by > Cable&Wireless in partnership with MessageLabs. (CCTM > Certificate Number 2006/04/0007.) In case of problems, please > call your organisations IT Helpdesk. > Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, > monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes. > > > This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the > attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, > disclosure, storage or copying is not permitted. If you are > not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and > inform the sender by return e-mail. > > This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the > attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, > disclosure, storage or copying is not permitted. If you are > not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and > inform the sender by return e-mail. > > This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may > be monitored, recorded and retained by the Ministry of > Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, > and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a > responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing > or forwarding e-mails and their contents. > This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail. This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail. This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents. The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet Anti-Virus service supplied by Cable&Wireless in partnership with MessageLabs. (CCTM Certificate Number 2006/04/0007.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes. 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/
