One suspects you are far too nice to know any of this Molly, though know we'd have been back to back against some of the stuff I did deal with. Attitudes to perversion tend to be perspectival and leave us making Gabby's 'interpretations'. How could you or I possibly know what the pervert feels? The deconstructivist philosopher knows a thousand dull tomes can be written at the first pick of the nit and that she will be kept in cheese and biscuits selling them, or champagne if one stumbles into the best seller like 'On Bullshit' by prof. Frankfurt at Princeton. He has bullshit as different to lying, a pathetic mistake - he doesn't realise how big the lies are and the role of BS in not giving out material that can be checked empirically (this is how chummy talks in interrogation).
-- I'd guess I'm even more impatient than you and also fearful of extended re-inventing the wheel argument that might be avoided if people would actually read and observe the world until yesterday - rather than think they are inventing it. There is some need to work out that the to be embraced paradox is not charged with 30,000 volts. Gabby's 'needle' has its uses as you'll be imagining in the instant shock possibilities of who might be holding the uninsulated pricker.
What we may be doing on inventing nit-picking in an opponent is disguised ad hominem - disguised because manners demand this and not the honest expression of the eristic. But, of course, we went to school instead of learning to think and recognise argument in its nine forms. That would have been nit picking. Religious and pervert activity in the brain seem centred in similar places when religion falls from grace to 'let's kill loads of school children'. You are a guiding light Moll - but the batteries may need the odd recharge and the light not always shone up the same blind alleys or to advertise self-enlightenment somewhat selfishly not grounded in what can be checked by routine enquiries ordinary people might make.
I suspect we can experience more pleasure by staying 5 minutes longer in a warm bed in the morning, than in consensual rituals of intense hygiene, rubber gloves (I'll leave the rest) or miserable enforced depravity of African tendency with grenades and female body parts or piss-poor ideas like women having to belong to a man. The nit pick might just be the needle that bursts the septic bubble. We've just wasted £31 million, mostly on lawyers, to discover a bunch of 'smelly Arabs' lied about being tortured by the 'excellent British' who had nipped over to Iraq to help out. Nit picking doesn't necessarily come cheap and we might not be much good at recognising who is doing it. Where are all the fine selves doing the right thing? The truth is we are repeatedly doing the wrong things and the fine self has learned the rhetoric of 'learning lessons at the expense of everyone else'. If, like me, one takes the view religion and virtue ethics have failed for millennia, most of the world's noise it nit-pick.
I'd like to speed things up and I'd start by looking at newsrooms and the need to see them as places of no news, full of women pouting at auto-cue, in adoration of dull men nearby, shifting bodies sexually, always pretty, never fat, never in wheelchairs or otherwise disabled and never ever use language most people do ... this is a pervert view to many, though I see the newsroom, religion and much more mannered social structuration as not-picked together. What politesse and etiquette have we 'mannered' together in nit-pick precedes our even talking? It doesn't matter between us Molly because we do no harm where we can. To some the term 'smelly Arabs' will make me racist - but we jump to all sorts of silly interpretations in the stereotyping behind political correctness. No one assumes I am talking about Norbert Elias here (some German guy Gabbs - probably had nothing worthwhile to say then eh?). New perspective might look like nit-picking or rude.
On Wednesday, December 17, 2014 11:48:31 AM UTC, Molly wrote:
On Wednesday, December 17, 2014 11:48:31 AM UTC, Molly wrote:
Splitting hairs makes every question unanswerable. Enjoying perversion has little to do with joy and everything to do with self punishment and destruction, all fear based. Confusing emotion is an easy way of denying self or the responsibility of self. A person who does everything they can to look at anything but self can pervert much and in the process create much pain for self and others. An easy way to refuse to relate with intimacy to people or circumstances in experience is to pervert, as this will push people away and spiral circumstance out of control. I have seen my share of sadomasochists and they all seem to complete the self destructive cliche over time.Dwelling on what we don't have, can't do or have lost or psychologically dominating others with these constructs is a self indulgent waste of time and has little to do with the creative work of engaging experience with whole-hearted imagination and action. Do we have a choice on how we conduct ourselves moment to moment? Or is some over riding program forcing us to engage in self destruction that leads to misery and isolation? I think that if we are not making the choices ourselves we are looking way from the fact that we can. The number of reasons I see for people to do that seems endless.
On Tuesday, December 16, 2014 4:48:49 PM UTC-5, archytas wrote:One can, of course, enjoy perversion Molly - though I don't mean to take your comment negatively. The philosophers easily get somewhere beyond the double negative and the realm of destroying metaphysics without realising that is - er - metaphysical. There are theories that language can't 'mean'. Neither of us would want to 'enjoy' walking into a school to kill teachers and children, which implies 'things not to enjoy'. Feeling sorry about the last slaughter in Pakistan by religious loonies or drone is likely a good thing if we can turn such to action.What prioritises enjoying experience above feeling bad about injustice?
On Tuesday, 16 December 2014 13:47:55 UTC, Molly wrote:Your last question is a good one. Why can't we enjoy what we experience, rather than feeling sorry for ourselves for what we don't?
On Monday, December 15, 2014 3:16:24 PM UTC-5, archytas wrote:I have a DSc. though swear I never listened in class. We need a shield of innocence to get through "education". The false teachers always deny logic. Superstition creeps in - even your soul/s is a classic form Allan. Standard supernatural views split between god-centred and soul-centred views, naturalism splits into objective - subjective and, of course, according to nihilism (or pessimism), what would make a life meaningful either cannot obtain or as a matter of fact simply never does.Here's some classic jive:'Another fresh argument for nihilism is forthcoming from certain defenses of anti-natalism, the view that it is immoral to bring new people into existence because doing so would be a harm to them. There are now a variety of rationales for anti-natalism, but most relevant to debates about whether life is meaningful is probably the following argument from David Benatar (2006, 18–59). According to him, the bads of existing (e.g., pains) are real disadvantages relative to not existing, while the goods of existing (pleasures) are not real advantages relative to not existing, since there is in the latter state no one to be deprived of them. If indeed the state of not existing is no worse than that of experiencing the benefits of existence, then, since existing invariably brings harm in its wake, existing is always a net harm compared to not existing. Although this argument is about goods such as pleasures in the first instance, it seems generalizable to non-experiential goods, including that of meaning in life.'Benatar, D., 2006, Better Never to Have Been: The Harm of Coming into Existence, New York: Oxford University Press."Fresh argument"? Gnosticism is rather ancient!One straightforward rationale for nihilism is the combination of supernaturalism about what makes life meaningful and atheism about whether God exists. If you believe that God or a soul is necessary for meaning in life, and if you believe that neither exists, then you are a nihilist, someone who denies that life has meaning. Albert Camus is famous for expressing this kind of perspective, suggesting that the lack of an afterlife and of a rational, divinely ordered universe undercuts the possibility of meaning (Camus 1955; cf. Ecclesiastes).Camus, A., 1955, The Myth of Sisyphus, J. O'Brian (tr.), London: H. Hamilton.The "philosophy" (where did we get the idea philosophers do philosophy?) has a lot in common with Monty Python - hardly surprising given these clowns went to Oxbridge. We might see philosophers as just another set of BS merchants selling 'argument'. Let's have your souls and not believe in them mate - then we get get as really miserable as this state:The idea shared among many contemporary nihilists is that there is something inherent to the human condition that prevents meaning from arising, even granting that God exists. For instance, some nihilists make the Schopenhauerian claim that our lives lack meaning because we are invariably dissatisfied; either we have not yet obtained what we seek, or we have obtained it and are boredI can't read stuff like this without imaging how far we can slide with it - like we did as kids slicking up an ice patch of the footpath. Have we forgotten how to have a laugh when we get into the slide?
On Monday, 15 December 2014 11:28:48 UTC, Allan Heretic wrote:LoL
BS : Bull Shitter
MS : Master Shitter
PHD : Piled Higher & Deeper
The true meaning of universal degree systems.
Not oddly I do agree with you. It seems our society is built literally on bullshit. Unfortunately our society chooses to feed upon the soft lie of bullshit rather thsn face the simple truth. There always be a few enlightened individuals. There has always been teachers of truth and those false teachers (possible examples: politicians ~ religious leaders ~ greedy souls) that feed on gullible innocent souls who in their need to survive create their own fertilizer.
Do not murder, rape, enslave or harm others
-----Original Message-----
From: archytas <nwterry@gmail.com>
To: minds-eye@googlegroups.com
Sent: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 11:56 AM
Subject: Re: Mind's Eye TaurascaticsThe professor wrote a BS book on BS. No secrets revealed, only the promise they were to be, which is BS.--
On Monday, December 15, 2014 6:24:42 AM UTC, Allan Heretic wrote:Silence lad
STOP! Giving away secrets
BS, MS, & PHD
Do not murder, rape, enslave or harm others
-----Original Message-----
From: archytas <nwterry@gmail.com>
To: minds-eye@googlegroups.com
Sent: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 7:16 AM
Subject: Mind's Eye Taurascatics--"The study of bullshit should occupy an important place alongside rhetoric because taurascatics is the antistrophe of rhetorical theory, for both are concerned with the politics of semiotic interaction, and with the frameworks within which that interaction will be produced, interpreted, and judged." (Professor Fredal, Ohio State)The frame includes: :• The Bullshitter (the originator of the BS)• The Bullshit, (the content), and• The Bullshitee (the recipient).Examples of the kind of BS one might encounter on a daily basis : e.g.• "Collateral damage" for civilians accidentally killed in military actions.• "Rightsizing" for firing people, and• "Alternative interrogation techniques" for torture.One of the most salient features of our culture is that there is so much bullshit. Everyone knows this. Each of us contributes his share. But we tend to take the situation for granted. Most people are rather confident of their ability to recognize bullshit and to avoid being taken in by it. So the phenomenon has not aroused much deliberate concern, or attracted much sustained inquiry. In consequence, we have no clear understanding of what bullshit is, why there is so much of it, or what functions it serves. (Harry Frankfurt)My opinion is one has to undertake the labours of Hercules to clear space to say anything. If Facilitator calls his next sculpture 'The Taurascat' and it looks like me I won't sue if I can use a photograph on the cover of my next book. It will be indistinguishable from other marketing and he could always say I put him up to it. There might be some publicity from one called 'Facilitatory Taurascatics' or one in silver from Allan.Seasons greetings everyone. Remember, the grass is greener on the other side because of cow pats.
---
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/d/optout .
---
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/d/optout .
---
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/d/optout.
0 comentários:
Postar um comentário