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

We are the universe

Expand Messages
  • bhvwd
    If the distance between humans and any other sentients is greater than what we can travel or communicate through we are the only ones to view the cosmos. I
    Message 1 of 5 , Aug 7 11:51 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      If the distance between humans and any other sentients is greater
      than what we can travel or communicate through we are the only ones
      to view the cosmos.
      I was at an Italian festival and an interested and vigilant parent
      ask why we were there. I responded we were there as spectators as
      all sport deserves an audiance. Bocce ball is a cosmic game that can
      represent astro physics or quantum mechanics. We prefer to view in
      total silence while drinking iced tea. We drink during the measuring
      but are attentive while the balls are in play. Somebody need watch,
      if nothing else to cement it actually happned. Orders out of
      planned time regularly arrive in Bocce ball and they breed adult
      acts. The players must adapt and decide in response to the unplanned
      and chaotic happenstance. In the background Frank is crooning"Thats
      Life".
      I am forced to think that contemporary is not the same as modern.
      What has replaced modern is a fragmented hodge podge of acedemic
      ravings and muddled mob response. Retreat mining Bush style remains
      in force as I think most are afraid of upsetting the percieved
      balance. It still is our time and all we know for sure is it will
      change. One could be a grand fulcrum for change and never have
      personal knowledge of the imputus. We have a scientific knowledge of
      the universe which seems to be growing. No universal general theory
      but the subject too vast for present memory storage. I know
      several people who can describe a cosmic model that holds up to
      modern cosmology. That to me seems a level of self understanding that
      can be communicated successfully.
      If we want a world that accepts and controls the choatic untoward
      events that bash our progress then stupid human tricks must be
      grossly minimized. That goes for the leadership also as they think
      they are unbridled and unassailable.
      I remember the falls of LBJ and Nixon. At that time I was not
      frightened by their passing. It was our cosmos then but perhaps
      only one person I knew had a creditable cosmic view. Bush has dug
      us in deep and we may need actual manpower to escape. Build a bridge,
      excavate a mine, fight for oil all seem ordinary but must continue
      in the present order. Will one thought overturn all and who will
      think that thought?Bill
    • Mary Jo
      ... wrote: If we want a world that accepts and controls the choatic untoward events that bash our progress then stupid human tricks must be grossly minimized.
      Message 2 of 5 , Aug 8 7:40 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "bhvwd" <v.valleywestdental@...>
        wrote:

        If we want a world that accepts and controls the choatic untoward
        events that bash our progress then stupid human tricks must be
        grossly minimized. That goes for the leadership also as they think
        they are unbridled and unassailable.

        ***********

        Indeed. This past week I watched "Hiroshima Mon Amour" and "The U.S.
        vs. John Lennon." There was a subconscious symmetry in these choices.
        We should do whatever we can to affect positive change but
        acknowledge that we're headed for very bleak times. The wealth and
        power which fuel a reckless, greedy, and destructive global
        corporatism can't crush the intellectual momentum of existential
        humanism.

        We're on track for a one-world diluted democracy with a meager
        socialism and perpetual wars. Technology will continue to minimize
        war, terrorism and other crime. Econmically the need for small
        pockets of solidarity will be exigent; people will need pull together
        for survival. Non-traditional families could thrive, hopefully with
        government sanction, or at least without interference.

        Existentialism could be the pervasive philosophy when most have
        exhausted their pleas to the heavens. Fear and hatred of minority and
        displaced people must change, but this plea for tolerance is nothing
        new under our finite sun. For millennia humans have known or
        suspected a better way. I propose a new `liberal' activism that
        shifts its focus from the same old tired diagnoses to projects of
        humanitarian reclamation. The only revolution that's effective is
        personal, though painfully difficult. "Existentialism is a humanism,"
        and there is a "politics of friendship" which could eventually
        prevail, but obviously not all will embrace a more communal or even
        congenial path to survival. Certainly the solitaries are preferable
        to endlessly contentious.

        Many have believed and lived these ideals. I simply predict that many
        more will. The time for expecting political, economic, and abstract
        philosophies to solve our problems is ending.

        If the cabal are as clever as I suspect they are, they will 'elect'
        leaders capable of inspiring the people through the coming storm with
        compassion, pragmatism, and a profound sense of responsibility for
        one another. Am I seeing a new Eleanor Roosevelt for a new,
        manageable Depression? Don't expect a bail-out this time round — just
        encouragement.

        "Give peace a chance; the war is over if you want it; and imagine"
        have become strangely quaint for me.

        MJ
      • eupraxis@aol.com
        If you are quoting someone, please make that evident. I can t see who is saying what here. WS ... From: Mary Jo To:
        Message 3 of 5 , Aug 8 7:58 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          If you are quoting someone, please make that evident. I can't see who is saying what here.

          WS







          -----Original Message-----
          From: Mary Jo <maryjo.malo@...>
          To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
          Sent: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 9:40 am
          Subject: [existlist] Practical, not cynical

























          --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "bhvwd" <v.valleywestdental@...>

          wrote:



          If we want a world that accepts and controls the choatic untoward

          events that bash our progress then stupid human tricks must be

          grossly minimized. That goes for the leadership also as they think

          they are unbridled and unassailable.



          ***********



          Indeed. This past week I watched "Hiroshima Mon Amour" and "The U.S.

          vs. John Lennon." There was a subconscious symmetry in these choices.

          We should do whatever we can to affect positive change but

          acknowledge that we're headed for very bleak times. The wealth and

          power which fuel a reckless, greedy, and destructive global

          corporatism can't crush the intellectual momentum of existential

          humanism.



          We're on track for a one-world diluted democracy with a meager

          socialism and perpetual wars. Technology will continue to minimize

          war, terrorism and other crime. Econmically the need for small

          pockets of solidarity will be exigent; people will need pull together

          for survival. Non-traditional families could thrive, hopefully with

          government sanction, or at least without interference.



          Existentialism could be the pervasive philosophy when most have

          exhausted their pleas to the heavens. Fear and hatred of minority and

          displaced people must change, but this plea for tolerance is nothing

          new under our finite sun. For millennia humans have known or

          suspected a better way. I propose a new `liberal' activism that

          shifts its focus from the same old tired diagnoses to projects of

          humanitarian reclamation. The only revolution that's effective is

          personal, though painfully difficult. "Existentialism is a humanism,"

          and there is a "politics of friendship" which could eventually

          prevail, but obviously not all will embrace a more communal or even

          congenial path to survival. Certainly the solitaries are preferable

          to endlessly contentious.



          Many have believed and lived these ideals. I simply predict that many

          more will. The time for expecting political, economic, and abstract

          philosophies to solve our problems is ending.



          If the cabal are as clever as I suspect they are, they will 'elect'

          leaders capable of inspiring the people through the coming storm with

          compassion, pragmatism, and a profound sense of responsibility for

          one another. Am I seeing a new Eleanor Roosevelt for a new,

          manageable Depression? Don't expect a bail-out this time round — just

          encouragement.



          "Give peace a chance; the war is over if you want it; and imagine"

          have become strangely quaint for me.



          MJ

















          ________________________________________________________________________
          AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com.


          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Mary Jo
          Now I m confused. I thought it was evident. The opening is attributed to Bill. I wrote what follows the asterisks, and the closing is easily recognized as John
          Message 4 of 5 , Aug 8 8:49 AM
          • 0 Attachment
            Now I'm confused. I thought it was evident. The opening is attributed
            to Bill. I wrote what follows the asterisks, and the closing is easily
            recognized as John Lennon.

            MJ

            --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eupraxis@... wrote:
            >
            >
            > If you are quoting someone, please make that evident. I can't see
            who is saying what here.
            >
            > WS
          • eupraxis@aol.com
            Quote marks or other indicators are best. This way, no one is confused. WS ... From: Mary Jo To: existlist@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wed, 8
            Message 5 of 5 , Aug 8 9:04 AM
            • 0 Attachment
              Quote marks or other indicators are best. This way, no one is confused.

              WS







              -----Original Message-----
              From: Mary Jo <maryjo.malo@...>
              To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
              Sent: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 10:49 am
              Subject: [existlist] Re: Practical, not cynical

























              Now I'm confused. I thought it was evident. The opening is attributed

              to Bill. I wrote what follows the asterisks, and the closing is easily

              recognized as John Lennon.



              MJ



              --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eupraxis@... wrote:

              >

              >

              > If you are quoting someone, please make that evident. I can't see

              who is saying what here.

              >

              > WS

















              ________________________________________________________________________
              AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com.


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