Stephen, Stephen, List,
 
I think it would be better, if in politics Peirce´s existential graphs would be applied. Then it would e.g. be clear, that if "liberal" is inside the cut, "fascist" , and "hammer and sickle" would be outside of it. Also quasi-fascists calling themselves liberals, and people claiming the existence of liberal fascists, would not work with EGs.
Also the sayings "The path should resemble the goal", and "the way to hell is paved with good intentions" could be easily sketched with EGs, I guess.
The kinds of weird double-negations that are used in politics instead of the Peircean cut should be analysed with Peirce, I think. Ok, who will do it?
 
Best,
Helmut
 
 10. August 2018 um 19:51 Uhr
 "Stephen Curtiss Rose" <stever...@gmail.com>
 
I watched the move of folk like Dick Neuhaus and Mike Novak to the right and felt it was as much economic motivation as anything else. Both prospered. Meanwhile, Christianity and Crisis which was my roost at the time went under. The liberal move to the right has had no discernable effect on the Right's sorry performance including its present sad captivity, My brand of liberalism which is not neo-liberalism but rather a liberalism based on fairness and non-violence will eventually triumph as the strong tree from which future politics can grow -- in a world of democracies once today's miasm blows away. Think long-term. I suspect Peirce did.
   
On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 1:29 PM, Stephen Jarosek <sjaro...@iinet.net.au> wrote:

The liberals of your experience remind me of the liberals that I used to identify with before I turned to the right. But times have changed, and the liberals of today are not what they used to be. This video clip reminds me of the reasons that I originally changed sides (I was ahead of my time J):
https://youtu.be/4Pjs7uoOkag

So don’t apologize… get those who now routinely betray what you believe in to apologize to you… or walk away.

sj

 

From: Stephen Curtiss Rose [mailto:stever...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, August 10, 2018 6:37 PM
To: Stephen Jarosek; Peirce List
Subject: Re: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Culture wires the brain

 

Wow! The blanket lumping of liberals with the selected vignetter you give of fascist liberalism sounds a bit like Jordan Peterson skewering post-modernist French intellectuals. Most liberals in my experience are nonviolent, oppose war, and do not use clearly provocative lingo even if they are rabidly opposed to their opponents. They can embrace a democratic-socialist all the way to a necessarily blue dog type. I am not sure where the animus behind your words comes from but I am tempted to apologize. Cheers, S

 

 

On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 11:52 AM, Stephen Jarosek <sjaro...@iinet.net.au> wrote:

HELMUT >” The "Left" do not utter "nonsense" by saying that there are more than two genders, but they (the "Left") are merely liberal, by not wanting to forbid anybody defining their own special gender, like "lesbian, gay, trans, both, none, or between man and woman...", if they feel one of those suits better to them than either "male" or "female". A culture that presses on everybody one of two labels is rigid.

The only duty we have is to respect one another. Most of us do not have a problem with people living out their personal preferences, so long as they respect others’ personal space. But people trying to foist “alternative” definitions into a culture and demand that they be observed are not liberal at all… they have an agenda and their demands are propaganda.

HELMUT>”
A rigid culture is more likely of starting a war than a liberal culture.

Many of us observing proceedings taking place in America would disagree. It is the Left in America that is agitating for war. They want to deny the Right their freedom of speech. They call anyone that they disagree with nazis. They want to deny a president that was democratically elected. Their fascism masquerading as antifascism is laughably transparent, and the violence of their Antifa reveals the mindboggling extent of their hypocrisy. History is repeating, and it is the Left that is at the center of it, fascism red in hammer and sickle.

sj

 

From: Helmut Raulien [mailto:h.raul...@gmx.de]
Sent: Wednesday, August 8, 2018 6:32 PM
To: tabor...@primus.ca
Cc: Stephen Jarosek; Daniel L Everett; Peirce-L
Subject: Aw: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Culture wires the brain

 

Edwina, Daniel, Stephen, List,

I agree with Edwina. I think there are social and altruistic instincts, but they may be destroyed by a rigid culture, and replaced with other instincts, which are "if-then"- routines, such as egocentric, tribal, and warrior instincts.

I think, that the nature of humans is usually good, in a liberal and equality-supporting culture. But there are also sleeping bad predispositions, which may be awakened in a bad environment, for the purpose of surviving there too. But of course, a human always has choices.

The "Left" do not utter "nonsense" by saying that there are more than two genders, but they (the "Left") are merely liberal, by not wanting to forbid anybody defining their own special gender, like "lesbian, gay, trans, both, none, or between man and woman...", if they feel one of those suits better to them than either "male" or "female". A culture that presses on everybody one of two labels is rigid.

A rigid culture is more likely of starting a war than a liberal culture. In a war situation, bad instincts are awakened, up to making psychopaths out of people. A psychiatrist visiting a continuous war zone in Congo has said, the psychopaths ratio in the population was 70%. The other 30% remain, because people still have brains and choices.

All this may have to do with "brain wiring", ok, but not with cultural relativity, as "rigid", "liberal", "equality-supporting", and so on are universal terms.

Best,

Helmut

08. August 2018 um 14:41 Uhr
 "Edwina Taborsky" <tabor...@primus.ca>
wrote:

Interesting - but - if you see our species [homo sapiens] as a kind of 'black slate' so to speak - then, how do you explain the fact that the infant has to be socialized; i.e., our species is not born with innate knowledge and requires a long nurturance period.  And our type of socialization requires language. So- how do you get away from the notion that the requirement for language is innate?

Edwina

 

On Wed 08/08/18 5:14 AM , Daniel L Everett danleveret...@gmail.com sent:


https://www.press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/D/bo16611802.html

 

 

Here are two recent works of mind on culture and cognition. I will be exploring these further in a specifically Peircean context in a book coming out next year from OUP. 

 

Dan Everett

 

Sent from my iPhone


On Aug 8, 2018, at 06:12, Stephen Jarosek <sjaro...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
 

List, here's an interesting article that resonates with ideas that I've
touched on in this forum (culture, neural plasticity, scaffolding,
bucket-of-bugs... no such thing as instinct, no such thing as a "blueprint"
that wires the brain). I'm not sure whether the author would take it as far
as I do, but definitely of direct semiotic/biosemiotic relevance:
https://news.northeastern.edu/2018/08/06/what-if-people-from-different-cultu
res-and-economic-backgrounds-have-different-brain-wiring/

Barrett's paper also got me thinking about a point that I've been mulling
over recently... the importance of initial conditions (scaffolding in the
context of chaos theory)... the idea that experiences can never occur in
isolation (objectivity), but must build on prior experiences (subjectivity):

   "This leads to another significant implication-that childrearing and
early childhood experiences are more important than we thought. Not only do
early experiences shape our personality and values, they also create the
wiring that will govern our perception of the world far into adulthood."

Initial conditions are particularly important in the cultural relativism
debate, for example, where the Left entertains nonsense about more than two
genders. Initial conditions based on childhood AND the body that you inhabit
lock you into a fairly narrow trajectory, with the implication that you
cannot just wake up one morning to decide that you're a special snowflake in
the wrong body, and that you need to change genders.

sj
 


-----------------------------
PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .



 


----------------------------- PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .



-----------------------------
PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .



 

 

----------------------------- PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
-----------------------------
PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L 
to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To 
UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with the 
line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at 
http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .




Reply via email to