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

Re: [existlist] Re: Perspectivism and existentialism

Expand Messages
  • tom
    Louise, If anything, Western modes of thought are probably more removed from group mind than most other cultures. Certainly, military training is designed to
    Message 1 of 25 , Jun 6, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Louise,

      If anything, Western modes of thought are probably more removed from group mind than most other cultures. Certainly, military training is designed to transform individuals into members of various units. I see the group mind far predating the emergence of humans. Watching birds in flight or the behavior of insects like bees and ants, it certainly appears that the whole is more than the sum of the parts. George Soros, speculator, philantrophist, and philosopher speculates that the affect of modernization and literacy is a transformation from organic society[where individuals occupy a certain place in the whole] to open society{ where each individual is free to choose from among various options]. This is one of the main differences that exist between the west and the mideast. We see the individual as the essential. element;whereas the family is the essential element in their world.
      Tom
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: louise
      To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Friday, June 05, 2009 3:17 PM
      Subject: [existlist] Re: Perspectivism and existentialism





      Tom,

      Yes, sorry, am getting rather confused. Would rather discuss this question direct with you rather than ask another member (Wil, in this case) to help clarify. Once I have accustomed myself to the implications of finally explaining my difficulties, maybe the paranoia will lessen. So, sorry again.

      What I am wondering is, whether the whole idea of a group mind is only a projection based on specifically Western modes of thought. It's just an initial suggestion, and I need to think more about this myself.

      Louise

      --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "tom" <tsmith17_midsouth1@...> wrote:
      >
      > Louise,
      >
      > I think there has been a mass mind, and politics since not only when men, but single celled organisms formed into colonies. Call it the mass mind, or the tribal mind, or whatever; men, apes, chimpanzies, wolves, bees etc have some form of group mind. I suspect the mass mind existed before the concept of the individual mind. Marshal Mccluan maintained in the Media is the Means [or somesuchbook] that with the inventing of the printing press, the individual emerges. The Reformation encouraged man to read his bible and let the Holy Spirit work in him;whereas, Catholicism with their ceremony and statures impacted the right hemisphere[the sensory motor tribal side] instead of the literate verbal left hemisphere which posited because I think I exist.
      > Tom
      > ----- Original Message -----
      > From: louise
      > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
      > Sent: Friday, June 05, 2009 2:07 PM
      > Subject: [existlist] Re: Perspectivism and existentialism
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Tom,
      >
      > If Lucifer is the myth of the genius condemned to hell by the mass mind, it is a derivative myth, surely? There is no mass mind at the time of the construction of the Lucifer myth. I wish we could get back to some serious existentialism, instead of all this media-derived nonsense.
      >
      > Louise
      >
      > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "tom" <tsmith17_midsouth1@> wrote:
      > >
      > > Jim,
      > >
      > > Socrates being forced to drink the hemlock was an example of the serious type of philosopher who only connects with an elite few, and is persecuted by the mass mind. Hitler said he who controls the mass mind controls the world. Einstein said
      > > A question that sometimes drives me crazy: am I or are the others crazy? Lucifer is the myth of the genius condemned to hell by the power of the mass mind.
      > >
      > > Tom
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > ----- Original Message -----
      > > From: jimstuart51
      > > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
      > > Sent: Friday, June 05, 2009 7:12 AM
      > > Subject: [existlist] Re: Perspectivism and existentialism
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > CSW,
      > >
      > > You write:
      > >
      > > "I still prefer to think the people I've met and worked with were the norm and not exceptions. There were generally more engaged and more passionate than I'd ever be... regardless of their views or
      > > mine.
      > >
      > > Philosophers are the same. They have to sound like they are certain, or who would buy their ideas? I can imagine several hosting angry, wild, loud talk shows with nightly tirades. I bet numerous
      > > philosophers would have been interesting (in short bursts) on the radio."
      > >
      > > Here you suggest that philosophers are similar to US talk show hosts.
      > >
      > > I completely disagree with you. The best philosophers were serious thinkers who questioned the cultural norms of their own societies and questioned their own presuppositions. They proceeded carefully, quietly, in solitude.
      > >
      > > Think of Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Wittgenstein. They sought out solitude and stillness away from the bluster of busy people with inflated egos and nothing much to say.
      > >
      > > Socrates questioned people in the street and spoke at symposia, but, again, his measured speech, frequent silences and his reluctance to put forward theories made him the opposite of the egotistic, extrovert, shouting US talk show hosts.
      > >
      > > Jim
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >





      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • louise
      Tom, Your account sets me musing in various directions. Take, as an example, a well-drilled army of [human] soldiers, viewed from the air. Do they have group
      Message 2 of 25 , Jun 6, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        Tom,

        Your account sets me musing in various directions. Take, as an example, a well-drilled army of [human] soldiers, viewed from the air. Do they have group mind? Is the whole more than the sum of the parts? How do they differ from a body of ants on the move? These questions are quite simplistic. I am highly sceptical about making general assumptions from my own feeling. Probably at present this tendency is accentuated by the immediate memories of having lived for a prolonged period in a pressured environment, where this generalisation was difficult to avoid. It could be that I am living in an area very culturally different from other parts of the Western world, I cannot readily tell. Geographically, I am in the west, but your summary of mideast cultural assumption also seems true here. That's what I meant by communal 'family values', quite different from my own commitment to honour family loyalties, from my individualist standpoint. Hence my particular use of the word, 'atheism', which is a rejection of coercive religion, whether or not the concept of 'God' be invoked. I suppose that an open society has never been anything like perfectly realised, and the options facing some individuals will be more restricted than if they were in an organic society. When 'glasnost' and 'perestroika' arrived in the Soviet Union, and the old Communist system was opened up, many were left pining for the old securities and the steady economic competence they had enjoyed.

        Louise


        --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "tom" <tsmith17_midsouth1@...> wrote:
        >
        > Louise,
        >
        > If anything, Western modes of thought are probably more removed from group mind than most other cultures. Certainly, military training is designed to transform individuals into members of various units. I see the group mind far predating the emergence of humans. Watching birds in flight or the behavior of insects like bees and ants, it certainly appears that the whole is more than the sum of the parts. George Soros, speculator, philantrophist, and philosopher speculates that the affect of modernization and literacy is a transformation from organic society[where individuals occupy a certain place in the whole] to open society{ where each individual is free to choose from among various options]. This is one of the main differences that exist between the west and the mideast. We see the individual as the essential. element;whereas the family is the essential element in their world.
        > Tom
        > ----- Original Message -----
        > From: louise
        > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
        > Sent: Friday, June 05, 2009 3:17 PM
        > Subject: [existlist] Re: Perspectivism and existentialism
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Tom,
        >
        > Yes, sorry, am getting rather confused. Would rather discuss this question direct with you rather than ask another member (Wil, in this case) to help clarify. Once I have accustomed myself to the implications of finally explaining my difficulties, maybe the paranoia will lessen. So, sorry again.
        >
        > What I am wondering is, whether the whole idea of a group mind is only a projection based on specifically Western modes of thought. It's just an initial suggestion, and I need to think more about this myself.
        >
        > Louise
        >
        > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "tom" <tsmith17_midsouth1@> wrote:
        > >
        > > Louise,
        > >
        > > I think there has been a mass mind, and politics since not only when men, but single celled organisms formed into colonies. Call it the mass mind, or the tribal mind, or whatever; men, apes, chimpanzies, wolves, bees etc have some form of group mind. I suspect the mass mind existed before the concept of the individual mind. Marshal Mccluan maintained in the Media is the Means [or somesuchbook] that with the inventing of the printing press, the individual emerges. The Reformation encouraged man to read his bible and let the Holy Spirit work in him;whereas, Catholicism with their ceremony and statures impacted the right hemisphere[the sensory motor tribal side] instead of the literate verbal left hemisphere which posited because I think I exist.
        > > Tom
        > > ----- Original Message -----
        > > From: louise
        > > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
        > > Sent: Friday, June 05, 2009 2:07 PM
        > > Subject: [existlist] Re: Perspectivism and existentialism
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > Tom,
        > >
        > > If Lucifer is the myth of the genius condemned to hell by the mass mind, it is a derivative myth, surely? There is no mass mind at the time of the construction of the Lucifer myth. I wish we could get back to some serious existentialism, instead of all this media-derived nonsense.
        > >
        > > Louise
        > >
        > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "tom" <tsmith17_midsouth1@> wrote:
        > > >
        > > > Jim,
        > > >
        > > > Socrates being forced to drink the hemlock was an example of the serious type of philosopher who only connects with an elite few, and is persecuted by the mass mind. Hitler said he who controls the mass mind controls the world. Einstein said
        > > > A question that sometimes drives me crazy: am I or are the others crazy? Lucifer is the myth of the genius condemned to hell by the power of the mass mind.
        > > >
        > > > Tom
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > ----- Original Message -----
        > > > From: jimstuart51
        > > > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
        > > > Sent: Friday, June 05, 2009 7:12 AM
        > > > Subject: [existlist] Re: Perspectivism and existentialism
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > CSW,
        > > >
        > > > You write:
        > > >
        > > > "I still prefer to think the people I've met and worked with were the norm and not exceptions. There were generally more engaged and more passionate than I'd ever be... regardless of their views or
        > > > mine.
        > > >
        > > > Philosophers are the same. They have to sound like they are certain, or who would buy their ideas? I can imagine several hosting angry, wild, loud talk shows with nightly tirades. I bet numerous
        > > > philosophers would have been interesting (in short bursts) on the radio."
        > > >
        > > > Here you suggest that philosophers are similar to US talk show hosts.
        > > >
        > > > I completely disagree with you. The best philosophers were serious thinkers who questioned the cultural norms of their own societies and questioned their own presuppositions. They proceeded carefully, quietly, in solitude.
        > > >
        > > > Think of Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Wittgenstein. They sought out solitude and stillness away from the bluster of busy people with inflated egos and nothing much to say.
        > > >
        > > > Socrates questioned people in the street and spoke at symposia, but, again, his measured speech, frequent silences and his reluctance to put forward theories made him the opposite of the egotistic, extrovert, shouting US talk show hosts.
        > > >
        > > > Jim
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        > > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        > >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
      • tom
        Louise, When I referred to the mideast as the epitome of a region where the family rather than the individual is the primary focus, I didn t mean to imply that
        Message 3 of 25 , Jun 6, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          Louise,

          When I referred to the mideast as the epitome of a region where the family rather than the individual is the primary focus, I didn't mean to imply that it is the only place.Interestingly, the philosopher who I believe first coined the term "open society" is the guy who is alleged to have told Wittgenstein to stop brandishing pokers at philosophers with whom he disagreed. Popper wrote a book"Open Society and its Enemies", and George Soros who was one of Popper's students at London School of Economics claimed Popper's ideas have been instrumental in his very successful investment strategies, and the philantropic foundation that Soros has founded and funded is named "The Open Society Institute". Soros along with fellow billionaires Peter Lewis and Dr John Sperling have been the most successful opponents of the War on Drugs in the USA. Before them there was an organization NORMAL which pushed for reform of Mariuana laws, but they lacked the money to adequately compete against the Drug Czar's Office, which is allowed to use government money to pay for advertisements against any referendums to legalize mariuana.

          You mention the fact that when the USSR disolved, many found the open society less satisfactory than the more closed society. Even Soros is the first to admit that open society does have its drawbacks like lack of purpose and being confronted with too many choices. As the opening lines of "A Tale of Two Cities" said"It was the best of times. It was the worst of times".
          As an organic society transforms into an open society, the people who are able to adapt and prosper with the change see it as the best of times, and the ones who are unable to adapt pschologically and economically experience as the worst of times.

          Tom




          ----- Original Message -----
          From: louise
          To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
          Sent: Saturday, June 06, 2009 6:28 PM
          Subject: [existlist] Re: Perspectivism and existentialism





          Tom,

          Your account sets me musing in various directions. Take, as an example, a well-drilled army of [human] soldiers, viewed from the air. Do they have group mind? Is the whole more than the sum of the parts? How do they differ from a body of ants on the move? These questions are quite simplistic. I am highly sceptical about making general assumptions from my own feeling. Probably at present this tendency is accentuated by the immediate memories of having lived for a prolonged period in a pressured environment, where this generalisation was difficult to avoid. It could be that I am living in an area very culturally different from other parts of the Western world, I cannot readily tell. Geographically, I am in the west, but your summary of mideast cultural assumption also seems true here. That's what I meant by communal 'family values', quite different from my own commitment to honour family loyalties, from my individualist standpoint. Hence my particular use of the word, 'atheism', which is a rejection of coercive religion, whether or not the concept of 'God' be invoked. I suppose that an open society has never been anything like perfectly realised, and the options facing some individuals will be more restricted than if they were in an organic society. When 'glasnost' and 'perestroika' arrived in the Soviet Union, and the old Communist system was opened up, many were left pining for the old securities and the steady economic competence they had enjoyed.

          Louise

          --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "tom" <tsmith17_midsouth1@...> wrote:
          >
          > Louise,
          >
          > If anything, Western modes of thought are probably more removed from group mind than most other cultures. Certainly, military training is designed to transform individuals into members of various units. I see the group mind far predating the emergence of humans. Watching birds in flight or the behavior of insects like bees and ants, it certainly appears that the whole is more than the sum of the parts. George Soros, speculator, philantrophist, and philosopher speculates that the affect of modernization and literacy is a transformation from organic society[where individuals occupy a certain place in the whole] to open society{ where each individual is free to choose from among various options]. This is one of the main differences that exist between the west and the mideast. We see the individual as the essential. element;whereas the family is the essential element in their world.
          > Tom
          > ----- Original Message -----
          > From: louise
          > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
          > Sent: Friday, June 05, 2009 3:17 PM
          > Subject: [existlist] Re: Perspectivism and existentialism
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > Tom,
          >
          > Yes, sorry, am getting rather confused. Would rather discuss this question direct with you rather than ask another member (Wil, in this case) to help clarify. Once I have accustomed myself to the implications of finally explaining my difficulties, maybe the paranoia will lessen. So, sorry again.
          >
          > What I am wondering is, whether the whole idea of a group mind is only a projection based on specifically Western modes of thought. It's just an initial suggestion, and I need to think more about this myself.
          >
          > Louise
          >
          > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "tom" <tsmith17_midsouth1@> wrote:
          > >
          > > Louise,
          > >
          > > I think there has been a mass mind, and politics since not only when men, but single celled organisms formed into colonies. Call it the mass mind, or the tribal mind, or whatever; men, apes, chimpanzies, wolves, bees etc have some form of group mind. I suspect the mass mind existed before the concept of the individual mind. Marshal Mccluan maintained in the Media is the Means [or somesuchbook] that with the inventing of the printing press, the individual emerges. The Reformation encouraged man to read his bible and let the Holy Spirit work in him;whereas, Catholicism with their ceremony and statures impacted the right hemisphere[the sensory motor tribal side] instead of the literate verbal left hemisphere which posited because I think I exist.
          > > Tom
          > > ----- Original Message -----
          > > From: louise
          > > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
          > > Sent: Friday, June 05, 2009 2:07 PM
          > > Subject: [existlist] Re: Perspectivism and existentialism
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > > Tom,
          > >
          > > If Lucifer is the myth of the genius condemned to hell by the mass mind, it is a derivative myth, surely? There is no mass mind at the time of the construction of the Lucifer myth. I wish we could get back to some serious existentialism, instead of all this media-derived nonsense.
          > >
          > > Louise
          > >
          > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "tom" <tsmith17_midsouth1@> wrote:
          > > >
          > > > Jim,
          > > >
          > > > Socrates being forced to drink the hemlock was an example of the serious type of philosopher who only connects with an elite few, and is persecuted by the mass mind. Hitler said he who controls the mass mind controls the world. Einstein said
          > > > A question that sometimes drives me crazy: am I or are the others crazy? Lucifer is the myth of the genius condemned to hell by the power of the mass mind.
          > > >
          > > > Tom
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > ----- Original Message -----
          > > > From: jimstuart51
          > > > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
          > > > Sent: Friday, June 05, 2009 7:12 AM
          > > > Subject: [existlist] Re: Perspectivism and existentialism
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > CSW,
          > > >
          > > > You write:
          > > >
          > > > "I still prefer to think the people I've met and worked with were the norm and not exceptions. There were generally more engaged and more passionate than I'd ever be... regardless of their views or
          > > > mine.
          > > >
          > > > Philosophers are the same. They have to sound like they are certain, or who would buy their ideas? I can imagine several hosting angry, wild, loud talk shows with nightly tirades. I bet numerous
          > > > philosophers would have been interesting (in short bursts) on the radio."
          > > >
          > > > Here you suggest that philosophers are similar to US talk show hosts.
          > > >
          > > > I completely disagree with you. The best philosophers were serious thinkers who questioned the cultural norms of their own societies and questioned their own presuppositions. They proceeded carefully, quietly, in solitude.
          > > >
          > > > Think of Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Wittgenstein. They sought out solitude and stillness away from the bluster of busy people with inflated egos and nothing much to say.
          > > >
          > > > Socrates questioned people in the street and spoke at symposia, but, again, his measured speech, frequent silences and his reluctance to put forward theories made him the opposite of the egotistic, extrovert, shouting US talk show hosts.
          > > >
          > > > Jim
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          > > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          > >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >





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