Archive for November, 2009

‘The Sociopathic Epidemic’: Commentary

0

This newsletter/post is about an article by ‘Robin of Berkeley’ in the ‘American Thinker’ and comments submitted to that website, by yrs trly, from the ‘aboriginal physics’ point of view, a sort of a probe as to whether we could dialogue not just about things that are going wrong, but about potential flaws in the foundations of our Enlightment social architecture.

* * *

Whether we are talking about organismic ‘dis-ease’ or ‘social ‘dis-ease’, one is free to apply the ‘Aboriginal Physics’ view as an alternative to the ‘Enlightenment physics view.

In the following instance, I commented on the article ‘The Sociopathic Epidemic’ in the ‘American Thinker’ website, giving the ‘Aboriginal Physics’ perspective.  First of all, in a condensed one third of a page format (at the bottom of this post).  Since the website did publish it, I submitted for publication, the original comment that I had prepared which was one and a half pages long and using more colloquial language where the ‘underlying physics’ is not so evident.

I don’t know if they will publish this longer comment, but if they do, I will report that in a comment here on the Aboriginal Physics website.

That being said, the following speaks for itself if one first reads the American Thinker article ‘The Sociopathic Epidemic’

http://comments.americanthinker.com/read/42323/467981.html

The following is the one and a half page comment version as was submitted for publication

* * *

Preview: This is how your message will appear in the forum.

Re: The Sociopathic Epidemic

Posted by: emile

Date: 11/14/2009 08:36PM

… what emile is saying in regard to the dynamo model of social dynamics can be translated as follows; (more…)

Can we, together, build a better world?

1

My experience is that many people interpret ‘working together to build a better world’ in the sense of ‘acting out of our ‘free will’ guided by the ‘universal knowledge of good’; i.e. out of our ‘purported’ moral and ethical knowledge.

This notion of joining together to make a better world seems to raise in us a feeling of ‘come on, people, we can do it, let’s get on with it’.

But there are spoilsports like myself, who will say things like; ‘Do you really believe in ‘free will’?’   and ‘How do you know what’s ‘good’ and what’s ‘bad’?

At this point,  I tend to start getting those nasty ‘what the hell is he going on about’ looks, that if they were utterances, would say;  ‘if you are not with us, you are against us.’ (more…)

Remembrance

0

Today, in Canada, is ‘Remembrance Day’ (November 11th) but my fear is that it MAY be serving  more to bring about ’selective forgetfulness’.

I do not believe it ‘subtracts’ from the respectful intentions of our remembrance to ‘add’ to our ‘remembrances’.

Should we forget the mothers and sisters of those young German boys who couldn’t bear to see their mother starving or their sisters turning to prostitution, humiliated indirectly or directly by the insensitivity of the people ‘in power’ in the world, having been made ‘the latter’s prisoners’ by the harsh terms of the Treaty of Versailles ending WWI?

Their mothers and sisters know that their love and caring for their families made them prey to radical calls to action against those powerful others, a calling which saw many of them pay the ultimate price, their own young lives.   Their mothers and sisters know that they were ‘the collateral damage’ of retribution aimed at their fathers.  Everyone knew, at the time of the Treaty of Versailles, that the ‘innocents’ were going to pay the price.  Journalists of the era captured this overt injustice in cartoons such as the following;

'evil nazis' - result, or cause, of global dissonance?

'evil nazis' - result?, or cause? ... of global dissonance?

Harold Nicolson, a British delegate at Versailles, declared the treaties ‘neither just nor wise’, and called the delegates ‘very stupid men’.   But Winston Churchill believed that the treaty was the best that could be achieved, and that  (more…)

Author’s Subtext. . . . . APN #1

0

Pandemic Preemption – ‘Author’s Subtext’ [see footnote in ‘Introduction’]

Contributors; Ted Lumley

In writing this first newsletter (APN #1, Pandemic Pre-emption)  on the ‘H1N1 swine flu pandemic’, I wanted to try to deepen the view of ‘what is actually going on’, to capture how the sense of ‘being a participant in evolution’ (a ‘strand in the web of life’) does important things for us and for the way we engage with/in the world, that are absent when we opt for the sense of ‘being in control’, as associates with dealing in ‘representations’ and the ‘causal model’.

The remarks on community ‘seen’ as the ‘wild desert flower’ that spontaneously self-organises, rather than the community ‘seen’ as something ‘deliberately constructed’ as it may appear in ‘representations’, tries to infuse the sense that the relationship between ‘habitat’ and ‘inhabitant’ can be ‘seen’ in two ways; in an ‘aboriginal/medieval’ way and an Enlightenment – representation way.

The approach attempted has been to infuse, by way of a ‘background awareness’, the sense that there is indeed a conjugate relationship between ‘inhabitants’ and ‘habitat’ (‘terrain’).   In the viewfield of a notional long-term observer (the ‘eyes of the continuing evolutionary process’), the flow of people in and out of the oasis is relentless and so the occupants of the dwellings around the oasis are ceaselessly being replaced, not only by the immigration-emigration flow but by the birth-death flow, so that the dwellings (that we can capture as photographic representations) can be understood as a kind of ‘scale’ that develops along the periphery of the flow, in the manner that a silt-loaded river in the delta dumps out the material to build its own banks.  (more…)

Pandemic Pre-emption APN#1

0

Perhaps nothing pre-empts minority views as effectively as the threat of a global catastrophe that appears to be avertable, if and only if everyone ‘gets on board’ the effort to ‘cut it off at the pass’.  For example, if one believes that getting vaccinated will attenuate the spread of H1N1 to the point that it never reaches ‘critical mass’, then it becomes a ‘moral imperative’ for everyone to get vaccinated and, figuratively speaking, lower the lead rods into the about-to-go-supercritical nuclear core of global society.

Managing a pandemic counter-defensive requires a concerted effort by the media to mobilize the masses, and there is no time, under these circumstances, to open the media channels to hear out the ‘minority views’ which question a runaway logic that may be more effective in provoking pandemonium than countering pandemic.  (more…)

Introduction:

7

‘Aboriginal Physics’connotes our pre-Enlightenment/Medieval understanding of the ceaselessly unfolding ‘fluid’ world in which we formerly saw ourselves and all things as being included.  The Enlightenment brought with it a different way of ‘seeing’ things — ‘seeing’ the world not by the flow itself, but by way of ‘representations’ that ‘froze” the flowing dynamical forms of nature; representations such as maps, diagrams and later ‘photographs’, whereas aboriginal or medieval ‘physics’ – an implicit rather than explicit field of study – saw ‘dynamics’ as a fluid-unfolding wherein the persisting patterns-in-the-flow were not yet given static ‘local’ form as frozen ‘representations’.  A storm-cell in the flow of the atmosphere in medieval times was still ‘seen’ in terms of ‘the flow that was always there’ that spawned ‘swirlings’ within itself, while in Enlightenment representation, the same storm-cell came to be ‘seen’ as a ‘local system’ with ‘its own local agency’.

Something radical happened to our manner of ‘seeing’ and understanding in the transition from the Aboriginal/Medieval worldview to the Enlightenment worldview, the notional ‘parentage’ of ’cause’ and ‘result’ was inverted.   In our ‘Enlightenment’ way of ‘seeing’, changes in the habitat are understood as being ’caused’ by the actions and interactions of ‘local’ objects/organisms/systems (the ‘inhabitants’), but in the Aboriginal/Medieval way of ‘seeing’, the APPARENTLY ‘local’ objects/organisms/systems  (‘inhabitants’) were understood as being both animated by, and created by, the changes in the habitat.  Today, many people would say that ‘storm-cells’ in the flow of the atmosphere ‘stir up’ (’cause’ change in the flow of) the atmosphere, but the fact is that it is the changes in the flow that not only animate the behaviour of the included cells, but create those cells.   Similarly, we may see the Colorado river as the cause of that huge ‘irregularity’ in the terrain we call the ‘Grand Canyon’, but the fact is that the Colorado river, like any other river, is the ‘result’ of irregularities in the terrain, … and we may see the trouble-makers in the streets of Paris in the summer of 1789 as the cause of irregularities in the social terrain, but the fact is that the trouble-makers were the ‘result’ of irregularities in the social terrain.

This inversion in the direction of sourcing or  ‘parental relation’ of habitat-dynamics and inhabitant-dynamics, accompanied by the reduction of the reciprocal habitat-inhabitat relation to a one-sided inhabitant-causal view, has permeated Western Enlightenment-perception generally. (more…)

Go to Top