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

Re: [existlist] When demons cry

Expand Messages
  • tom
    William, I thought that Israel has had nuclear weapons for a good while. I thought the US, Russia, England, France, China, India, Pakistan and Israel are the
    Message 1 of 17 , Oct 26, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      William,

      I thought that Israel has had nuclear weapons for a good while. I thought the US, Russia, England, France, China, India, Pakistan and Israel are the nations with nucs. As far as Israel, one way or another they could get them. Of the guys that invented nuclear weapons, think how many were of Jewish ancestory, Szilard,Oppenheimer, and Einstein. Einstein wasn't directly involved in the inventing of such, but Einstein cosigned the letter to FDR that got it rolling, and his earlier theoretical research had provided the theoretical basis for what became the practical application.A good case can be made that by the holocost and various antisemetic agenda, Hitler made refugees and enemies out of a number of these brilliant Jewish scintists, and the US gained militarily by their emigrating to the US.

      Tom

      Tom
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: William
      To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 9:00 AM
      Subject: [existlist] When demons cry


      Hi, Thomas. Along with holocost denyers now there are those who deny Israel has nuclear weapons. Of course for Israel to use nukes is the ultimate example of shitting in your mess kit. For the Israelis nukes are the real armageddon. Yet their slogan "never again" rings true to me.
      I have often looked at a nuclear Israel as a crazy move on our part but perhaps they developed them themselves, or the secrets were stolen[i.e. the Rosenbergs senario} or the Brits provided the know how? It makes little difference as I have assurances their threat is real.
      The" chosen people" takes on a wider meaning in the emerging world disorder. There are enough Jews in NYC,Miami and LA to insure the survival of juda. The radical Islamists can be assured the jews have Mecca and Medina on their target list. The balance of terror can be self limiting but at what level of destruction?
      I think we must continue to arm Israel but our direct military intervention in the area is no longer beneficial. Defuse by disengagement but retain the threat of nuclear obliteration. In the case of use of nuclear weapons the chosen people are the martyrs of the nuclear age. Bill





      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Mary
      Tom, Using your language of collective unconscious, synchronicity, perhaps even noosphere and global consciousness, you might consider that nuclear weapons
      Message 2 of 17 , Oct 26, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        Tom,

        Using your language of collective unconscious, synchronicity, perhaps even noosphere and global consciousness, you might consider that nuclear weapons were developed by necessity. The specter of horrible, prolonged global war had to be replaced by something more frightening. Existentialism confronts harsh reality at personal and common levels and forces us to reconsider failed ideologies and the moral gridlock Bill has been stressing.

        Mary

        --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "tom" <tsmith17_midsouth1@...> wrote:
        >
        > William,
        >
        > I thought that Israel has had nuclear weapons for a good while. I thought the US, Russia, England, France, China, India, Pakistan and Israel are the nations with nucs. As far as Israel, one way or another they could get them. Of the guys that invented nuclear weapons, think how many were of Jewish ancestory, Szilard,Oppenheimer, and Einstein. Einstein wasn't directly involved in the inventing of such, but Einstein cosigned the letter to FDR that got it rolling, and his earlier theoretical research had provided the theoretical basis for what became the practical application.A good case can be made that by the holocost and various antisemetic agenda, Hitler made refugees and enemies out of a number of these brilliant Jewish scintists, and the US gained militarily by their emigrating to the US.
        >
        > Tom
      • tom
        Mary, I am aware of the theory you are presenting, and I can t say it is wrong. Einstein said that the biggest mistake of his life was signing the letter to
        Message 3 of 17 , Oct 26, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          Mary,

          I am aware of the theory you are presenting, and I can't say it is wrong. Einstein said that the biggest mistake of his life was signing the letter to FDR suggesting the possibility and feasibility of the A bomb. Of course, he had heard Germany was working on it, and he didn't want to see the A bomb in the hands of Hitler. Einstein said that our technology has exceeded our humanity. It is hard to monday morning quarterback.

          Tom
          ----- Original Message -----
          From: Mary
          To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
          Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 6:30 PM
          Subject: [existlist] Re: When demons cry


          Tom,

          Using your language of collective unconscious, synchronicity, perhaps even noosphere and global consciousness, you might consider that nuclear weapons were developed by necessity. The specter of horrible, prolonged global war had to be replaced by something more frightening. Existentialism confronts harsh reality at personal and common levels and forces us to reconsider failed ideologies and the moral gridlock Bill has been stressing.

          Mary

          --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "tom" <tsmith17_midsouth1@...> wrote:
          >
          > William,
          >
          > I thought that Israel has had nuclear weapons for a good while. I thought the US, Russia, England, France, China, India, Pakistan and Israel are the nations with nucs. As far as Israel, one way or another they could get them. Of the guys that invented nuclear weapons, think how many were of Jewish ancestory, Szilard,Oppenheimer, and Einstein. Einstein wasn't directly involved in the inventing of such, but Einstein cosigned the letter to FDR that got it rolling, and his earlier theoretical research had provided the theoretical basis for what became the practical application.A good case can be made that by the holocost and various antisemetic agenda, Hitler made refugees and enemies out of a number of these brilliant Jewish scintists, and the US gained militarily by their emigrating to the US.
          >
          > Tom





          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • William
          Tom , was it you who alluded to the Noosphere? Louise understands that. You might converes as she could carry that conversation a far. If not her ,she might
          Message 4 of 17 , Oct 26, 2009
          • 0 Attachment
            Tom , was it you who alluded to the Noosphere? Louise understands that. You might converes as she could carry that conversation a far. If not her ,she might refer you to Eduard. He is the original Nooist. You might cull him out for recitation.
            The noosphere was, of course , the dream of Teihard De Chardin. It refers to a hyperpersonalisation of the human psyche. With mind/machine linkage ,which is happening, that future looms. I had great respect for Teihards imaginative future. Eduard really knew it` s possibilities. He is an EE scientist and sensed we could mind meld with thinking machines. The alien from within comes to mind.
            So the long lived title, demon or dreggs. If Teihard is right why should we remember an inquisitioned monk? Eduard took us closer and he only retains the strings of a scientist. Bill
          • tom
            William, No, it wasn t me. I seem to recall someone using that term recently here, but I can t remember who. I can understand why I would seem a likely
            Message 5 of 17 , Oct 26, 2009
            • 0 Attachment
              William,

              No, it wasn't me. I seem to recall someone using that term recently here, but I can't remember who. I can understand why I would seem a likely suspect. I did read something of De Chardin a number of years ago. I have also read some Bergson, who is also mentioned in the following article in regard to noosphere I found on the web after I read your post.

              Tom

              This article may contain original research or unverified claims. Please improve the article by adding references. See the talk page for details. (December 2008)

              Noosphere (pronounced /'no?.?sf??r/; sometimes noösphere), according to the thought of Vladimir Vernadsky and Teilhard de Chardin, denotes the "sphere of human thought". The word is derived from the Greek ???? (nous "mind") + ?????? (sphaira "sphere"), in lexical analogy to "atmosphere" and "biosphere".

              In the original theory of Vernadsky, the noosphere is the third in a succession of phases of development of the Earth and it includes all of the multiverse, after the geosphere (inanimate matter) and the biosphere (biological life). Just as the emergence of life fundamentally transformed the geosphere, the emergence of human cognition fundamentally transforms the biosphere. In contrast to the conceptions of the Gaia theorists, or the promoters of cyberspace, Vernadsky's noosphere emerges at the point where humankind, through the mastery of nuclear processes, begins to create resources through the transmutation of elements. It is also currently being researched as part of the Princeton Global Consciousness Project.[1]

              Contents
              [hide]
              a.. 1 History of concept
              b.. 2 Instances in popular culture
              c.. 3 References
              d.. 4 External links


              [edit] History of concept
              For Teilhard, the noosphere is best described as a sort of 'collective consciousness' of human-beings. It emerges through and is constituted by the interaction of human minds. The noosphere has grown in step with the organization of the human mass in relation to itself as it populates the earth. As mankind organizes itself in more complex social networks, the higher the noosphere will grow in awareness. This is an extension of Teilhard's Law of Complexity/Consciousness, the law describing the nature of evolution in the universe. Teilhard argued that the noosphere is growing towards an even greater integration and unification, culminating in the Omega point, which he saw as the goal of history. The goal of history, then, is an apex of thought/consciousness.

              One of the original aspects of the noosphere concept deals with evolution. Henri Bergson (1907) was one of the first to propose that evolution is 'creative' and cannot necessarily be explained solely by Darwinian natural selection. L'évolution créatrice is upheld, according to Bergson, by a constant vital force that animates life and fundamentally connects mind and body, an idea opposing the dualism of René Descartes. In 1923, C. Lloyd Morgan took this work further, elaborating on an 'emergent evolution' that could explain increasing complexity (including the evolution of mind). Morgan found that many of the most interesting changes in living things have been largely discontinuous with past evolution, and therefore did not necessarily take place through a gradual process of natural selection. Rather, evolution experiences jumps in complexity (such as the emergence of a self-reflective universe, or noosphere). Finally, the complexification of human cultures, particularly language, facilitated a quickening of evolution in which cultural evolution occurs more rapidly than biological evolution. Recent understanding of human ecosystems and of human impact on the biosphere have led to a link between the notion of sustainability with the "co-evolution" [Norgaard, 1994] and harmonization of cultural and biological evolution.

              The resulting political system has been referred to as a noocracy.

              American integral theorist Ken Wilber deals with this third evolution of the noosphere. In his work, Sex, Ecology, Spirituality (1995), he builds many of his arguments on the emergence of the noosphere and the continued emergence of further evolutionary structures.

              The term Noöcene epoch refers to "how we manage and adapt to the immense amount of knowledge we've created." [1]

              The noosphere concept of 'unification' was elaborated in popular science fiction by Julian May in the Galactic Milieu Series. It is also the reason Teilhard is often called the patron saint of the Internet.[2]

              History of this expression:

              a.. Henri Bergson's L'évolution créatrice (1907)
              b.. Edouard Le Roy's Les origines humaines et l'évolution de l'intelligence (1928)
              c.. Vladimir I. Vernadsky (1863-1945)
              d.. Pierre Teilhard de Chardin (1881-1955)
              e.. David Ronfeldt and John Arquilla
              f.. Wilfrid Desan
              [edit]
              ----- Original Message -----
              From: William
              To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
              Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 9:25 PM
              Subject: [existlist] When demons cry


              Tom , was it you who alluded to the Noosphere? Louise understands that. You might converes as she could carry that conversation a far. If not her ,she might refer you to Eduard. He is the original Nooist. You might cull him out for recitation.
              The noosphere was, of course , the dream of Teihard De Chardin. It refers to a hyperpersonalisation of the human psyche. With mind/machine linkage ,which is happening, that future looms. I had great respect for Teihards imaginative future. Eduard really knew it` s possibilities. He is an EE scientist and sensed we could mind meld with thinking machines. The alien from within comes to mind.
              So the long lived title, demon or dreggs. If Teihard is right why should we remember an inquisitioned monk? Eduard took us closer and he only retains the strings of a scientist. Bill





              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Mary
              Tom, My post was an attempt to explain why weapons of mass destruction are developed. You seem generally more interested in non-material explanations such as a
              Message 6 of 17 , Oct 27, 2009
              • 0 Attachment
                Tom,

                My post was an attempt to explain why weapons of mass destruction are developed. You seem generally more interested in non-material explanations such as a collective unconscious and synchronicity, etc. Your interest in propaganda, however, deals directly with conscious effort. I was suggesting that if one believes in the existence of a collective unconscious, it appears that humanity often returns to apocalyptic visions of the world when faced with frightening realities. (See Velikovsky's "Mankind in Amnesia") Hence, even though unconscious or conscious states are only now beginning to be understood through the rigors of scientific method, one might attribute to humanity the desire to end the horrible by even more horrific means. The powerful and the powerless are not immune from this impulse though the latter are unlikely to do much besides imagine. My own opinion is that the unconscious and conscious work together. If there is anything resembling a global consciousness, it will be accessed and utilized by those who have the motive and resources to affect it. What remains puzzling to me is why negative force is stronger. Is it the nature of power itself?

                Mary

                --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "tom" <tsmith17_midsouth1@...> wrote:
                >
                > Mary,
                >
                > I am aware of the theory you are presenting, and I can't say it is wrong. Einstein said that the biggest mistake of his life was signing the letter to FDR suggesting the possibility and feasibility of the A bomb. Of course, he had heard Germany was working on it, and he didn't want to see the A bomb in the hands of Hitler. Einstein said that our technology has exceeded our humanity. It is hard to monday morning quarterback.
                >
                > Tom
                > ----- Original Message -----
                > From: Mary
                > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
                > Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 6:30 PM
                > Subject: [existlist] Re: When demons cry
                >
                >
                > Tom,
                >
                > Using your language of collective unconscious, synchronicity, perhaps even noosphere and global consciousness, you might consider that nuclear weapons were developed by necessity. The specter of horrible, prolonged global war had to be replaced by something more frightening. Existentialism confronts harsh reality at personal and common levels and forces us to reconsider failed ideologies and the moral gridlock Bill has been stressing.
                >
                > Mary
              • tom
                William, I read Mary s post today and it comes back. Tom, Using your language of collective unconscious, synchronicity, perhaps even noosphere and global
                Message 7 of 17 , Oct 27, 2009
                • 0 Attachment
                  William,

                  I read Mary's post today and it comes back.

                  Tom,

                  Using your language of collective unconscious, synchronicity, perhaps even noosphere and global consciousness, you might consider that nuclear weapons were developed by necessity. The specter of horrible, prolonged global war had to be replaced by something more frightening. Existentialism confronts harsh reality at personal and common levels and forces us to reconsider failed ideologies and the moral gridlock Bill has been stressing.

                  Mary

                  ----- Original Message -----
                  From: William
                  To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
                  Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 9:25 PM
                  Subject: [existlist] When demons cry


                  Tom , was it you who alluded to the Noosphere? Louise understands that. You might converes as she could carry that conversation a far. If not her ,she might refer you to Eduard. He is the original Nooist. You might cull him out for recitation.
                  The noosphere was, of course , the dream of Teihard De Chardin. It refers to a hyperpersonalisation of the human psyche. With mind/machine linkage ,which is happening, that future looms. I had great respect for Teihards imaginative future. Eduard really knew it` s possibilities. He is an EE scientist and sensed we could mind meld with thinking machines. The alien from within comes to mind.
                  So the long lived title, demon or dreggs. If Teihard is right why should we remember an inquisitioned monk? Eduard took us closer and he only retains the strings of a scientist. Bill





                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • tom
                  Mary, I suspect that when the conscious is supported by the subconcious, concious intentions are likely to be realized. Luck might be explained by the degree
                  Message 8 of 17 , Oct 27, 2009
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Mary,

                    I suspect that when the conscious is supported by the subconcious, concious intentions are likely to be realized. Luck might be explained by the degree of support or resistance expressed by the subconcious. Carl Jung said that the concept of the subsconcious is like the concept of God and the Devil, a borderline concept to attempt to describe something we don't know too much about.

                    Although propaganda is mostly crafted by the concious mind, as I understand it it is mostly aimed at the subconcious mind. Charismic guys whither Hitler, a rock star, or some of the more effective evangicals have some combination of concious and unconcious ability to connect up with a group subconcious. I have heard it said that to most of the world Hitler seemed like a scary joke; but he wasn't speaking to the rest of the world, he was speaking to the German mass mind. Hitler said he who can control the mass mind can control the world. He also saw the audience as the female side of the exchange, and is said to have refered to making them cum as he was the male side, the Fuhrer.

                    Interestingly, after reading Hitler's ideas on propaganda,I can listen to a Rush or Hannity and see the same tactics operating, like using slogans over and over again and never recognizing anything good about the opposition. I don't think Rush ever found one thing he admited was good during Clinton administration. In reality, it would be difficult not to find a few things to agree with by Bush, Hitler etc.even Rush. Demagogues don't lie all the time or they would never be believed. They gain credibility for bringing up some true points on their enemies, and then throw in lies and exagerations to increase affect.


                    Thus we see that propaganda must follow a simple line and correspondingly the basic tactics must be psychologically sound.


                    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

                    What, for example, would we say about a poster that was supposed to advertise a new soap and that described other soaps as 'good'?
                    We would only shake our heads.

                    Exactly the same applies to political advertising.

                    The function of propaganda is, for example, not to weigh and ponder the rights of different people, but exclusively to emphasize the one right which it has set out to argue for. Its task is not to make an objective study of the truth, in so far as it favors the enemy, and then set it before the masses with academic fairness; its task is to serve our own right, always and unflinchingly.

                    Tom





                    ----- Original Message -----
                    From: Mary
                    To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
                    Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 1:14 PM
                    Subject: [existlist] Re: When demons cry


                    Tom,

                    My post was an attempt to explain why weapons of mass destruction are developed. You seem generally more interested in non-material explanations such as a collective unconscious and synchronicity, etc. Your interest in propaganda, however, deals directly with conscious effort. I was suggesting that if one believes in the existence of a collective unconscious, it appears that humanity often returns to apocalyptic visions of the world when faced with frightening realities. (See Velikovsky's "Mankind in Amnesia") Hence, even though unconscious or conscious states are only now beginning to be understood through the rigors of scientific method, one might attribute to humanity the desire to end the horrible by even more horrific means. The powerful and the powerless are not immune from this impulse though the latter are unlikely to do much besides imagine. My own opinion is that the unconscious and conscious work together. If there is anything resembling a global consciousness, it will be accessed and utilized by those who have the motive and resources to affect it. What remains puzzling to me is why negative force is stronger. Is it the nature of power itself?

                    Mary

                    --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "tom" <tsmith17_midsouth1@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > Mary,
                    >
                    > I am aware of the theory you are presenting, and I can't say it is wrong. Einstein said that the biggest mistake of his life was signing the letter to FDR suggesting the possibility and feasibility of the A bomb. Of course, he had heard Germany was working on it, and he didn't want to see the A bomb in the hands of Hitler. Einstein said that our technology has exceeded our humanity. It is hard to monday morning quarterback.
                    >
                    > Tom
                    > ----- Original Message -----
                    > From: Mary
                    > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
                    > Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 6:30 PM
                    > Subject: [existlist] Re: When demons cry
                    >
                    >
                    > Tom,
                    >
                    > Using your language of collective unconscious, synchronicity, perhaps even noosphere and global consciousness, you might consider that nuclear weapons were developed by necessity. The specter of horrible, prolonged global war had to be replaced by something more frightening. Existentialism confronts harsh reality at personal and common levels and forces us to reconsider failed ideologies and the moral gridlock Bill has been stressing.
                    >
                    > Mary





                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • Mary
                    Tom, I agree completely. So then you think that philosophy is the antithesis of propaganda as a means to power? Or is propaganda a means to realize a
                    Message 9 of 17 , Oct 27, 2009
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Tom,

                      I agree completely. So then you think that philosophy is the antithesis of propaganda as a means to power? Or is propaganda a means to realize a particular philosophy? Neither?

                      Mary

                      --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "tom" <tsmith17_midsouth1@...> wrote:

                      The function of propaganda is, for example, not to weigh and ponder the rights
                      of different people, but exclusively to emphasize the one right which it has set
                      out to argue for. Its task is not to make an objective study of the truth, in so
                      far as it favors the enemy, and then set it before the masses with academic
                      fairness; its task is to serve our own right, always and unflinchingly.
                    • tom
                      Mary, In reality I suspect that there is usually some of both things in one. Recently, there has been reference here to Nietzsche writing for the few; whereas
                      Message 10 of 17 , Oct 27, 2009
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Mary,

                        In reality I suspect that there is usually some of both things in one. Recently, there has been reference here to Nietzsche writing for the few; whereas Hitler in Mein Kampf makes it very clear his message is for the masses. I guess the political power to get the group behind you goes back to the days of nomadic hunting tribes. Politics was getting the hunting party seeing u as the leader to lead them to successful hunts, and your opponent as a critter or varmint to kill. I suspect much that we think about as cruelty utilizes the group hunting instinct and the person being stoned, crucified or burned at the stake is playing the role of the prey.

                        VICTIMLESS CRIME

                        Jesus Christ wa crucified for a victimless crime
                        by the same cats that been in the cross building business since the beginning of time.

                        Now Pontius Pilate couldn't see anything Jesus had done wrong; but he washed his hands of the matter after he did what was politically expedient to get along.

                        GROOVY MAN
                        www.thecoolcat.net

                        Tom
                        ----- Original Message -----
                        From: Mary
                        To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
                        Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 2:14 PM
                        Subject: [existlist] Re: When demons cry


                        Tom,

                        I agree completely. So then you think that philosophy is the antithesis of propaganda as a means to power? Or is propaganda a means to realize a particular philosophy? Neither?

                        Mary

                        --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "tom" <tsmith17_midsouth1@...> wrote:

                        The function of propaganda is, for example, not to weigh and ponder the rights
                        of different people, but exclusively to emphasize the one right which it has set
                        out to argue for. Its task is not to make an objective study of the truth, in so
                        far as it favors the enemy, and then set it before the masses with academic
                        fairness; its task is to serve our own right, always and unflinchingly.





                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      • tom
                        Mary, I guess what we might call negative is the dominance of the power instinct in a communication. Probably in all communication there is some will to power
                        Message 11 of 17 , Oct 27, 2009
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Mary,

                          I guess what we might call negative is the dominance of the power instinct in a communication. Probably in all communication there is some will to power and some will to communion. The power instinct is dominant in political, military or commercial communications.When the power instinct is most dominant, the presenting of one paradigm as absolutely true and arousal of the emotions to take the needed action are the requirements. As Hitler said"The function of propaganda is, for example, not to weigh and ponder the rights of different people, but exclusively to emphasize the one right which it has set out to argue for. Its task is not to make an objective study of the truth, in so far as it favors the enemy, and then set it before the masses with academic fairness; its task is to serve our own right, always and unflinchingly.

                          I guess the difference between reading an advertisement for the product as opposed to reading a consumer report on the item would be good examples of the two modes.

                          It certainly seems for thousands of years, mankind has been it's own worst enemy. Probably concurent with human evolution reaching the stage where man had reached the top of the food chain, warfare between groups of humans became the norm. As the rudiments of a standing army and a military industrual complex emerged, war was no longer a product of 2 groups getting angry and fighting, and as emotion died down fighting ended. The feelings of the men were secondary to their submission to the authority. These things were probably concurent with the beginnings of written language and history. Humans were transforming from pagans who lived in cyclical time with the seasons to goal oriented moderns who lived for the future, whither that imagined future be a Christian heaven or a Communist goal of the classless society.

                          Tom.
                          ----- Original Message -----
                          From: Mary
                          To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
                          Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 1:14 PM
                          Subject: [existlist] Re: When demons cry


                          Tom,

                          My post was an attempt to explain why weapons of mass destruction are developed. You seem generally more interested in non-material explanations such as a collective unconscious and synchronicity, etc. Your interest in propaganda, however, deals directly with conscious effort. I was suggesting that if one believes in the existence of a collective unconscious, it appears that humanity often returns to apocalyptic visions of the world when faced with frightening realities. (See Velikovsky's "Mankind in Amnesia") Hence, even though unconscious or conscious states are only now beginning to be understood through the rigors of scientific method, one might attribute to humanity the desire to end the horrible by even more horrific means. The powerful and the powerless are not immune from this impulse though the latter are unlikely to do much besides imagine. My own opinion is that the unconscious and conscious work together. If there is anything resembling a global consciousness, it will be accessed and utilized by those who have the motive and resources to affect it. What remains puzzling to me is why negative force is stronger. Is it the nature of power itself?

                          Mary

                          --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "tom" <tsmith17_midsouth1@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > Mary,
                          >
                          > I am aware of the theory you are presenting, and I can't say it is wrong. Einstein said that the biggest mistake of his life was signing the letter to FDR suggesting the possibility and feasibility of the A bomb. Of course, he had heard Germany was working on it, and he didn't want to see the A bomb in the hands of Hitler. Einstein said that our technology has exceeded our humanity. It is hard to monday morning quarterback.
                          >
                          > Tom
                          > ----- Original Message -----
                          > From: Mary
                          > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
                          > Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 6:30 PM
                          > Subject: [existlist] Re: When demons cry
                          >
                          >
                          > Tom,
                          >
                          > Using your language of collective unconscious, synchronicity, perhaps even noosphere and global consciousness, you might consider that nuclear weapons were developed by necessity. The specter of horrible, prolonged global war had to be replaced by something more frightening. Existentialism confronts harsh reality at personal and common levels and forces us to reconsider failed ideologies and the moral gridlock Bill has been stressing.
                          >
                          > Mary





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