1/10/2012 9:00:34 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, [email protected]  
writes:

You don't like language  "corruption." Fine. Then what are we to do with 
the KJV in which Paul's vision  has Jesus telling him "it is hard for thee to 
kicketh against the pricks."  Does anyone today know what that means? 
Without an Old English dictionary, I  doubt it. Throw out the KJV? The Fighting 
Fundies are going to be after you!  :-) 


Actually this is  anything but a problem for me. Most of the time I read 
the NEB,  sometimes
the New  Jerusalem or Oxford. These are the best scholarly translations, 
and they  are
well done, at  least the editions before about 1985 or so.  The KJV is  
strictly
for language as  far as I am concerned. It is like Shakespeare. Simply  
inspirational.
Otherwise I  read the 3 translations, usually the NEB, well over 98 % of 
the  time.


Take back the language? Great idea, how is that done? We didn't  quite get 
here overnight. We aren't going back overnight. 
 



We are now on the verge of losing two perfectly good  words to the Right,  
"Socialism"
and "Liberal."  I feel like  fighting to save those words also. On grounds 
of historical 
meaning and cultural relevance.  But now it is the Left that has pretty 
much given up
on the fight.  If that's what they  want to do, OK, I am anti-today's-Left 
anyway.
But the classical US Left of the era 1900  - 1930 I feel like fighting for. 
Today's Left
hates that Left and regards  those people as backward and unenlightened.
 
Being an historian means that some issues that draw blank stares from  most 
people
are burning issues to me  --and to many members of the AHA (  American 
Historical
Association ). 
 
But you're right, " We didn't quite get here overnight.  We aren't going 
back overnight."
That is absolutely correct. 
 
Its like SMU, no football program for decades, and now  they're baaaack.
 
Things like that can happen if you work at  it.
 
Billy
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--


David



  _   
 
“A society that does  not recognize that each individual has values of his 
own which he is entitled  to follow can have no respect for the dignity of 
the individual and cannot  really know freedom.”—Fredrich August von Hayek  



On 1/10/2012 11:37 AM,  [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected])  wrote:  
 
Hrummmmph.
 
There are advantages to the word "progressivism." If we are serious  about
assuming the mantle of Teddy Roosevelt then we need to find some  way
to work with the word and, in the process,  break the  identification the 
term
now has with  ( the sad excuse for ) today's Left. 
 
That is, partly what we have going-on  is a word war, or "War of  the 
Words."
Creatures from Mars arrive in UFOs to teach us how to use language  better
and  to provide Earthlings with better conceptual and  communications 
skills.
 
We are those creatures from Mars.
 
Little Green Radical Centrists.
 
So, let's not surrender any "heritage vocabulary." It can only be a  fight
but let's, win back all the good words that others have tried to  
appropriate
for nefarious purposes.
 
If you were an historian you might well be sensitive to this. Read  texts 
written
in previous decades ( historians read history just about every day )  and 
that may 
make absurd sense if we define words in them in modern-day ways.  

"Don we now our gay apparel," the Christmas carol ( one of about 20  with 
this problem ) 
sounds bizarre now. Solution,  fight to discredit homosexual use  of "gay." 
 Similarly, 
in the era of the Korean war, the USAF referred to Mig jets as  "fagots"  
( can be spelled with one or two Gs ). 
 
Republicans like to demonize "liberal" and socialist."  Why should  we 
accept
such word poisoning ?  Both words have entirely good and noble  meanings.
 
All of this said,  I also like your list of alternatives,  evolutionary 
centrism,
activist centrism, scientific centrism, etc, each of which can be  used
in the right context to very goof effect.
 
 
Billy
 
===============================================
 
1/10/2012 9:16:13 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, [email protected]_ 
(mailto:[email protected])   writes:



On Jan 10, 2012, at 8:42 AM, Chris Hahn wrote:

 





 
 
a  rational progressivism that supports testable change to improve the  lot 
of the entire populace, rather than the traditional American  progressivism 
which moves toward some moralistic  utopia.







 
 
I like your  concepts, but I don’t like the word progressivism.  It will be 
too  easily be confused with American progressivism which already has a  
meaning.  Instead of rational progressivism, how about “rational  improvement”
 or “rational  evolvement”?





I'm with Chris; great insight, but potentially confusing  terminology.


How about:


- scientific centrism


- progressive centrism (adjective instead of noun)


- progressive design


- evolutionary centrism


- activist centrism


- improvisationalism


Not quite there yet, but worth working on.  As usual, I prefer a  name that 
is oxymoronic and paradoxical in order to inspire cognitive  dissonance. A 
good test would be whether it infuriates Solomon. :-)


-- Ernie P.





 


Chris
 
 
From: [email protected]_ 
(mailto:[email protected])  
[_mailto:[email protected]_ 
(mailto:[email protected]) ] On Behalf Of Mike  Gonzalez
Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2012 9:32  AM
To: radicalcentrism
Subject: [RC] Thoughts on this  tenet?
 
I  want to home-in on this particular tenet and get to the heart of the  
point (tempered optimism + our brand of centrism = rational  progressivism):

When pessimism infects centrism, it becomes angry  populism. When apathy 
blends with centrism, it creates the traditional  view of the lazy, valueless 
independent. What is needed, instead, is a  tempered positivity in 
scientific centrism, channeling the best aspects  of an ideology that believes 
in the 
application of workable solutions in  individual, piecemeal fashion to 
civil society. Consequently, a  rejection of pessimism and apathy in favor of 
sober belief in a  society's ability to improve itself is an essential aspect 
of centrism.  The result of this is a rational progressivism that supports 
testable  change to improve the lot of the entire populace, rather than the  
traditional American progressivism which moves toward some moralistic  
utopia.
-- 
Centroids: The Center of  the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) >
Google  Group: _http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism_ 
(http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism) 
Radical  Centrism website and blog: _http://RadicalCentrism.org_ 
(http://radicalcentrism.org/) 









-- 


-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

Reply via email to