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

RE: [existlist] Re: Bound to remember

Expand Messages
  • Bob Keyes
    True mary, a biological weapon is much more dangerous. The Israelis are working on poisions that will only kill Arabs.... Call that genetic engineering or what
    Message 1 of 16 , Jul 1, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      True mary, a biological weapon is much more dangerous. The Israelis are
      working on poisions that will only kill Arabs.... Call that genetic
      engineering or what but it is reality. We are studying the same stuff. Same
      with Russia China ,, blah blah...



      -----Original Message-----
      From: existlist@yahoogroups.com [mailto:existlist@yahoogroups.com]On
      Behalf Of Mary Jo Malo
      Sent: Friday, July 01, 2005 11:19 PM
      To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [existlist] Re: Bound to remember


      Who's talking nuclear? There are new weapons in development that
      don't guarantee mutually assured destruction. The future is other
      kinds of weapons, the kind that involve plausible deniability. Mary

      In existlist@yahoogroups.com, Exist List Moderator <existlist1@t...>
      wrote:
      > On Jul 01, 2005, at 16:05, Mary Jo Malo wrote:
      >
      > > I don't really trust either of them because they have to act in
      their
      > > own national interests. Japan may not dominate as far as
      conventional
      > > weapons, but they are economically and technologically very
      > > aggressive. They are also very greatly bound to remember. Have you
      > > forgotten Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Time will tell. - Mary
      > >
      >
      > I think the experiences of the Japanese make them particularly
      unlikely
      > to blindly trust anything nuclear.
      >
      >
      > - C. S. Wyatt
      > I am what I am at this moment, not what I was and certainly not all
      > that I shall be.
      > http://www.tameri.com - Tameri Guide for Writers
      > http://www.tameri.com/csw/exist - The Existential Primer




      Please support the Existential Primer... dedicated to explaining nothing!

      Home Page: http://www.tameri.com/csw/exist
      Yahoo! Groups Links
    • Susan Schnelbach
      The same way historians do - from analysis of writings of the time. This, however, ends up being guesswork and hypothesis in many cases.
      Message 2 of 16 , Jul 1, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        The same way historians do - from analysis of writings of the time.
        This, however, ends up being guesswork and hypothesis in many cases.


        On Jul 1, 2005, at 12:44 PM, Ehab Shoubaki wrote:

        >
        > On Fri, 1 Jul 2005 12:05:13 -0700, "Exist List Moderator"
        > <existlist1@...> said:
        >
        >
        >>
        >> History is being rewritten as memories of the actual events behind
        >> wars
        >> fade.
        >>
        >> - CSW
        >>
        >>
        >
        >
        >
        > Then how can one find truth in history , if there is such a thing ?
        > How
        > can one now discern what's true from what's convenient without living
        > through that particular era....
        >
        > ehab
        >
        >
        > Please support the Existential Primer... dedicated to explaining
        > nothing!
        >
        > Home Page: http://www.tameri.com/csw/exist
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
      • Bob Keyes
        In all cases.. Bob.. ... From: existlist@yahoogroups.com [mailto:existlist@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Susan Schnelbach Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2005 12:41 AM
        Message 3 of 16 , Jul 1, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          In all cases..
          Bob..

          -----Original Message-----
          From: existlist@yahoogroups.com [mailto:existlist@yahoogroups.com]On
          Behalf Of Susan Schnelbach
          Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2005 12:41 AM
          To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: Re: [existlist] Bound to remember


          The same way historians do - from analysis of writings of the time.
          This, however, ends up being guesswork and hypothesis in many cases.


          On Jul 1, 2005, at 12:44 PM, Ehab Shoubaki wrote:

          >
          > On Fri, 1 Jul 2005 12:05:13 -0700, "Exist List Moderator"
          > <existlist1@...> said:
          >
          >
          >>
          >> History is being rewritten as memories of the actual events behind
          >> wars
          >> fade.
          >>
          >> - CSW
          >>
          >>
          >
          >
          >
          > Then how can one find truth in history , if there is such a thing ?
          > How
          > can one now discern what's true from what's convenient without living
          > through that particular era....
          >
          > ehab
          >
          >
          > Please support the Existential Primer... dedicated to explaining
          > nothing!
          >
          > Home Page: http://www.tameri.com/csw/exist
          > Yahoo! Groups Links
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >



          Please support the Existential Primer... dedicated to explaining nothing!

          Home Page: http://www.tameri.com/csw/exist
          Yahoo! Groups Links
        • Exist List Moderator
          ... Of course, a major problem with the above statement is that Israelis of semitic heritage are nearly identical to their Arabian *semitic* neighbors. Not to
          Message 4 of 16 , Jul 2, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            On Jul 01, 2005, at 20:55, Bob Keyes wrote:

            > True mary, a biological weapon is much more dangerous. The Israelis are
            > working on poisions that will only kill Arabs....

            Of course, a major problem with the above statement is that Israelis of
            semitic heritage are nearly identical to their Arabian *semitic*
            neighbors. Not to mention that fact Arab-Israelis in the parliament
            have been on the intelligence panel.

            A further complication is that nearly a third of Israeli citizens are
            from non-semitic backgrounds and lack a demonstrable genetic link the
            the region. Israeli law gives citizenship to any person of Jewish
            faith, including converts. Also, it gives residency to any Arab-Israeli
            with a historical link to the territory but willing to disavow violence
            and work within the Israeli state.

            I cannot envision a biological agent able to determine ones faith,
            since that's the only true link among all Jewish Israeli citizens. I am
            certain my mutt heritage leaves me barely semitic at all.

            This sort of nonsense is why people still read and believe the Elders
            of Zion.

            Israel has low-level, medium-range nuclear fusion weapons, according to
            Jane's. The benefits of nuclear weapons without the nasty
            after-effects. Oh, yes, that's the type of reactor core we'll be
            building in France -- which is also wanting to help Iran with a
            reactor. Gotta love the planning there.

            - CSW
            I am what I am at this moment, not what I was and certainly not all
            that I shall be.
            http://www.tameri.com - Tameri Guide for Writers
            http://www.tameri.com/csw/exist - The Existential Primer
          • Mary Jo Malo
            Gotta love this planning as well. http://www.gulfwarvets.com/news11.htm But at least there s nothing nuclear in the reports. That should make our sick Gulf War
            Message 5 of 16 , Jul 3, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              Gotta love this planning as well.

              http://www.gulfwarvets.com/news11.htm

              But at least there's nothing nuclear in the reports. That should make
              our sick Gulf War vets feel better. Over the years, Independence Day
              has lost some of its lustre. On balance however, it's still better to
              be here than there.

              Mary


              --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, Exist List Moderator
              <existlist1@t...> wrote:
              > On Jul 01, 2005, at 20:55, Bob Keyes wrote:
              >
              > > True mary, a biological weapon is much more dangerous. The
              Israelis are
              > > working on poisions that will only kill Arabs....
              >
              > Of course, a major problem with the above statement is that
              Israelis of
              > semitic heritage are nearly identical to their Arabian *semitic*
              > neighbors. Not to mention that fact Arab-Israelis in the parliament
              > have been on the intelligence panel.
              >
              > A further complication is that nearly a third of Israeli citizens
              are
              > from non-semitic backgrounds and lack a demonstrable genetic link
              the
              > the region. Israeli law gives citizenship to any person of Jewish
              > faith, including converts. Also, it gives residency to any Arab-
              Israeli
              > with a historical link to the territory but willing to disavow
              violence
              > and work within the Israeli state.
              >
              > I cannot envision a biological agent able to determine ones faith,
              > since that's the only true link among all Jewish Israeli citizens.
              I am
              > certain my mutt heritage leaves me barely semitic at all.
              >
              > This sort of nonsense is why people still read and believe the
              Elders
              > of Zion.
              >
              > Israel has low-level, medium-range nuclear fusion weapons,
              according to
              > Jane's. The benefits of nuclear weapons without the nasty
              > after-effects. Oh, yes, that's the type of reactor core we'll be
              > building in France -- which is also wanting to help Iran with a
              > reactor. Gotta love the planning there.
              >
              > - CSW
              > I am what I am at this moment, not what I was and certainly not all
              > that I shall be.
              > http://www.tameri.com - Tameri Guide for Writers
              > http://www.tameri.com/csw/exist - The Existential Primer
            • George Walton
              From Harry G. Frankfurt s On Bullshit The contemporary proliferation of bullshit...has deeper sources, in various forms of skepticism which deny that we can
              Message 6 of 16 , Jul 3, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                From Harry G. Frankfurt's On Bullshit

                "The contemporary proliferation of bullshit...has deeper sources, in various forms of skepticism which deny that we can have any reliable access to an objective reality, and which therefore reject the possibility of knowing how things truly are. These "antirealist" doctrines undermine confidence in the value of disinterested efforts to determine what is true and what is false, and even in the intelligibility of the notion of objective reality. One response to the loss of confidence has been a retreat from the discipline required by dedication to the ideal of correctness to a quite different sort of discipline, which is imposed by pursuit of an alternative ideal of sincerity. Rather than seeking primarily to arrive at accurate representations of a common world, the individual turns toward trying to provide honest representations of himself. Convinced that reality has no inherent nature, which he might hope to identify as the truth about things, he devotes himself to being true to his
                own nature. It is as though he decides that since it makes no sense to try to be true to the facts, he must therefore try instead to be true to himself.

                "But it is preposterous to imagine that we ourselves are determinate, and hence susceptible both to correct and to incorrect descriptions, while supposing that the ascription of determinacy to anything else has been exposed as a mistake. As conscious beings we exist only in response to other things, and we cannot know ourselves at all without knowing them. Moreover, there is nothing in theory, and certainly nothing in experience, to support the extraordinary judgment that it is the truth about himself that is the easiest for a person to know. Facts about ourselves are not peculiarly solid and resistent to skeptical dissolution. Our natures are, indeed, elusively insubstantial----notoriously less stable and less inherent than the natures of other things. And insofar as this is the case, sincerity itself is bullshit."



                Which I suppose means no one can suggest Frankfurt is actually being sincere about this, right?

                Unless of course the above is merely an exercise in irony. Or perhaps it's yet another manifestation of malarkey.

                My own reaction is that Frankfurt has more or less hit the bullseye here because the bullseye is embedded in the inherently problematic nature of having a point of view about it at all.

                In other words, instead of aiming the discussion at what is said to be or not to be bullshit [free will, situational ethics, pragmatism, idealism, critical rationalism, God, the Bush Administration etc] Frankfort seems to imply that those doing the aiming are, in turn, mere fonts of bullshit themselves. And if how we come to understand our own self is ultimately seen to be bullshit how could any perspective emanating from this profoundly problematic font not necessarily be bullshit as well? Then we only have to figure out how to juxtapose this point of view with the necessary assumption it cannot help but be bullshit too. Then we come face to face once again with the seeming intractable impediment of language itself in the attempts made to "resolve" it once and for all.

                Philosophically, perhaps, it is not whether you are being sincere that is the starting point.....but "who" "you" "are" when insisting this is so. Human identity as a kind of quantum mechanics. I may be sincere in believing this point of view is correct. But there is no way I can know it reflects what is true. The observation and the observer are always intricately intertwined in the seeming mystery of the entanglement itself.

                Thus how we think about ourselves can only be understood in relationship to all of the countless countervailing variables that came together over the years to create this particular point of view. In other words, who really knows what to expect when they turn the next corner. Even in reading this post it might trigger in you a whole new way of looking at things. And once that happens the potential for yet more change in your "reality" can rapidly evolve into that proverbial snowball.

                Then it only becomes a question of deciding whether or not this is the good news or the bad. Not that either assumption can be seen as anything other then yet more bullshit, of course.

                So by all means: choose wisely.

                george






                ---------------------------------
                Yahoo! Mail Mobile
                Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone.

                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • Aija Veldre Beldavs
                someone a while back asked about the half-glassers being optimists or pessimists. (a lot of that has to do with early childhood experiences in addition to
                Message 7 of 16 , Jul 3, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  someone a while back asked about the half-glassers being optimists or
                  pessimists. (a lot of that has to do with early childhood experiences in
                  addition to inherited tendencies and cultural orientation.)

                  but also maybe "unsophisticated" people as do children see both potential
                  good and bad in people. they know first-hand how indifferent or hostile
                  the world and other people can be, but they reject academic
                  confabulations, classifications, and schemes that do nothing more than
                  lead to despair, gloom, and suicide as a pointless dead end. there is joy
                  in small things - in celebrations, and the occasional turn in good fortune
                  to offset the drudgery or outright suffering of everyday life. for much
                  of human existance, one could turn to nature and her cycles, or turn to
                  rythms in dance, music, and ritual as a way to regain balance and order
                  when trauma and disorder had disrupted the will to keep on truckin.'

                  the word "bullshit" is neither objective, neutral, nor factual but an
                  emotional summary of attitude. trying to be true to oneself, sincere, as
                  opposed to deliberately obfuscating, hiding, or redirecting investigation
                  of whatever is phenomenologically possible to observe, evalutate, and
                  categorize does hold distinctive meaning for most people even when they
                  subscribe to semiotic realities, observational and computational limits.
                  "sincerity" or "truth" to ones best intentions is not at odds with doing
                  the best we can with probability assessments and other ways of getting at
                  "truth" all the while knowing it can not be essentialist fixed Absolute,
                  but an ongoing process continuously tested.

                  the individual has meaning in terms of other individuals who give reality
                  checks, thus also providing the location or context in which the
                  individual finds herself inseparable from her observation.

                  aija,
                  still experiencing as deeply moving, purposeful, and full of hope a
                  childrens' song and dance festival where folk musicians, a rock star, and
                  a symphony orchestra performed together with 35,000 children from every
                  region and the rock star dedicated the song called "my song" to the
                  children the refrain including "i know no one will sing that song in my
                  place" (my translation of Renars Kaupers and Inga Cipe of the group Prata
                  Vetra/Brainstorm) and the final stanza "between a moment and eternity."

                  > From Harry G. Frankfurt's On Bullshit

                  > "The contemporary proliferation of bullshit...has deeper sources, in
                  > various forms of skepticism which deny that we can have any reliable
                  > access to an objective reality, and which therefore reject the
                  > possibility of knowing how things truly are.

                  > Convinced that reality has no inherent nature, which he might hope to
                  > identify as the truth about things, he devotes himself to being true to
                  > his own nature.

                  > Our natures are, indeed, elusively insubstantial----notoriously less
                  > stable and less inherent than the natures of other things. And insofar
                  > as this is the case, sincerity itself is bullshit."

                  george:

                  > In other words, instead of aiming the discussion at what is said to be
                  > or not to be bullshit [free will, situational ethics, pragmatism,
                  > idealism, critical rationalism, God, the Bush Administration etc]
                  > Frankfort seems to imply that those doing the aiming are, in turn, mere
                  > fonts of bullshit themselves.

                  > Then we come face to face once again with the seeming intractable
                  > impediment of language itself in the attempts made to "resolve" it once
                  > and for all.

                  > Philosophically, perhaps, it is not whether you are being sincere that
                  > is the starting point.....but "who" "you" "are" when insisting this is
                  > so. Human identity as a kind of quantum mechanics. I may be sincere in
                  > believing this point of view is correct. But there is no way I can know
                  > it reflects what is true. The observation and the observer are always
                  > intricately intertwined in the seeming mystery of the entanglement
                  > itself.
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.