The Seven of Nine by logical definition can only flee to dreamscape to achieve the 360 degree spherical vision, that's correct.
2013/1/29 archytas <nwterry@gmail.com>
The tempting thing is always just to go with the fashion Gabby. Most
of us just do the day job and hope for the best - perhaps hoping we
miss the Russian curse and never have to live in interesting lives. I
considered taking steroids myself. A friend did. He made it, I
didn't really. He's dead. Even in amateur teams half were on
'Smarties' of some kind. I'm not sure I had the courage not to or
lacked such to consume - I played at the edge of the rules on the
pitch if I had to. Looking back I'd rather I'd never been bored
enough to play.
The 0.2 versus 99.8 debate has a lot right in it - but a lot missing -
including how we might stop a few 'black bag fantasists with guns'
taking over the Utopian paradise following the dictatorship of the
proles that evaded a constitution written by its first leader. I
always baulk at the point in science fiction where great leaders like
Janeway (I'm after her with an inter-galactic genocide writ) say 'this
isn't a democracy' whilst pondering a decision to fire that would have
already have been made by machine to evade destruction by the enemy.
In current dreams, Seven-of-Nine has injected nano-stuff into me to
give me 360 degree spherical vision (in space it's handy to see what's
coming from up, down, forwards and backwards). Simplistic Utopian
argument needs modernising to include more dimensions. I doubt
leadership as we've known it has much place in a really different
society, but out literature lacks ability not to put it there, let
alone institutions that could effectively replace it. Management
fashions don't change much.
On Jan 29, 10:19 am, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Rigs' 'some Neanderthal figured that out watching animal behaviour'
> strikes me as potentially key. 'Watching' undergraduate classes (any
> really) over many years a teacher can see their herd behaviour. They
> don't read much is one conclusion. Our wider society reads even
> less. People remain very parochial in the main. Most can learn to do
> stuff like driving cars, breeding and so on. We don't do our day-to-
> day stuff in any deep knowledge. The Italians are a paradigm case of
> restricted breeding, in spite of infallible Popes and presumably
> because economics and birth control technology have exercised
> considerable power in the day-to-day. I don't meet people who don't
> have children (or more children) because of deep argument on carbon
> footprints and not burning the planet. I doubt the Italians have
> achieved their sensible population control through abstinence or
> environmental concern.
>
> Questions on how to achieve an informed majority are very difficult.
> Education is known to reduce the number of children women have. It
> thus offends those who would keep women as breeding machines in black
> bags - and even from this tiny fact we can tell education is
> political. It also shows that there is no neutral argument on such
> matters as rights. Does anyone have the right to form a Nazi Party?
> Liberal argument must somewhere confront those who will not share its
> assumptions and who act as 'hot heads'.
>
> We still carry the Neanderthals with us, having assimilated them as
> surely as the Borg. The bacteria we carry (other than as subsumed
> mitochondria) remain part of a hologenome in our genetic development
> with influence on our genetic code - something itself developing in co-
> evolution in our environment. We have, if we put the effort in,
> factual history to guide us. Bees know how to genetically convert
> from nurses to foragers. Our technologies have made much work the
> province of machines and we should be considering what our need for
> workers is in our new environment. My view is that we are actually
> flapping about with a religious politics and economics that cannot
> deal rationally with this situation. We also know every horrible
> regime in history had its own ideology of virtue, often claimed
> rational, in which leaders claimed to lead the majority to the
> promised land and that such claims were really those of the road of
> serfdom or the cry of a cavalry charge into the heart of the volcano.
>
> I suspect we can do better now if we can get honest dialogue going. I
> think we have to stop being so easily conned that any form of
> argument, including scientific practice, left in the hands of a few
> and private from the rest of us, can achieve this. We need to admit
> we are in an era needing dreams and imagination that we can reasonably
> predict the outcome of. The negative side of this is the ease with
> which lying politicians operate with dreamy promises repeatedly made
> and never fulfilled. The question concerns how we make not repeating
> history positive and find political-economic technology the majority
> can drive like a car, respecting rules of the road and making most
> decisions themselves.
>
> On Jan 29, 9:10 am, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Thinking a bit further on Lee's splendid jibe of what happens when the
> > majority comes round to my point of view I note this often occurs with
> > a majority forgetting it was my point of view in the first place!
> > People like to fell ideas are their own even where copyright isn't a
> > factor. In Socractic irony the knowledge is presumed there and just
> > needs the right dialogue to bring it out.
>
> > I don't notice much Republican rhetoric from rigs, only a marginal GOP
> > tendency easily subsumed under mutual respect. The real danger is the
> > 'there is no alternative' doctrine and a serious problem with that is
> > one starts to despise those uttering it and enter the pitfall of
> > enunciating the alternatives in the same conviction, matching
> > zealotism with just another form of zealotism. I have never seen
> > politics as important enough to get in the way of friendship.
>
> > The economists I tend to agree with at the moment (Steve Keen, Bill
> > Black, Yves Smith and Michael Hudson are examples easily found on the
> > Net - naked capitalism is a good source) could all be considered left
> > wing. But I also agree with most rigs says and much on such
> > libertarian digests as Zero Hedge. A big claim now current is that
> > neo-classical (pejorative theo-classical) economics is more like a
> > religion than a science and, of course, the alternatives scientific.
> > The arguments made on this point are weak and leave out a vast
> > literature on the sociology and methods of science and what purely
> > rational argument could be.
>
> > My own view is that politics and economics as we have them remain a
> > control fraud and we need a way past this. It would be great if we
> > could do this through scientific practice we could all understand and
> > be involved in. The immediate problem with this is that science is
> > esoteric and difficult to learn. I suspect it works by excluding the
> > majority and the majority still think in Idols (Francis Bacon). We
> > are stuck with an elite deciding what science is. One answer seems to
> > be to train everyone to be capable in scientific argument and
> > practice, something I also believe impossible. If we could do this
> > then people would be capable of informed voting - but in the real
> > world people claim to vote 'on the economy' and then can't answer even
> > simple questions on what the economy is.
>
> > Most of us, I guess, would like to vote for some smart people we can
> > trust. Even this might be to vote for national governments pitted
> > against each other in global competition. Our 'smart people' end up
> > pitting nation against nation - not smart in my view.
>
> > On Jan 29, 7:06 am, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > yes sports is dangerous stuff ,,steroids are not uncommon also
> > > carried on though pro sports oops I forgot they buy off the drug czar
>
> > > I do not see why you really don't look into what is going on instead
> > > of just spout republican rhetoric..
>
> > > On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 12:59 AM, rigs <rigs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > I should have added independence from family, sex and drinking though
> > > > the latter two are primed in highschool. Also, students can read and
> > > > write but many need (forgot the term) classes to improve their skills.
> > > > Not sure if handwriting/grammar is even a factor anymore. // Then
> > > > there's sports- though Obama thinks it is dangerous stuff along with
> > > > gun ownership so soon American men/women will be civilian wimps. But
> > > > the military is an alternative to college/poor employment
> > > > opportunities so there is always an answer unless one considers
> > > > military service a risk and who would do that?
>
> > > > On Jan 28, 8:57 am, rigs <rigs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> Considering that many movers and shakers were lucky to get a
> > > >> highschool education back in the '20's and '30's and that some recent
> > > >> innovators dropped out of college one does start to question the
> > > >> process. Add up the loan debt, as well. College may be a form of the
> > > >> caste system, networking or opportunity/income leveler. I repeat my
> > > >> stated opinion that college is a respectable place to park ones
> > > >> children for some parents. It used to be a place to meet a mate but
> > > >> now a career is the object since two can no longer live as cheaply as
> > > >> one. Often college entrants still cannot read or write plus now they
> > > >> have expectations of a certain level of hype and bedazzlement.//
> > > >> Teachers burn out in some subjects because it's 24/7- just in
> > > >> correcting essay exams and term papers plus checking for plagiarizims,
> > > >> etc. and because they are expected to be sort of a pseudo-parent/
> > > >> nursemaid/sex-object/inspiration all while getting published to prove
> > > >> their value/worth to the institution.//Once one learns to read and
> > > >> comprehend they can teach themselves most anything. A library card
> > > >> will do...
>
> > > >> On Jan 28, 6:39 am, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > >> > Strangely enough Lee I do experience that! Brian Clough should have
> > > >> > been England manager! One finds a lot of arrogant ignorance in
> > > >> > classrooms and a lot of stereotyping by teachers and students.
> > > >> > Teaching is often a weird experience and difficult to drop from the
> > > >> > system - something pretty important to let learning take place. I
> > > >> > don't use textbooks unless I've given up on a class that won't fend
> > > >> > for itself (some demand spoonfeeding and find discovery learning
> > > >> > terrifying). It's easy enough to get classes round to looking at work
> > > >> > motivation in terms of the content and process theories of 'chapter
> > > >> > three' and regurgitate what's there. To a man jack they'd all give up
> > > >> > work if they won the lottery, suggesting a rather different theory.
> > > >> > I'm sure the books are mostly wrong and that more than that the need
> > > >> > for basic texts is a combination of bad teachers and commercial
> > > >> > pressures to get bums through seats. I try to met people do what
> > > >> > interests them, what they want to find and express - but as in all
> > > >> > human activity there is a problem with people promising 'your own way'
> > > >> > who don't mean it. And it's much more difficult today to defend
> > > >> > students who don't toe to the party line. Is it possible to 'respect
> > > >> > ignorance' but at the same time fail it? What is a person who wants
> > > >> > to stay ignorant doing in a learning environment? Further down the
> > > >> > line one often finds research leads one to the conclusion that what's
>
> ...
>
> read more »
--
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to minds-eye+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to minds-eye+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
0 comentários:
Postar um comentário