Re: [FRIAM] capitalism vs. individualism

[Prof David West]

God has not spoken to me recently, but I have had some wonderful conversations 
with the Universe.

There are alternatives to Pragmatism other than despair or obscurantism.

BTW — Pragmat "ISM!" Mon "ISM!" Just more fictional stories?

My interpretation of the Hermeneutics (lineage as described earlier) suggests a 
"*So Now What*" of two parts:

1- evaluate and act based on *_*ALL*_* the information.
2- strive for practical omniscience to assure that you have *_*ALL*_* the 
information necessary to evaluate and act.

davew


On Fri, Nov 8, 2019, at 8:36 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:
> All,

> 

> “Everything is interpretation.”

> 

> Yey-AH! Duh! What else could it possibly be? Does God speak to you? 
> Presumably not. Hopefully, not.

> 

> Welcome to monism. So now what?

> 

> You only get five seconds to be amazed at the wisdom of monism before you 
> have to start making distinctions between those interpretations that prove 
> out in the end and those that don’t. 

> 

> Now I admit that problems arise in those situations in which some 
> participants in the collective discussion have the power to alter the 
> outcomes. Presidents, bosses, and parents are all in that position, to some 
> degree. You hold the child in your arms and you croon, “Everything is going 
> to be all right”. You might do that when “there is a goblin under the bed.” 
> You might also do it when the plane in which are riding is hurtling toward 
> the ground. The fact that you do the same in both sorts of situations doesn’t 
> change how those situations “prove out”. Some interpretations are better than 
> others.

> 

> The answer to “everything is interpretation” is not obscurantism or despair. 
> It’s Pragmatism. 

> 

> Nick

> 

> Nicholas S. Thompson

> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

> Clark University

> http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

> 

> *From:* Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] *On Behalf Of *Prof David 
> West
> *Sent:* Friday, November 08, 2019 8:44 AM
> *To:* friam@redfish.com
> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] capitalism vs. individualism

> 

> Steve,

> 

> On the back of my Hermeneutic Card is the pedigree: Hermes Trismegistus, 
> Dilthey, Heidegger, Gadamer, Derrida, and Foucault with infusions from Hesse 
> and Jung (the alchemist more than the psychologist). This lineage is quite 
> distinct from the "interpretation of sacred texts, e.g. the Bible) thread of 
> hermeneutics.

> 

> "Everything is an Interpretation," a metaphorical Philosopher's Stone from 
> this thread of Hermeneutics coupled with our late friend Hywel's favorite 
> dictum, "Ah, but it is more complicated than that," is part of the foundation 
> for my critique of "isms" and of the current impeachment process.

> 

> Confronted with a rich, dynamic, ambiguous, conflicting, and emerging data 
> set; humans select data points from that set and weave together a, mostly, 
> self-consistent story — an Interpretation. As individuals this is essential 
> and unavoidable, to some degree, as our physical survival depends on it. 
> (This point has been mentioned before - we perceive what is useful to 
> survive, not what is really "out there.")

> 

> At the group level a few (one to perhaps a few hundred) "storytellers" 
> convince an uncritical herd to accept a particular story (interpretation) and 
> voila we have a religion, a philosophy, a science, an "ism." The foundational 
> "story" can exist, if and only if, it repudiates, denies the existence of, or 
> simply disregards any contrary or inconvenient data points in the original 
> rich and complex data set.

> 

> When I said in the earlier missive that they ignored ninety-percent of that 
> data set, I was indulging in hyperbole. But, I would asset with a great deal 
> of assurance that the ratio of accepted to rejected data points is never less 
> than 50:50.

> 

> in the capitalism article a number of statements / assertions are made in a 
> simple declarative fashion, giving them the veneer of "fact" or "truth." 
> Statements about capitalism and post-truth. From my Hermeneutic perspective, 
> such statements are Interpretations, not facts not truths. It is more 
> complicated than that.

> 

> The conclusion the author made, also asserted in declarative sentences of 
> "fact," is problematic, specious, or absurd depending on the depth of a 
> reader's alternative interpretations of overlapping or orthogonal data points 
> with regard capitalism and post truth. (Personally, his assertions about 
> post-truth are the unforgivable misinterpretations.)

> 

> With regard to current impeachment efforts: a small (few hundred to less than 
> a thousand) storytellers are cherry-picking the data set, and interpreting 
> each point so that it is consistent with the intended "moral of the story," 
> weaving this grand interpretation narrative and selling it to a herd of tens 
> of millions.

> 

> But, because the storytellers have suspended their disbelief to 

Re: [FRIAM] Setting up a new PC

[Nick Thompson]

Hi, russ, again, 

I just discovered that my new computer comes up in my directory for my old one. 
 So I guess I COULD just transfer EVERYTHING on my old computer onto my new 
computer.  

But surely this is a sheep-dip moment, and I should transfer only data, emails, 
and other stuff in the backup.  

Save me from myself. 

Nick 

Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
Clark University
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

-Original Message-
From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Russell Standish
Sent: Friday, November 08, 2019 2:33 PM
To: friam 
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Setting up a new PC

On Fri, Nov 08, 2019 at 01:20:31PM -0700, Nick Thompson wrote:
> Kindly FRIAMers,
> 
>  
> 
> Do you have any advice to give, or a website to suggest, that will 
> help me decide how to set up the computer I just bought.  I back up 
> the old computer to a hard drive every night, and I had always thought 
> to transfer the data to the new one by restoring the backup file to 
> the new computer. But I assume there is a LOT of crap in there I don’t 
> want.  SOMEBODY must have thought about this issue and written something 
> avuncular for people like me.

I always restore from backup, or from the original drive if it is still 
working.  Getting rid of crap is a different task, requiring dedication and 
thought about what you do or don't need. I usually do that either when slightly 
bored, or when my disk is full and I'm desparate for space.

Cheers
-- 


Dr Russell StandishPhone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Senior Research Fellowhpco...@hpcoders.com.au
Economics, Kingston University http://www.hpcoders.com.au



FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe 
http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove



FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] Setting up a new PC

[Nick Thompson]

Thanks, Russ, 

Are things sane down there?  

Is it to Australia that we FRIAMMERS can retreat when the madness becomes 
terminal?

When Putin strolls upon the otherwise empty Northern Hemisphere stage and gives 
is triumphant soliloquy?  

The situation in Britain seems beyond crazy.  Did you know that after the 
presently anticipated devolution of the UK Scotland, Wales, and after much 
grumbling, Northern Ireland, a radical new plan is forming for a Wessexexit?   
Who needs those bloody Celts in a Pure Anglo Saxon Britain?  

[sigh]

Nick 

Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
Clark University
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/


-Original Message-
From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Russell Standish
Sent: Friday, November 08, 2019 2:33 PM
To: friam 
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Setting up a new PC

On Fri, Nov 08, 2019 at 01:20:31PM -0700, Nick Thompson wrote:
> Kindly FRIAMers,
> 
>  
> 
> Do you have any advice to give, or a website to suggest, that will 
> help me decide how to set up the computer I just bought.  I back up 
> the old computer to a hard drive every night, and I had always thought 
> to transfer the data to the new one by restoring the backup file to 
> the new computer. But I assume there is a LOT of crap in there I don’t 
> want.  SOMEBODY must have thought about this issue and written something 
> avuncular for people like me.

I always restore from backup, or from the original drive if it is still 
working.  Getting rid of crap is a different task, requiring dedication and 
thought about what you do or don't need. I usually do that either when slightly 
bored, or when my disk is full and I'm desparate for space.

Cheers
-- 


Dr Russell StandishPhone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Senior Research Fellowhpco...@hpcoders.com.au
Economics, Kingston University http://www.hpcoders.com.au



FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe 
http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove



FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] Setting up a new PC

[Russell Standish]

On Fri, Nov 08, 2019 at 01:20:31PM -0700, Nick Thompson wrote:
> Kindly FRIAMers,
> 
>  
> 
> Do you have any advice to give, or a website to suggest, that will help me
> decide how to set up the computer I just bought.  I back up the old computer 
> to
> a hard drive every night, and I had always thought to transfer the data to the
> new one by restoring the backup file to the new computer. But I assume there 
> is
> a LOT of crap in there I don’t want.  SOMEBODY must have thought about this
> issue and written something avuncular for people like me. 

I always restore from backup, or from the original drive if it is
still working.  Getting rid of crap is a different task, requiring
dedication and thought about what you do or don't need. I usually do
that either when slightly bored, or when my disk is full and I'm
desparate for space.

Cheers
-- 


Dr Russell StandishPhone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Senior Research Fellowhpco...@hpcoders.com.au
Economics, Kingston University http://www.hpcoders.com.au



FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] capitalism vs. individualism

[Nick Thompson]

Well, I agree that there are some obscurantist Pragmatists.  Rorty drives me 
bonkers. 

 

But is there an Obscurantist movement?  For that matter, are their 
Despair-ists?  

 

Watching Boris Johnson manoeuver is a wonderful  lesson concerning the degree 
to which people and power can (and cannot) actually alter truth. 

 

Nick 

 

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

  
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

 

From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Marcus Daniels
Sent: Friday, November 08, 2019 12:51 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group 
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] capitalism vs. individualism

 

Be fair Nick, what about capital O, Obscurantism?

 

From: Friam mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com> > on 
behalf of Nick Thompson mailto:nickthomp...@earthlink.net> >
Reply-To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group mailto:friam@redfish.com> >
Date: Friday, November 8, 2019 at 11:46 AM
To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' mailto:friam@redfish.com> >
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] capitalism vs. individualism

 

Please note the capital P. 

 

N

 

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

 

From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Steven A Smith
Sent: Friday, November 08, 2019 12:45 PM
To: friam@redfish.com  
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] capitalism vs. individualism

 

 

The answer to “everything is interpretation” is not obscurantism or despair.  
It’s Pragmatism.  

Well said Nick. 


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

[FRIAM] Setting up a new PC

[Nick Thompson]

Kindly FRIAMers,

 

Do you have any advice to give, or a website to suggest, that will help me
decide how to set up the computer I just bought.  I back up the old computer
to a hard drive every night, and I had always thought to transfer the data
to the new one by restoring the backup file to the new computer. But I
assume there is a LOT of crap in there I don't want.  SOMEBODY must have
thought about this issue and written something avuncular for people like me.


 

Thanks, as always, 

 

Nick 

 

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

 


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] capitalism vs. individualism

[Marcus Daniels]

Be fair Nick, what about capital O, Obscurantism?

From: Friam  on behalf of Nick Thompson 

Reply-To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group 
Date: Friday, November 8, 2019 at 11:46 AM
To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' 
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] capitalism vs. individualism

Please note the capital P.

N

Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
Clark University
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Steven A Smith
Sent: Friday, November 08, 2019 12:45 PM
To: friam@redfish.com
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] capitalism vs. individualism


The answer to “everything is interpretation” is not obscurantism or despair.  
It’s Pragmatism.
Well said Nick.

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] capitalism vs. individualism

[Nick Thompson]

Please note the capital P. 

 

N

 

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

 

From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Steven A Smith
Sent: Friday, November 08, 2019 12:45 PM
To: friam@redfish.com
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] capitalism vs. individualism

 

 

The answer to “everything is interpretation” is not obscurantism or despair.  
It’s Pragmatism.  

Well said Nick. 


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] capitalism vs. individualism

[Steven A Smith]

>  
>
> The answer to “everything is interpretation” is not obscurantism or
> despair.  It’s Pragmatism. 
>
Well said Nick.

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] capitalism vs. individualism

[Nick Thompson]

All, 

 

“Everything is interpretation.”

 

Yey-AH! Duh!  What else could it possibly be?  Does God speak to you?  
Presumably not.  Hopefully, not. 

 

Welcome to monism.  So now what?

 

You only get five seconds to be amazed at the wisdom of monism before you have 
to start making distinctions between those interpretations that prove out in 
the end and those that don’t.  

 

Now I admit that problems arise in those situations in which some participants 
in the collective discussion have the power to alter the outcomes.  Presidents, 
bosses, and parents are all in that position, to some degree.  You hold the 
child in your arms and you croon, “Everything is going to be all right”.  You 
might do that when “there is a goblin under the bed.”  You might also do it 
when the plane in which are riding is hurtling toward the ground.  The fact 
that you do the same in both sorts of situations doesn’t change how those 
situations “prove out”.  Some interpretations are better than others. 

 

The answer to “everything is interpretation” is not obscurantism or despair.  
It’s Pragmatism.  

 

Nick 

 

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

 

From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Prof David West
Sent: Friday, November 08, 2019 8:44 AM
To: friam@redfish.com
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] capitalism vs. individualism

 

Steve,

 

On the back of my Hermeneutic Card is the pedigree: Hermes Trismegistus, 
Dilthey, Heidegger, Gadamer, Derrida, and Foucault with infusions from Hesse 
and Jung (the alchemist more than the psychologist). This lineage is quite 
distinct from the "interpretation of sacred texts, e.g. the Bible) thread of 
hermeneutics.

 

"Everything is an Interpretation," a metaphorical Philosopher's Stone from this 
thread of Hermeneutics coupled with our late friend Hywel's favorite dictum, 
"Ah, but it is more complicated than that," is part of the foundation for my 
critique of "isms" and of the current impeachment process.

 

Confronted with a rich, dynamic, ambiguous, conflicting, and emerging data set; 
humans select data points from that set and weave together a, mostly, 
self-consistent story — an Interpretation. As individuals this is essential and 
unavoidable, to some degree, as our physical survival depends on it. (This 
point has been mentioned before - we perceive what is useful to survive, not 
what is really "out there.")

 

At the group level a few (one to perhaps a few hundred) "storytellers" convince 
an uncritical herd to accept a particular story (interpretation) and voila we 
have a religion, a philosophy, a science, an "ism." The foundational "story" 
can exist, if and only if, it repudiates, denies the existence of, or simply 
disregards any contrary or inconvenient data points in the original rich and 
complex data set.

 

When I said in the earlier missive that they ignored ninety-percent of that 
data set, I was indulging in hyperbole. But, I would asset with a great deal of 
assurance that the ratio of accepted to rejected data points is never less than 
50:50.

 

in the capitalism article a number of statements / assertions are made in a 
simple declarative fashion, giving them the veneer of "fact" or "truth." 
Statements about capitalism and post-truth. From my Hermeneutic perspective, 
such statements are Interpretations, not facts not truths. It is more 
complicated than that.

 

The conclusion the author made, also asserted in declarative sentences of 
"fact," is problematic, specious, or absurd depending on the depth of a 
reader's alternative interpretations of overlapping or orthogonal data points 
with regard capitalism and post truth. (Personally, his assertions about 
post-truth are the unforgivable misinterpretations.)

 

With regard to current impeachment efforts: a small (few hundred to less than a 
thousand) storytellers are cherry-picking the data set, and interpreting each 
point so that it is consistent with the intended "moral of the story," weaving 
this grand interpretation narrative and selling it to a herd of tens of 
millions.

 

But, because the storytellers have suspended their disbelief to such an extent 
that they are no longer aware of their own Interpretations — believing that 
everything they say is literal, gospel, veridical TRUTH.

 

This would be fine, except for the fact, that by doing so, they are almost 
guaranteeing a political outcome that is antithetical to their expressed 
intent. (And, on a personal level, making me happy that I might be sitting out 
the consequences, mostly, from Amsterdam.)

 

If only Derrida could counsel them with a bit of constructive deconstruction.

 

davew

 

 

On Thu, Nov 7, 2019, at 4:30 PM, Steven A Smith wrote:

DaveW -

 

As a card carrying Hermeneutic 

"Hermeneutics is the art of understanding and of making oneself understood" - 
Wikipedia

>From the viewpoint of 

Re: [FRIAM] capitalism vs. individualism

[Marcus Daniels]

Glen writes:

< As much as I'd love to see a constitutional convention, my guess is too few 
people care enough about others (other countries, the earth, other life forms) 
to work authentically toward a solution. Every player would be trying to game 
the system for themselves (or their "tribe", whatever they think that is). So, 
scrapping it seems too risky. And we're left with the technical debt and the 
rule-rot we have. >

There's another kind of debt, which is the money kind.   That could really get 
out of control if revenue went down.   I wonder what it would take before I 
could make money shorting U.S. treasury bonds?   Could U.S. cities endure a 
national bankruptcy?

Marcus


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] capitalism vs. individualism

[uǝlƃ ☣]

On 11/8/19 7:44 AM, Prof David West wrote:
> This would be fine, except for the fact, that by doing so, they are almost 
> guaranteeing a political outcome that is antithetical to their expressed 
> intent.

Well, my political intent is to actualize the checks and balances on which the 
system was predicated. It's the duty, the job, of the House to execute the 
inquiry. So, it's not clear *who* you're talking about when you say "they". 
You're not talking about this impeachment supporter, that's for sure. If, after 
the inquiry, the Senate "acquits" and the electoral college re-elects Trump, so 
be it. We did the right thing.

But this does wrap back around into conflicting -isms. I'm sympathetic to the 
idea that the electoral college is obsolete. I'm also sympathetic to the idea 
that mob-rule is dangerous. If our system (whether a good representation of 
what the Founders wanted or not) doesn't integrate democracy with republic well 
enough, then a) do we tweak it, e.g. with rank choice voting, or b) scrap it 
for a new one? As much as I'd love to see a constitutional convention, my guess 
is too few people care enough about others (other countries, the earth, other 
life forms) to work authentically toward a solution. Every player would be 
trying to game the system for themselves (or their "tribe", whatever they think 
that is). So, scrapping it seems too risky. And we're left with the technical 
debt and the rule-rot we have.

Our Constitution and other supporting frameworks like common law are a great 
example of a prematurely modeled integration that we're now stuck with. Maybe 
there's no way out of this local optimum to a more global optimum unless we 
scrap it.

-- 
☣ uǝlƃ


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] capitalism vs. individualism

[Prof David West]

Steve,

On the back of my Hermeneutic Card is the pedigree: Hermes Trismegistus, 
Dilthey, Heidegger, Gadamer, Derrida, and Foucault with infusions from Hesse 
and Jung (the alchemist more than the psychologist). This lineage is quite 
distinct from the "interpretation of sacred texts, e.g. the Bible) thread of 
hermeneutics.

"Everything is an Interpretation," a metaphorical Philosopher's Stone from this 
thread of Hermeneutics coupled with our late friend Hywel's favorite dictum, 
"Ah, but it is more complicated than that," is part of the foundation for my 
critique of "isms" and of the current impeachment process.

Confronted with a rich, dynamic, ambiguous, conflicting, and emerging data set; 
humans select data points from that set and weave together a, mostly, 
self-consistent story — an Interpretation. As individuals this is essential and 
unavoidable, to some degree, as our physical survival depends on it. (This 
point has been mentioned before - we perceive what is useful to survive, not 
what is really "out there.")

At the group level a few (one to perhaps a few hundred) "storytellers" convince 
an uncritical herd to accept a particular story (interpretation) and voila we 
have a religion, a philosophy, a science, an "ism." The foundational "story" 
can exist, if and only if, it repudiates, denies the existence of, or simply 
disregards any contrary or inconvenient data points in the original rich and 
complex data set.

When I said in the earlier missive that they ignored ninety-percent of that 
data set, I was indulging in hyperbole. But, I would asset with a great deal of 
assurance that the ratio of accepted to rejected data points is never less than 
50:50.

in the capitalism article a number of statements / assertions are made in a 
simple declarative fashion, giving them the veneer of "fact" or "truth." 
Statements about capitalism and post-truth. From my Hermeneutic perspective, 
such statements are Interpretations, not facts not truths. It is more 
complicated than that.

The conclusion the author made, also asserted in declarative sentences of 
"fact," is problematic, specious, or absurd depending on the depth of a 
reader's alternative interpretations of overlapping or orthogonal data points 
with regard capitalism and post truth. (Personally, his assertions about 
post-truth are the unforgivable misinterpretations.)

With regard to current impeachment efforts: a small (few hundred to less than a 
thousand) storytellers are cherry-picking the data set, and interpreting each 
point so that it is consistent with the intended "moral of the story," weaving 
this grand interpretation narrative and selling it to a herd of tens of 
millions.

But, because the storytellers have suspended their disbelief to such an extent 
that they are no longer aware of their own Interpretations — believing that 
everything they say is literal, gospel, veridical TRUTH.

This would be fine, except for the fact, that by doing so, they are almost 
guaranteeing a political outcome that is antithetical to their expressed 
intent. (And, on a personal level, making me happy that I might be sitting out 
the consequences, mostly, from Amsterdam.)

If only Derrida could counsel them with a bit of constructive deconstruction.

davew


On Thu, Nov 7, 2019, at 4:30 PM, Steven A Smith wrote:
> DaveW -
> 
>> As a card carrying Hermeneutic 
> "Hermeneutics is the art of understanding and of making oneself understood" - 
> Wikipedia
>> From the viewpoint of someone who knows/believes/understands everything to 
>> be Interpretation, this is a silly assertion.
> Interpretation of "received wisdom" conventionally. Rhetorical presentation 
> of "received wisdom" is not hermeneutical.
> 
>> The only way you can ascribe Truth to an ism, Capitalism included, is by 
>> disregarding ninety-percent of the "data" as irrelevant and claiming the 
>> self-consistent (mostly) residue to be that Truth.

And of course each ism cherry picks the ten-percent of the data 
(non-overlapping sets) that supports its interpretation of fact/reality/truth 
and vociferously defends it as the only correct way to see things or think 
about things  — and then makes the fatal mistake of believing, in a 
fundamentalist sort of way, their own story (interpretation).
> This cynical interpretation of the attempt to condense knowledge and wisdom 
> is not unfounded, but do you contend that it is intrinsic ot "isms" that they 
> be thus? Is your 10% data-driven, anecdotal, or rhetorical?
> 
>> That last step, believing the fictional story that you weave from your 
>> interpretation of cherry picked data, is fundamental to the idiocy of 
>> impeachment.
> Do you mean *this impeachment* of *this president* at *this time*? Or are you 
> impugning the very idea of impeachment, of congressional oversight of the 
> Executive and the ideal of checks and balances?
> 
>> While the story being told may have substance, it has no Reality, it has no 
>> Truth, and telling