Re: Mind's Eye Re: A Call To Democratic Arms?

I think he sounds like a politician who depends on votes from a base
that accepts his "philosophy" as a solution to their troubles The more
he can fuzz up the methods, the safer he will be- at least
temporarily.

On Jan 24, 4:00 am, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Back from Max's wrestle with a Boxer (lost on points) and a snowman
> (won with leaping kick), we have Cameron lying on tax evasion with no
> mention of Britain's role via offshore.  He moves on to talk of
> tackling poverty through democracy, peace, rule of law and
> transparency.  The worrying thing is how he manages to sound like a
> champion and must, like Obama, mean none of it.  Now he's saying big
> bankers have told him to pursue the open society agenda!  Arggh!
>
> On Jan 24, 8:48 am, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I was only thinking out loud rigs.  In science we don't even know what
> > mass is, but still manage to weight it accurately for most purposes.
> > Start trying to produce mass from energy (without something given in
> > nature like photosynthesis) and politics looks simple!  My guess has
> > long been most of us don't want to know about politics but would like
> > it done honestly - and there lies the snag, summed-up in the term
> > transparency - this looks simple but is a double-edged sword (as in my
> > tax return is due and I won't be transparent! - though I am honest and
> > do pay up).  I hate the way the real issues are really denied debate
> > and part of that is our desires for reasonably private family life.
>
> > I do fear we are at a tipping point and can't see the benefits of more
> > transparency and the role of machines in this.  My mate Dave runs a
> > second till in his pub and sells the odd bottle of spirits through it
> > - thus cheating the brewery and tax man.  Without this no pub - the
> > business model for such pubs has collapsed.  I turn a blind eye and
> > hope he succeeds.  I've know many business people who had to cheat,
> > lie to the bank and so on to get through hard times, often creating
> > successful businesses.  I don't think big business should behave this
> > way - but the business cycle does provide some justification.  I
> > wonder how many 'Dave fiddles' make a Starbucks?
>
> > If you look at China (allegedly communist - though some way from the
> > 16th century German Christian communist rebellions) you find billions
> > being invested in US/EU property by an elite - this kind of money from
> > all over should be invested in more social and scientific capital.  I
> > think we could get to that without revolution and are largely
> > restrained by fear.  It's not that long since we couldn't talk of the
> > Sun and planets orbiting same without doing auto da fe.  I thus see
> > economics restrained by instruments of torture and incapable of the
> > courage once needed in science.  I am pessimistic on educating a
> > critical mass of people and the nightmare is the mass of people are
> > breeding us to a precipice.  I also fear technology may spread to
> > terrorists in a way we have only yet imagined through machine
> > expertise in chemical engineering.
>
> > In the end we run away from the reality, much as I'm about to do with
> > Max and the day job - this usually works rigs - but I suspect the
> > energy in the zeitgeist is low!  He knows his walk is due and is now
> > grumping about accusing me of stealing his 'nose time' in the universe
> > outside the door I don;t 'see' like him.
>
> > On 23 Jan, 14:22, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > there was a time when american politicians worked for the good of the
> > > people. Today that is that has all changed..  the republican party is
> > > willing to hold the nation hostage so they can support the high priest
> > > of the golden calf..  making sure the poor pay the taxes and not the
> > > extremely wealthy..
>
> > > Oh well greed has it problems usually in less than 100 year when they
> > > face their resurrection,,  but the it is to late .,.,.  poor souls..
>
> > > On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 2:09 PM, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > He's also as stubborn as a mule Allan - makes him even better really.
>
> > > > Your pros and cons (plus margins) had me thinking rigs - I've been
> > > > asked for a book chapter on 'why economics isn't a science' and saw a
> > > > set of scales as I read your comments.  Coincidentally, Obama was
> > > > doing his inauguration speech on tv and I remembered you don't like
> > > > him - he changed to a lying toad in front of my eyes (literally in my
> > > > head - though I always know I'm seeing an illusion).  It was the
> > > > 'bringing democracy to all nations of the world' bit.  Stuff lies to
> > > > us in science - mass is the classic - we treat it as creating
> > > > gravitational force (yet gravity is an illusion in general relativity)
> > > > and also treat it in terms of inertia - experimental results
> > > > coincidentally 'prove' both.  US (and all other) imperialism should
> > > > make a statement like Obama's impossible to perceive other than as a
> > > > lie (the historical evidence is that we have subverted democracy
> > > > almost everywhere).  I know from my own experience as an experimenter
> > > > that it is very difficult to set up measurement. Thinking of this
> > > > woolly mix I went to bed and dreamed of politicians as cheating
> > > > alchemists.  The dream turned sour at that point when I sensed I was
> > > > on to something.
>
> > > > I can see a machine able to flag up (say) US foreign policy effects as
> > > > politicians make their promises - clanking up pros and cons to make
> > > > lying in performance management more obvious.  Science is aware that
> > > > it still gets caught up in myths (like creation and big bang - can we
> > > > think without origin) but essentially works hard on making factual
> > > > databases 'anyone' can use in terms of knowing what and knowing how.
> > > >  The economic-political system generally prevents this altogether.
> > > >  Don't really know what I'm on about - but I'm not scared by the
> > > > machine possibilities and suspect somewhere in this I don;t believe we
> > > > are human yet - and might only become so with machine help.
>
> > > > Time to unleash the hound!
> > > > On Jan 23, 6:56 am, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> sounds like a great dog Neil
>
> > > >> On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 5:58 AM, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> > Maxwell is a stubby-legged Labrador and a bit of a wimp.  He's a
> > > >> > sweetie.
>
> > > >> > On Jan 22, 1:40 pm, rigs <rigs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> >> My last was a lab-shepherd with high energy till he grew old- age 13.
> > > >> >> Also had a Chesapeake Bay retriever- another large dog that loves
> > > >> >> water. I have a large backyard but he really needed a field- stream-
> > > >> >> woods,etc. This cold is hard on paws- some fit their dogs with
> > > >> >> sweaters and booties.//Yes- it does seem the Brits collapse in snow
> > > >> >> and unusual weather but it's a strange year- even Jerusalem could make
> > > >> >> snowmen this year. Anyway- happy travels today.
>
> > > >> >> On Jan 22, 12:56 am, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > >> >> > Max loves the snow - though we rarely drop much below freezing here
> > > >> >> > even with wind-chill.  I'm off into Manchester today, assuming out
> > > >> >> > trains run on a quarter of an inch of snow,
>
> > > >> >> > On Jan 22, 1:07 am, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > >> >> > > brrr.  We might be there overnight.  The deep freeze.  Wonderful
> > > >> >> > > world.  We move through it regardless.
>
> > > >> >> > > On Jan 21, 10:24 am, rigs <rigs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > >> >> > > > My earlier post has been diverted to outer space, it seems.
>
> > > >> >> > > > That loneliness may be a cover, you know.
>
> > > >> >> > > > Saul Bellow was a rascal.
>
> > > >> >> > > > The speed of information leads to surprise and a protean miss, often.
> > > >> >> > > > I look for patterns in history/culture and try to keep two columns-
> > > >> >> > > > pro and con with hope for the margins. The top tiers of government are
> > > >> >> > > > usually the culprits rather than their off-spring- and it's true of
> > > >> >> > > > tribes as well as complicated systems- the buck really does stop- even
> > > >> >> > > > in suitcases of cash and packets of Viagra.
>
> > > >> >> > > > My "dog" would need diapers- we're at -30 wind chill factor.
>
> > > >> >> > > > On Jan 21, 6:10 am, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > >> >> > > > > Of course, I don't expect anything tangled-up with government and
> > > >> >> > > > > academic bureaucracy to produce much practical.  The gist was once
> > > >> >> > > > > that we should aim for praxis, a form of rational action.  For some
> > > >> >> > > > > the guide was marxism, but most of us grew up with a form of Keynesian
> > > >> >> > > > > guide - the economics of full employment and FDR's never completed
> > > >> >> > > > > second Bill of Rights.  More recently we have reverted to the control
> > > >> >> > > > > fraud of banksters and neo-classical economics.  I was never much
> > > >> >> > > > > interested in the 'grand theory' - as a cop I was more interested in
> > > >> >> > > > > what people were hiding and lying about, as scientist the grand was
> > > >> >> > > > > excluded as rigorously as possible a the laboratory door and as a
> > > >> >> > > > > university teacher I was more interested in developing resourceful
> > > >> >> > > > > humans than daft, religious managerial theories.  As a kid, my elder
> > > >> >> > > > > brother and sister always claimed I changed the goalposts in argument
> > > >> >> > > > > and as I grew up I discovered this was what argument was generally
> > > >> >> > > > > about - the goalposts changing name to root metaphor and paradigm.
> > > >> >> > > > > Experts in argument are bought like lawyers and have about the same
> > > >> >> > > > > ethics.  When Socrates gestures at the Sophists claiming 'I know
> > > >> >> > > > > nothing, but even this is to know more than they' he is just being the
> > > >> >> > > > > smartest guy in the room.
> > > >> >> > > > > We say 'jaw-jaw' is better than 'war-war' - but there is no crucial
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

--