parallel-monetary-systems/ - I've often mentioned Steve Keen, though
this is a colleague's work.
In teaching chemistry (long ago -mostly universities) the preparation
stage is a lot of 'don't do this' - in schools most staff are scared
stiff of letting the 'louts' loose. In economics and organisation
theory it's don't get suckered into KISS. You have to Poga Oke (fol-
proof). Look for instance at the following 'chain of conseuences:
courses to reactions to learning to individual changes in behaviour to
changes in group behaviour to better organisational performance
This is a standard model of educational and development evaluation.
Now explain it to me -now explain its holes and why it might be wrong
- now go and do some evaluation.
Now look at some broad economic models and go do the same. I'd hope
you worked out the standard models aren't fit to use on bog-paper.
Saul Amarel - a much better maths guy than me - once said solutions
become obvious in the analysis. There is little point telling you the
solutions if you won't do the work in analysis.
partly because it's so unrewarding in terms of jobs and so
> uncomfortable to bear, I'd say the truth is we've been 'killing
> hope'as Blum maintains, under what is a holocaust of the American
> Empire (you can read his book free via googling for the pdf - you
> won't have). The issue is about learning a positive history - but
> many will see it as anti-American. To maintain a 'positive' (and
> false) view against the evidence you exclude the evidence and form a
> world-view that justifies what happens. I'm not for handing
> government over to a bunch of Arabs or Pakistanis (to name a few) with
> guns. I'm not for solutions bound it in our western clown
> perspectives either.
> One can see, as argument progresses, that unwanted ends (against
> positive history in the real sense)emerge in that one might end up
> leading just as leaders always have. How do we avoid such outcomes?
> How do we encourage innovation (do you know what this is, or do you
> think Apple and Microsoft are innovators?) without unwarranted power
> accruing tgmalo the successful? Many innovations did not make the
> inventors rich, or even those first to market.
> In giving medicine to the third world, one often has to confront local
> power. You need to know a lot of negatives to get round this and work
> with it. I've kicked my way through some of that, often wishing I had
> more than an AKM as back up. The solutions are fairly obvious in
> terms of outcomes - the questions are all about how in the blinding
> kitsch of eno-classical economics and general boneheadedness. This
> latter may mean 'you'. Even you Chris might ask yourself (I take your
> question as from a mate) who does put anything positive forward in non-
> intercourse-the-paradigmal-synergistic penguin form.
>
> We need to take the streets is the start - mostly because our clever
> people don't care. Then come questions about what to do and how to do
> it. But what use asking the questions until enough work is done on
> what won't just lead to default positions and history repeating itself
> because most are to idle to learn any etc. There no room for the
> grand plan in here - literally on time outs - but also because most
> just can't even imagine the depth of study needed to know about the
> existing house of cards. I can say what's needed in a few lines - but
> the nay saying they would induce is massive. Much of what needs doing
> is to understand the relation between actual knowledge and what those
> who have it do unto others (and themselves) by cornering wealth. And
> to find broader methods of 'teaching' to bring more up to speed (this
> would not be in schools or universities as now).
>
> Try doing my lead carbonate experiment in the middle of a neutron
> star. You'll find you need to know a lot about the 'environment' to
> get it done. We know what needs doing - reasonable equality,
> innovation-fair-competiveness and to stop power acceretion away from
> democratic control without inane bureaucracy - but we're struggling in
> a "neutron star" environment. How would you go about giving micro-
> finance to someone in Yemen (Ido) or Rwanda (I do). Got a couple of
> hundred quid and you can start. I guess you 'positives' ain't doing
> this or would give the money to an agency that ensures it is wasted.
> I'm not this hard onmy students - except the better ones.
>
> On Oct 21, 9:37 pm, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > My guess is that modern rationality starts with Descartes - though he
> > doesn't provide a template, just some ground we can get into the
> > issues through. The great warnings to us on 'solutions' is real
> > history and the failure of Germany as the most cultured and scientific
> > nation culminating in "Hitler" - the lesson being so-called triumphs
> > in rationality, science and culture are dreadful fantasies. I would
> > hope in this that German friends would not see any blaming in this -
> > the culpability is wider-set in imperialism and our still stupid
> > notions of leadership. In intellectual terms we are supposedly in
> > postmoderism (really read that and weep in a different way from
> > Gabby's sonnet). The crisis is one of legitimation and the need for
> > an incredulous stance towards grand narratives like religion and the
> > 'wealth creation' espoused in the status quo of oligarchy (rather than
> > competitive capitalism).
>
> > I'd say the big issue is dishonesty and the ease with which we swallow
> > chronic lies whole as the facts stand up against them. The idiocy is
> > in demanding paragons of virtue in politics. Honesty is not so easily
> > produced. As a population we remain crudely ignorant and politicians
> > can rely on this. I can prove over and again that voters don't know
> > what they vote for - the result being my regard as a smartarse,
> > "commie" or whatever suits. We get bogged down by popular opinion
> > (Idols in Bacon) and inane rationalist fantasies as to whether god
> > exists or not to which there is only 'answer' in sentient (Hume). We
> > rightly point to failures in communism whilst failing to spot we have
> > already been carried away in the anti-communism (even anti-democratic
> > management - see the use of the UnAmerican stuff against quite mild
> > adherents of such) that drives our resources into the hands of a tiny
> > few, leaving even 1 in 5 Americans poor etc. and wars all over -let
> > alone poverty through massive over-breeding and climate change.
>
> > The answer is a massive change in our ways, including world-government
> > - but the rub here is this can't involve the kind of people doing
> > politics at the whim of banksterism and it does mean not allowing
> > 'riches' as currently conceived, which many think 'fair' owing to
> > propaganda. The statement on population ignorance itself needs review
> > as it can't itself be just another bid for leadership and power. On
> > the odd occasion I do chemistry for schoolkids I do experiments that
> > go bang, flash light and then a tame one in which heating Lead
> > Carbonate turns it yellow before it melts. The kids rarely understand
> > (which isn't the point). Teaching economics is much the same in
> > result - most end up with no clue and would need to be in intensive
> > educational care to get a grok. I am much more confident in my
> > scientific prognostications than on those of how we should live and a
> > viable economics. Yet the world of science is much less authoritarian
> > than that of public opinion, despite the techniques being much more
> > reliable. If you don't want to listen properly on how to make,say,
> > gunpowder - then you're free to blow your hands off. Yet how do I
> > tell anyone not to have children in excess? Recruit Indira Gandhi?
> > How do we get work done - sit around drinking tea voting?
>
> > The basic idea is often to get everyone up to western standards - yet
> > what 'standard' do we offer? Planet burning firsts? A model that has
> > always favoured a few rich with a minor blip after WW2 and is as debt-
> > ridden as ancient Mesopotamia? A big part of the answer is the
> > setting up of complex regulation that prevents undue power accretion.
> > The human tendency in this is towards bureaucracy and that runs into n
> > iron cage (Weber). I believe computing offers new avenues -but we'd
> > have to guard against this being perverted in the usual ways. The key
> > roadblock is world peace and not believing we could have it and the
> > daft assumption just laying down our 'guns' would produce it.
>
> > There's a massive literature that could help - the problem being few
> > read and would even watch if our media could summarise it. Should I
> > issue a bibliography? This doesn't even work at university.
>
> > The first solution is getting resources into individual and collective
> > control with banking as a utility (rather than designed to steal them
> > as happens now even with micro-credit). This itself should produce
> > enough argument to fill several books - but watch this space. The
> > move is broadly capitalist but anti-oligarchy pro-democracy in the
> > sense of (Popper's) control of those allocated 'power'. Questions
> > immediately arise as to what is not allowable - like a bunch of
> > Taliban mistreating women and trying to build an H-bomb or burning
> > coal for the hell of it.
>
> > To see this as other than 'castle-in-the-air' one needs an
> > understanding of social economics and the mad stuff of the mainstream
> > and what its results are. This requires a lot of negation -something
> > widely perceived (still, long after science) perceived as negative
> > because of Idols. Rigsy started a thread on Freud in which this and
> > the paranoid-schizoid and 'depressive' positions could have been
> > explored. This level of intellectualism can even lead to 'academic
> > bullying' claims in universities in these dumbed-down days. A good
> > start would be Naomi Klein's 'Shock Doctrine' would be a start, but
> > only a start (you can get it on Movshare and the like).
>
> > I'm much more positive than most people I know in spirit, from running
> > myself into the ground and desperate tackles to trying new stuff. One
> > meets this negative stuff everywhere from underperforming sports teams
> > to simple changes like not buying vastly over priced ink and toner and
> > getting advice from the data protection officer that means don't put
> > anything on your project website. The 'highly positive', of course
> > ain't going through the Pillars of Hercules because they'll fall off
> > the edge. The positive question is nearly always 'what junk are we in
> > thrall to now' - what is today's "flat earth theory". The big
> > challenge isn't ignorance but incompetence even to the point of not
> > recognising one's own. The arguments many...
>
> read more »
0 comentários:
Postar um comentário