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

Re: Thought is divided

Expand Messages
  • Jim
    Mary, You write: If all the technologies we depend upon work only part of the time, we return them or demand new models. Thought needs rethinking, but where
    Message 1 of 68 , Apr 4, 2010
      Mary,

      You write:

      "If all the technologies we depend upon work only part of the time, we return them or demand new models. Thought needs rethinking, but where this will lead is unknown. So Thought takes recourse in the status quo: let's not think about Thought. Just keep doing all this other stuff that only works part of the time. Now, if Thought suggests that we patiently pursue our projects while using its faulty model, I say we should patiently develop a new model for thinking and junk the old one. A confusing system of thought wants us to be silent and adapt like slaves to its seemingly benign oppression."

      This seems a very ambitious project, and I have no idea what a new model of thinking will look like.

      If you, or somebody else, were to present a new model, I could compare it with the traditional model, and decide to stick with the old model or discard the old model and embrace the new model.

      Until a new model comes along, I don't think I have any choice but to continue with the old model. I can't feed myself, hold down a job and provide for my family without using some model of thought.

      If I don't like my car, I can sell it, and manage without a car until I spot a new model I want to buy and use. It's not so easy with a house. Where would I live whilst waiting for a new house to meet my requirements? More so with thought. I can't ditch the old model, then manage without thought until a better model comes along.

      I don't see the negative features of the traditional model of thought that you see, and are so keen to discard. I don't see thought itself as some power-hungry, controlling dictator.

      I don't think thought itself is confusing. Yes, many people think in muddled and confused ways, and, yes, it is in the interests of those in power to leave the mass of ordinary people confused, so they do not see through the deceptions and contradictions of the ruling elite.

      I think it is better to target the ruling elites, and not thought itself. But I don't want to dissuade you from your ambitious project of seeking a new model for thought. I am no conservative, opposed to any form of change. I hope I am open-minded enough to recognise a new model of thought, or any other basic phenomenon, in an unbiased way, and assess it for its usefulness as impartially as is possible,

      Jim
    • Herman
      Hi Jim, ... Well, yes, but not reasonably. Aristotle believed that it lay in the nature of slaves to be slaves, and that the possibility for freedom was
      Message 68 of 68 , Apr 6, 2010
        Hi Jim,

        On 6 April 2010 22:43, Jim <jjimstuart1@...> wrote:
        > Hi Polly,
        >
        > Recall, Irvin wrote this:
        >
        > "Aristotle might emphasize that freedom is the ability to acquire those dispositions necessary for virtue."
        >
        > This account of freedom says nothing about the existence of slaves in a society. So even if Aristotle did mean his account of freedom to apply only to free men and women in a society where slavery existed, I can take Aristotle's account of freedom and say it is a viable definition of freedom, which can justifiably be applied to all human beings here and now.
        >

        Well, yes, but not reasonably. Aristotle believed that it lay in "the
        nature" of slaves to be slaves, and that the possibility for freedom
        was limited to the elite. So your notion of freedom is quite
        different, unless you believe that if Aristotle arrived on the scene
        today that he would not spy anyone who was servile by nature. (He'd
        best get his eyes checked if that was the case).

        Polly




        > Jim
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > ------------------------------------
        >
        > Please support the Existential Primer... dedicated to explaining nothing!
        >
        > Home Page: http://www.tameri.com/csw/existYahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.