Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Reality as "is", co-created and fracturing

Expand Messages
  • Elaine Phipps-Earl
    Given the high level of intellect on this forum I feel no need to explain the distinction between the reality, which is and the reality, which is
    Message 1 of 9 , Jan 3, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Given the high level of intellect on this forum I feel no need to explain
      the distinction between the reality, which "is" and the reality, which is
      "co-created". I am extremely curious, is anyone else on this forum
      sensing/experiencing a distinct fracturing between these two realities? Most
      recently, in reflection of events, as processes within both the micro and
      macro systems of co-created reality, I have this sensed awareness of a
      fracturing in the flow of cause and effect. While we link together static
      frames in the co-creation of our reality, of late this linking appears
      dysfunctional, illogical, and unreal. Just one such example in a
      multiplicity, is the US's stopping of an international flight because of the
      name of one of the passengers, who turned out to be a five year old girl. If
      the entire world is but a stage and we mere actors in this delusional drama,
      it appears the scriptwriter has lost his/her mind. Is it just me who
      perceives the most recent events, both within the micro and macro systems of
      co-created reality, as most bizarre? Is anyone else experiencing this ?



      Love & Massive Hugs

      Elaine
    • Henry W. Peters
      Dear Elaine, I hardly think you could remotely possibly be alone here... in a world built to be addicted to alienation... (intentionally or not). & true...
      Message 2 of 9 , Jan 4, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        Dear Elaine,

        I hardly think you could remotely possibly be alone here... in a
        world built to be addicted to alienation... (intentionally or not).

        & true... not always is illumination produced which casts a wider (or
        more indepth) beam... on Life's stories... Sartre, I have observed,
        wished to tip the scales toward the synthesis of historocity...
        regaining a sense of possibilty for Human development which I have
        long felt was really a HEALING effort.

        Just think, for a moment... how the little girl in the airplane in
        your story must have thought/felt!!!??? How about her mother &
        father... the other passengers, etc.

        & for good measure... contrast this with your signature... "Love &
        Massive Hugs."

        Regards,
        Henry




        >Given the high level of intellect on this forum I feel no need to explain
        >the distinction between the reality, which "is" and the reality, which is
        >"co-created". I am extremely curious, is anyone else on this forum
        >sensing/experiencing a distinct fracturing between these two realities? Most
        >recently, in reflection of events, as processes within both the micro and
        >macro systems of co-created reality, I have this sensed awareness of a
        >fracturing in the flow of cause and effect. While we link together static
        >frames in the co-creation of our reality, of late this linking appears
        >dysfunctional, illogical, and unreal. Just one such example in a
        >multiplicity, is the US's stopping of an international flight because of the
        >name of one of the passengers, who turned out to be a five year old girl. If
        >the entire world is but a stage and we mere actors in this delusional drama,
        >it appears the scriptwriter has lost his/her mind. Is it just me who
        >perceives the most recent events, both within the micro and macro systems of
        >co-created reality, as most bizarre? Is anyone else experiencing this ?
        >
        >
        >
        >Love & Massive Hugs
        >
        >Elaine
        >
      • Elaine Phipps-Earl
        Dear Henry, U wrote :- Just think, for a moment... how the little girl in the airplane in your story must have thought/felt!!!??? How about her mother &
        Message 3 of 9 , Jan 4, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          Dear Henry,

          U wrote :- Just think, for a moment... how the little girl in the airplane
          in your story must have thought/felt!!!??? How about her mother &
          father... the other passengers, etc.
          I wrote to a friend this afternoon, prior to receiving your email saying :-

          Even international news seems most bizarre. The visual images we are being
          shown do not match the text, so called facts do not connect to show one big
          picture. An example is the grounding of the UK airline, because of a "name",
          which turned out to be a 5 year old child, absolutely senseless details
          joined together to create a senario (story). Look at the details

          1. CIA warning of terrorist attack
          2. Stopping plane from taking off from UK because this
          flight was associated with a possible terrorist attack
          3. They have a "name"
          4. The name turns out to be that of a 5 year old child
          5. Although they have discovered that this name is the
          name of a 5 year old child, the flight is still grounded.

          Now if u or i were going to write a short "fiction" story we first define
          the plot. U could say that 1 and 2 are the start of the plot, but if u look
          at 3,4 and 5 they don't fit in. It appears as a story a 5 year old child
          would write. It is illogical, childish nonsense. Now u and i are not
          connected to this event and still it seems bizarre. Can u imagine how
          someone who was supposed to be taking that flight must feel? I should
          imagine they feel as though they are on the set of "Outer Limits".

          However, this is merely one example. I am experiencing this phenomena across
          the board, not only as i study world events, but also in my own personal
          life experience. People around me are exhibiting very strange behaviour. I
          cannot put my finger on it. If i was to put this sensed awareness into a
          creative (fictional) story, it would see the main character suddenly
          confronted by a bizarre
          reality, where he/she discovers that they are the only thinking, conscious
          entity and all others in their reality are merely robots, which are
          malfunctioning.

          It is rather like looking at a crystal ball which is beginning to crack,
          eventually shatter into a billion pieces. I realize this depiction could be
          linked to mental illness. However, while events could easily find one
          slipping into some form of neurosis, i feel quite stable lol. I attribute my
          stability to the fact that 90% of the time i stand as observer, outside of
          myself, merely watching on. The other 10% of the time i am overwhelmed by
          conflicting emotions, hence it is easier to stand outside ;))) However, from
          the outside looking in on reality it seems most bizarre.

          As to my Love & Massive Hugs they are sincere, i am far removed from the
          "norm" of society, however, i continually strive not only to express
          unconditional love, but also to act with unconditional love.

          Love & Massive Hugs or alternatively Kind Regards,
          Elaine

          p.s. With emails to my Professors i sign Kind Regards, but only until the
          semester has ended and then i sign Love & Massive Hugs. Over the past 25
          years, i have remained in contact with many of my Professors and some of
          them now sign with Love ;)))))))))))))))))
        • Henry W. Peters
          Dear Elaine, Then there is that famous other little girl: Alice of wonderland... & in the (backward looking) looking glass! in a place where some had to
          Message 4 of 9 , Jan 4, 2004
          • 0 Attachment
            Dear Elaine,

            Then there is that famous other little girl: "Alice" of
            wonderland... & in the (backward looking) looking glass! in a place
            where some had to run, just to stand still.

            In my previous correspondence, I meant (& mean) to suggest that in
            fact... & in basic agreement with you, there are such problems as
            "fracturing" IN the world... & although it comes in differing ways
            for different situations, & their complex of interactions, these
            separations are pervasive. & as we are in the world (the universe,
            for that matter) we necessarily become infected with, one way or the
            other... these problems...

            I continue to think that the insights & thoughtfulness of Sartre, De
            Beauvoir & others, as pioneers along the way to helping us (possibly)
            clear the meanings & interchanges that arise because of such
            alienation/fracturing... first, by beginning to logically/critically
            describe human thought process, no matter the "ideological" or social
            stratification biases... (though not necessarily disregarding any
            such) so that secondly, we may begin to situate, distinguish more
            appropriately, mental inventions derived from (possibly mindless)
            self protection schemes; denial/s, etc. (i.e., not just "personal"
            matters, news scripts, events, cultural or political) & begin to
            build a more inclusive, relevantly aware world to accommodate
            sameness/diversities... with what resource we may find available...
            including imagination.

            Though this may seem a digression... I now turn toward the rather
            well known cite of Albert Einstein regarding the development of
            atomic fission... (& I paraphrase from memory): "When we fissioned
            the atom, we changed everything save our way of thinking." I
            believe he meant exactly that... changed EVERYTHING. So a question
            then arises... if the potential for release of such matter/energy is
            ineluctably with us... (& this is potentially & in fact an
            inescapable calamity, even if not disregarded) & corresponding
            pathways for appropriate action (say to properly employ or contain
            such available options is disregarded, trivialized, etc.), why would
            there not be a "sensing/experiencing a distinct fracturing between
            these two realities?" as you put it? Perhaps another way to put it
            would be to say that the potencies for physical realization would be
            on a differing track than those charged (willingly or no) for the
            cares & considerations for those physical potencies realizations...
            (or elimination) which is us. & I am laying aside here, for the
            moment any analysis of relations of social stratifications... but do
            see the necessity to appropriately include this... to accurately
            understand any relations... between humans... (& nature as well).

            By raising the flag "alienation" I really did not wish to
            oversimplify what you were saying... rather, my meagre attempt at
            solidarity with what you were expressing in a more concrete way via
            the story you brought up... (you did ask if any one had similar such
            experience, no?). Another way to put this (less verbose) would be
            to say... You're darn right, during the Vietnam war/Watergate
            period... when I lived in California, I used to read the headlines
            of newspapers on the news stands... & swear I could see these
            troubles in the eyes, behavior of my fellow "citizens," right in the
            streets!!! i.e., a correspondence as certain events showed themselves
            in this way (a provocative manner of headline news). I saw this as
            an eruption of a massive social crisis/psychosis... that probably
            was there all the time, in more seemingly manageable form... for many
            (masked by politeness, self/imposed censorship, bureaucratic form,
            etc.)

            As to the love & hugs... hey, I am all for it... spread it
            around!!!! yes. I like to say (I raised greenhouse, hydroponic
            tomatoes for a few years): "A good tasting tomato can do things for
            people no army could do."

            Peace with love & hugs, to ya good sister, peace & good tasting
            tomatoes (if you like them).

            Henry

            p.s., from the point of view of what to do with ones observations,
            experiences, thoughts, intuitions, etc., Sartre also refused to
            distinguish between literature & philosophy.


            >Dear Henry,
            >
            >U wrote :- Just think, for a moment... how the little girl in the airplane
            >in your story must have thought/felt!!!??? How about her mother &
            >father... the other passengers, etc.
            >I wrote to a friend this afternoon, prior to receiving your email saying :-
            >
            >Even international news seems most bizarre. The visual images we are being
            >shown do not match the text, so called facts do not connect to show one big
            >picture. An example is the grounding of the UK airline, because of a "name",
            >which turned out to be a 5 year old child, absolutely senseless details
            >joined together to create a senario (story). Look at the details
            >
            >1. CIA warning of terrorist attack
            >2. Stopping plane from taking off from UK because this
            > flight was associated with a possible terrorist attack
            >3. They have a "name"
            >4. The name turns out to be that of a 5 year old child
            >5. Although they have discovered that this name is the
            > name of a 5 year old child, the flight is still grounded.
            >
            >Now if u or i were going to write a short "fiction" story we first define
            >the plot. U could say that 1 and 2 are the start of the plot, but if u look
            >at 3,4 and 5 they don't fit in. It appears as a story a 5 year old child
            >would write. It is illogical, childish nonsense. Now u and i are not
            >connected to this event and still it seems bizarre. Can u imagine how
            >someone who was supposed to be taking that flight must feel? I should
            >imagine they feel as though they are on the set of "Outer Limits".
            >
            >However, this is merely one example. I am experiencing this phenomena across
            >the board, not only as i study world events, but also in my own personal
            >life experience. People around me are exhibiting very strange behaviour. I
            >cannot put my finger on it. If i was to put this sensed awareness into a
            >creative (fictional) story, it would see the main character suddenly
            >confronted by a bizarre
            >reality, where he/she discovers that they are the only thinking, conscious
            >entity and all others in their reality are merely robots, which are
            >malfunctioning.
            >
            >It is rather like looking at a crystal ball which is beginning to crack,
            >eventually shatter into a billion pieces. I realize this depiction could be
            >linked to mental illness. However, while events could easily find one
            >slipping into some form of neurosis, i feel quite stable lol. I attribute my
            >stability to the fact that 90% of the time i stand as observer, outside of
            >myself, merely watching on. The other 10% of the time i am overwhelmed by
            >conflicting emotions, hence it is easier to stand outside ;))) However, from
            >the outside looking in on reality it seems most bizarre.
            >
            >As to my Love & Massive Hugs they are sincere, i am far removed from the
            >"norm" of society, however, i continually strive not only to express
            >unconditional love, but also to act with unconditional love.
            >
            >Love & Massive Hugs or alternatively Kind Regards,
            >Elaine
            >
            >p.s. With emails to my Professors i sign Kind Regards, but only until the
            >semester has ended and then i sign Love & Massive Hugs. Over the past 25
            >years, i have remained in contact with many of my Professors and some of
            >them now sign with Love ;)))))))))))))))))
            >
          • Elaine Phipps-Earl
            Dear (((((((((((((Henry))))))))))), One of my Professors, in the Christmas card he sent to me, wrote :- U are a true seeker . I am indeed the seeker and as
            Message 5 of 9 , Jan 4, 2004
            • 0 Attachment
              Dear (((((((((((((Henry))))))))))),



              One of my Professors, in the Christmas card he sent to me, wrote :- "U are a true seeker". I am indeed the seeker and as the seeker, I sometimes struggle to bring it all together. This email will make evident such struggling, the grasping of differing threads and their entwining, in an attempt to define meaning or truth, if there is in fact any truth to be found, the eternal quest of the Philosopher ;))))). As such, before I begin, I apologise to those who may find my struggle irritating. Of course I could have written privately. However, I perceive the subject matter as well worthy of discussion and would hope that others will be inspired to contribute their own insight and understanding.



              U wrote :- in basic agreement with you, there are such problems as "fracturing" IN the world... & although it comes in differing ways for different situations, & their complex of interactions, these separations are pervasive. & as we are in the world (the universe, for that matter) we necessarily become infected with, one way or the other... and later in the email .....

              You're darn right, during the Vietnam war/Watergate period... when I lived in California, I used to read the headlines of newspapers on the news stands... & swear I could see these troubles in the eyes, behaviour of my fellow "citizens," right in the streets!!! i.e., a correspondence as certain events showed themselves in this way (a provocative manner of headline news). I saw this as an eruption of a massive social crisis/psychosis... that probably was there all the time, in more seemingly manageable form... for many (masked by politeness, self/imposed censorship, bureaucratic form, etc.)





              U say "I saw this as an eruption of a massive social crisis/psychosis... that probably was there all the time".



              My Dearest Ronnie (R.D. Laing) in his revolutionary theories of Mental Illness, in particular Schizophrenia, believed the greater majority exist, as Jung suggested, in a state of unconsciousness, blissfully unaware of the delusional drama in which each is merely an actor, this unconscious collusive delusion created in order to maintain ontological security.



              Ronnie perceived the Schizophrenic as the visionary, overtly aware of his/her "own" experience and motives, hypertrophy of self-consciousness conferring a greater sense of psychological mindedness.[1] Psychosis, rather than an apparition of senseless delusion, was the unconscious becoming conscious,[2] visions of the literal and figurative truth,[3] the overwhelmingly violence, hostility and alienation within the patient's own micro-social system.



              Both u and I are overtly aware of a massive social crisis/psychosis. As written in my previous email, I have become blatantly aware of this crisis/psychosis both within the micro and macro social system. My saving grace, as I suggested, appears to be my ability to stand outside of myself, as mere observer. As u say, and Ronnie would obviously agree, this mass social psychosis would appear to have been maintained throughout the entire history of mankind. However, as Taylor suggests, humanity is moving ever forward toward consciousness, becoming conscious of and as such, many are now confronted by the seeming absurdity of created reality. Our modern civilization is in crisis. Mental illness has now become the "norm", the greater majority now suffering from some form of neurosis or psychosis.



              I am presently half way through my Honours Degree and my study is focusing upon this very subject. I cannot be sure if this is my intention or the University's lol. In an Honours Degree u are given no course material, no distinct subject matter and the combination of units in the degree is the student's choice. I should imagine, given the diversity of choice, what becomes the student's thesis is rather like lotto. While there are a certain number of units/topics available, the combination gives endless possibilities. In first semester this year I will be studying "Foucault and Deleuze" and in second semester "Eastern Philosophies of Mental Illness" and upon completion I begin my thesis. I am the seeker and as Sartre, Jung and my Dearest Ronnie, I seek to free humanity from this delusional drama, in order for each and every human being to authentically embrace their own experience of being-in-the-world.



              I was most fortunate in having the opportunity to study the Philosophy of Time, which touched upon Physics and since have had an overwhelming urge to study Physics and Cosmology in more detail.



              U wrote :- I now turn toward the rather well known cite of Albert Einstein regarding the development of atomic fission... (& I paraphrase from memory): "When we fissioned the atom, we changed everything save our way of thinking." I believe he meant exactly that... changed EVERYTHING.



              Please could u explain the above in more detail ;)))))))))))))))))))))))) to enable me to comprehend your statement:- "the potencies for physical realization would be on a differing track than those charged (willingly or no) for the cares & considerations for those physical potencies realizations... (or elimination) which is us. & I am laying aside here, for the moment any analysis of relations of social stratifications... but do see the necessity to appropriately include this... to accurately understand any relations... between humans... (& nature as well).



              I don't know if u have ever experienced this phenomena, but with each study I find something, this something incomplete, which begs me to remember in order to build upon it at a later date. While the study of the Philosophy of Time was indeed most enlightening, the something, which seemed incomplete and begged for me to remember, was physics suggestion that all physical matter is of one, energy, and the only difference in manifestations of matter is the differing dance of neutrons and quarks. While at this moment I do not know the profound significance of this, I do know I must seek its significance.



              The tomatoes sound great ;)))) In consciousness, I can taste it, oops juice running down chin lol.



              Love & Massive Hugs

              Elaine





              --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

              [1] Burston D. -"The Crucible of Experience"; p.41.

              [2] Mullan B. -"Mad To Be Normal"; p.161.

              [3] Burston D. -"The Crucible of Experience"; p.65.



              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Henry W. Peters
              ... Dear Elaine, As you may already be aware, Being & Nothingness is most descriptive of relations between the natural/physical & human... as well as the
              Message 6 of 9 , Jan 5, 2004
              • 0 Attachment
                At 8:56 AM +1000 01/05/04, Elaine Phipps-Earl wrote:
                >Please could u explain the above in more detail
                >;)))))))))))))))))))))))) to enable me to comprehend your
                >statement:- "the potencies for physical realization would be on a
                >differing track than those charged (willingly or no) for the cares &
                >considerations for those physical potencies realizations... (or
                >elimination) which is us. & I am laying aside here, for the moment
                >any analysis of relations of social stratifications... but do see
                >the necessity to appropriately include this... to accurately
                >understand any relations... between humans... (& nature as well).

                Dear Elaine,

                As you may already be aware, "Being & Nothingness" is most
                descriptive of relations between the natural/physical & human... as
                well as the attempts by humans toward each other, i.e.; "in-itself" /
                "for-itself..." This work, also facing courageously the largely
                prohibited understanding of the place/s of negativity in its'
                multifaceted forms... (usually, until then, thought of as evil...) &
                thereby offering some of the implications thereby lost & gained for
                human understanding/possibility. "Critique of Dialectical Reasoning"
                Sartres' final major work, begins further the more expansive journey
                toward the social understandings of the implications of aforesaid
                findings; "praxis," ("the activity of an individual or group in
                organizing conditions in the light of some end"), "practico-inerte,"
                ("matter in which past praxis is embodied"), etc..

                A wider or deeper discussion of "physics" is probably best, for the
                moment, for another forum... but as I think that raising the issue of
                physicality & intentionality... are reasonably germane &
                contemporaneous problems... for "existential" comprehensions...
                which, to take the ideas, findings, etc. of J. P. Sartre for anything
                more than academic exercises in mental stimulation... we should
                understand this thought (& others) though the lens of intentionality
                & current problem solving, I therefore proceed, as briefly as I can.

                I have always taken the cautionary statement previously given... by
                Albert Einstein re fissioning the atom as serious (& importantly,
                though not woven into an attempted "holistic" philosophy such as B.&
                N., an experiential insightful) warning regarding the DISJUNCTION of
                knowledge & the known... i.e., that the physical powers available
                to be unleashed... newly discovered had insufficient (or no)
                controls... because sufficient attentions/means/methodologies were
                not established as prerequisites for unleashing (or leveraging) these
                new found energy sources/means, & often disequilibria in the extreme,
                (& which likely were/are, manifestations of possible physical prowess
                at the tip of the iceberg, so to speak...). This is to say... we
                have had (possibly until recently) insufficient scientific / cultural
                / social awareness of the serious NEED for actual confidence in
                fielding appropriately such powers...

                An "enemy" missle gets fired from somewhere... as it flys... or is
                it a crow... or what? This really happens. From the "other side,"
                it is just a moveing blip on a radar screen...

                Around 1985 or 86 I attended an honors ceremony for the late great
                scientist/peace advocate... Linus Pauling in which he said something
                like: He had just visited the then president Ronald Reagan at the
                White House, to (try to) talk about his volatile rhetoric regarding
                the "evil empire"(i.e., the Soviet Union), the cavalier statements
                about preemptive use of nuclear weapons... star wars, etc.

                He further said something like Reagan would not look him in the
                eye... & that the course of discussion revealed the distinct
                possibility that this man (Reagan) did not really understand that
                nuclear weapons were anything more than "glorified bullets & bows &
                arrows."

                The fact of six billion human beings on planet Earth... & growing...
                also presents some ticklish problems that yet have no sure
                resolution... & given the fractious nature of historical/social
                developments & the institutionalized edifice of largely anti nature
                resolve... bodes not well... Especially since given recourse to
                resolve is "status quo;" i.e., to EXTERNALIZE all costs for
                resources ( that may be conned, pirated, captured, etc., for
                succeeding generations to "pay" never mind the impending global
                changes such as extreme temperature, chemical, etc. which these same
                generations will be facing fuller costs from as well... but that's
                another discussion (forum).

                So yes, it's all the same energy base... dancing... but then there
                is the polka... the waltz... tango... shotish... salsa... boogie...
                rock... rap... soul... the death wish doodle (not really a dance),
                etc., with many more & more local variations on all!

                Peace & Great Tasting Tomatoes,

                Henry

                p.s. What does "lol" mean?
              • Henry W. Peters
                ... I hope I may clearify this statement... read instead: (Reagan) seemed to think that nuclear weapons were merely glorified bullets & bows & arrows.
                Message 7 of 9 , Jan 5, 2004
                • 0 Attachment
                  >He further said something like Reagan would not look him in the
                  >eye... & that the course of discussion revealed the distinct
                  >possibility that this man (Reagan) did not really understand that
                  >nuclear weapons were anything more than "glorified bullets & bows &
                  >arrows."


                  I hope I may clearify this statement... read instead: (Reagan)
                  seemed to think that nuclear weapons were merely "glorified bullets &
                  bows & arrows."

                  Apologies for any confusions.

                  Regards,
                  Henry
                • Elaine Phipps-Earl
                  Dear Henry, Please correct me if i am wrong. Are u meaning to say that while we have managed to discover physical laws of nature, manipulate and transmute the
                  Message 8 of 9 , Jan 5, 2004
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Dear Henry,

                    Please correct me if i am wrong. Are u meaning to say that while we have
                    managed to discover physical laws of nature, manipulate and transmute the
                    physical to create our own manifestations of power, our own processes of
                    logic are inferior to the power we have created?

                    Love & Massive Hugs
                    Elaine
                  • Henry W. Peters
                    ... Hi Elaine, First off, I would like to make mention that I think there are even significant scientific/technological success stories humans can claim... in
                    Message 9 of 9 , Jan 7, 2004
                    • 0 Attachment
                      >Dear Henry,
                      >
                      >Please correct me if i am wrong. Are u meaning to say that while we have
                      >managed to discover physical laws of nature, manipulate and transmute the
                      >physical to create our own manifestations of power, our own processes of
                      >logic are inferior to the power we have created?
                      >
                      >Love & Massive Hugs
                      >Elaine

                      Hi Elaine,

                      First off, I would like to make mention that I think there are even
                      significant scientific/technological success stories humans can
                      claim... in part or in whole...

                      But as to your above interpretation: Close... but because I believe
                      that it would not really help us get to the heart of the matter,
                      i.e., possibly altering the situation... I think I would not
                      necessarily use the appellation "inferior," at least in broad or
                      sweeping generalizations... Along with the possibility of self
                      destruction resulting from such activity (science/technology run
                      amok), critiquing this dilemma, calls into question relationships;
                      like our ability to not be determined by a "pastness..." & the
                      like... I guess I see these "powers" as you say, as being not
                      sufficiently & appropriately understood... & our "own processes of
                      logic" would be deficient... in, say, attentiveness... vision...
                      spirit... humility...

                      One hesitates, in such an abbreviated context, to use the word
                      freedom... because of the largely unquestioned abuse this term has
                      been historically brought towards... (a kind of entrapment, I might
                      call this abuse) but non the less... think there is no escaping the
                      importance of... this concept... i.e. what makes it possible for
                      humans to distinguish ourselves from our surroundings????? Is this
                      not a rather basic "existential" question... of sorts?

                      It may be... that the same or similar thought/mind processes/powers
                      which can & have & do lead to the afore mentioned "fracturing" (or
                      getting off track, separations, alienation & so forth) when
                      transformed or made self aware thought/action developments may be
                      transformed, somehow, empowered to produce change... productive of
                      more than a science that is so called for science sake... & or just
                      monetary 'success,' & or merely subservient to the powers that be...
                      but the will to transform, & needed resource must then be mustered...
                      forth... somehow... understanding there are no guaranteed out
                      comes... in experiment... by definition.

                      In other words, relationships productive of relationship/s with
                      nature & others that may be more actively & experientially
                      considerate (ergo, engaged) with the processes of nature...
                      Producing relevant novelty (not the hee-hee kind, like say a whoopee
                      cushion, etc.). Knowing that we do not know... seems also important
                      to be able to appropriately recognize along with knowing that we
                      do... & also seems to me; to need a kind of confidence which comes
                      not from any exterior discovery anyone could make... (say;
                      humility... creativity).

                      & then, devise ways to work with these processes... & who is to say
                      that a part of the consideration/s couldn't be the mutually forward
                      thinking accommodation of the needs for everyone? & it may just be
                      that the "everyone" is an essential aspect for the possibility of
                      forwarding of "success" of any living human project... I realize
                      that there are alternatives... I say, we may as well check out the
                      ones that seem to be good choice for ones self & then be best for the
                      mostest... & go for it... if possible & or timely (but this is
                      another matter).

                      This seems to me... to call for a science which is integral to
                      imperatives of human need... attentive to natures ways... & around &
                      around (spider spiral like).

                      I received the below forwarded article on a environmental activist
                      discussion list in which I participate... it may illustrate
                      somewhat, further difficulties some of the condition which we find
                      our selves in... & the need for appropriate transcendence. Please
                      excuse me if some on this list feel/think it to be not on topic... I
                      mean it as a further illustration of the NEED for resolution of some
                      of the above & the problems highlighted in the below forwarded
                      article...

                      Best Regards,
                      Henry

                      p.s. what does "lol" mean?

                      ----------> forward------>>>

                      Star Tribune
                      Mpls., MN

                      Opinion

                      BARTON REPPERT: Politics in the lab
                      The Christian Science Monitor
                      http://24hour.startribune.com/24hour/opinions/story/1108538p-7734418c.html

                      Published January 6, 2004

                      GAITHERSBURG, Md. (CSM) - In theory, science is supposed to be cold,
                      analytical, dispassionate - and studiously apolitical. But in the real
                      world of competing demands for federal research dollars, savvy scientists
                      of all disciplines - from cognitive psychologists running rats through
                      mazes to nuclear physicists operating massive particle accelerators -
                      recognize that a certain amount of political meddling in their
                      research by
                      policymakers in the executive branch and Congress is to be expected.
                      However, there are limits - limits the Bush administration has frequently
                      disregarded by imposing stringent political controls on a broad
                      variety of
                      federal scientific programs and activities. This has raised acute concern
                      in the American scientific community that the administration's drive to
                      stamp its conservative values on science isn't just affecting policy
                      decisions, but undermining the integrity of the U.S. research
                      infrastructure itself.
                      Playing politics with science is nothing new in Washington, of course.
                      President Nixon shut down his White House science office
                      because he didn't
                      like the advice he was getting on arms control and the supersonic
                      transport. Nevertheless, several science-policy experts argue that no
                      presidency has been more calculating and ideological than the Bush
                      administration in setting political parameters for science. President
                      Bush's blunt rejection of the Kyoto Protocol on global warming, and his
                      decision restricting stem-cell research are only the most obvious and
                      widely publicized examples of what has become a broader pattern
                      across the
                      administration.
                      At the same time, the president's chief science adviser, atomic physicist
                      John Marburger, who is largely well-regarded in the scientific community,
                      reportedly has very little substantive access to Bush and his senior
                      aides, and his office has been moved out of the White House complex.
                      Some examples of the Bush administration's interference with science
                      include:

                      - The removal from a National Cancer Institute Web site of a scientific
                      analysis concluding that abortions do not increase a woman's risk of
                      breast cancer. That move, in November 2002, contradicted the
                      broad medical
                      consensus, and members of Congress protested the change. In response, the
                      NCI updated its Web site to include the conclusion of a panel of experts
                      that induced abortion is not associated with an increase in breast cancer
                      risk.

                      - Dropping a leading addiction expert from the University of New Mexico,
                      Dr. William Miller, from consideration for membership on the National
                      Advisory Council on Drug Abuse after an administration aide quizzed him
                      about whether he opposed abortion ("no") and had voted for Bush ("no").

                      - The elimination of the section on global warming in a comprehensive
                      Environmental Protection Agency report on the environment last June. EPA
                      officials decided to eliminate the section on climate change after an
                      earlier draft prompted the White House to demand major revisions.

                      The politicization of U.S. science has drawn close attention from leading
                      scientific journals. Bush administration interference with federal
                      scientific advisory committees as well as peer-review panels for research
                      grants is an "epidemic of politics," editorialized Science, the
                      influential weekly journal of the American Association for the
                      Advancement
                      of Science. "What is unusual about the current epidemic is not that the
                      Bush administration examines candidates for compatibility with its
                      'values.' It's how deep the practice cuts, in particular, the way it now
                      invades areas once immune to this kind of manipulation," wrote editor in
                      chief Donald Kennedy.
                      Prominent Democrats in Congress have expressed frustration over
                      the mixing
                      of politics with science.
                      "I think what they've done is unprecedented," says Rep. Henry Waxman (D)
                      of California, ranking minority member of the House Government Reform
                      Committee. "Even prominent Republicans who served under
                      Presidents Reagan,
                      Ford, and Nixon are alarmed.... Leading scientists both inside
                      and outside
                      the administration have said politics is getting into
                      previously protected
                      areas."
                      Mr. Waxman's committee issued a report in August concluding that the
                      administration's political interference with science has led to
                      "misleading statements by the president, inaccurate responses
                      to Congress,
                      altered Web sites, suppressed agency reports, erroneous international
                      communications, and the gagging of scientists."
                      The report - which can be seen at
                      http://www.house.gov/reform/min/politicsandscience - alleges abuses in 21
                      areas ranging from abstinence-only sex education to breast cancer,
                      drinking water, food safety, global warming, prescription-drug
                      advertising, stem-cell research, and workplace safety.
                      White House press secretary Scott McClellan dismissed the report as
                      "riddled with distortions, inaccuracies and omissions." And, he said,
                      "This administration looks at the facts, and reviews the best available
                      science based on what's right for the American people. The only
                      one who is
                      playing politics about science is Congressman Waxman."
                      Several senior-science policy specialists say that while the
                      Waxman report
                      has a partisan tone, most of its major points are well taken. Neal Lane,
                      who served as director of the National Science Foundation and then as
                      presidential science adviser during the Clinton administration, observed:
                      "It's always the case in the White House ... that science is one of a
                      number of sets of issues that a president, a political
                      policymaker, has to
                      consider when they're making decisions. Sometimes the decision goes in a
                      way that the science would not suggest. But there's such a long list of
                      egregious actions taken by this administration that I think it
                      essentially
                      gives a false impression of what the science really is and strongly
                      suggests the administration simply doesn't care to find out."
                      Professor Lewis Branscomb, a science policy expert at Harvard and former
                      director of the National Bureau of Standards under Nixon, notes that on
                      the question of stacking federal scientific advisory committees, "I'm not
                      aware that (Nixon) ever hand-picked ideologues to serve on advisory
                      committees, or dismissed from advisory committees very well-qualified
                      people if he didn't like their views.... What's going on now is in many
                      ways more insidious. It happens behind the curtain. I don't think we've
                      had this kind of cynicism with respect to objective scientific advice
                      since I've been watching government, which is quite a long time."
                      Perhaps the corrosive issue of political interference with science won't
                      be crucial to Bush's re-election chances, but by undercutting the
                      integrity of the scientific community, it may be crucial to the long-term
                      quality of life not just in the U.S., but also in other countries around
                      the world.

                      Barton Reppert, a former Associated Press reporter and editor in
                      Washington, New York and Moscow, is a freelance science and technology
                      writer.

                      © Copyright 2004 Star Tribune. All rights reserved.

                      NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is
                      distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in
                      receiving this information for research and educational purposes.



                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.