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

Situation ethics

Expand Messages
  • William
    Im sure you all remember the idea, it drove the old moralists wild and split the generations for good. Existentialists think ethics evolve with the people
    Message 1 of 16 , Nov 28, 2010
      Im sure you all remember the idea, it drove the old moralists wild and split the generations for good. Existentialists think ethics evolve with the people that design them.
      Last night I rewatched Woodstock and was amased again by all the naked and drugged out people. They were not tatooed and pierced freeks , they were collage people who had had enough of the straight world. The leaders had run the world into a dead end of war and morality and the times demanded change. Most of those people went back and turned to disko and the latest commercial fad. Few bothered to look for where such an idea of evolving morality could have come from. Camus was far beyond that, he was examining how a persons past binds him to his present. Since I know you can only change the present I write a good deal about current events. As to how I am attached to the past is of some interest, especially if a thoughtful person like Mary is examining the subject. She is one who looks for deeper meanings.
      This morning I listened to the curator of the art museum trying to explain to a local load announcer the significance of Bacon`s study of the vasqueses series of the popes. The pious announcer could not understand why anyone would paint a pope screaming. He also could not understand how a collage could impart meaning as he likes his meanings spelled out with good stern rules.
      Certainly a fellow like Dick is often a pain but he tries to navigate with few tools. That he suspects a substrate of causality beneath the surface of lies and misinformation is to his credit. Our existentialism is not the end all as the philosophy evolves with the practitioners. Now Dick is old and is devolving into his memories. That seems normal but I do not think he ever really understood the concept of endless and seemingly absurd change. Monumental happenings take time to set up and become recognisable reality. I think Dick has gone a good distance but did not have the education to put many of the pieces in place. That was why I sent him that long list of psychologists who were American and European. He did not know them and dodged the matter by saying he was not in that kind of psychology. He is abandoning the present and his past experience now guides his ethics and writings. Dick left the mainstreem in his admitted field long ago and does not even acknowledge his collegues. I really hope he is happy but he will not run this group into his rut. I am sorry Tom took the last blast of profanity , Tom has been a good participant and does not deserve that kind of lousey treatment. The only saving grace is that Tom can understand the situation. Bill
    • tom
      Bill A few hours ago I was looking through a few of my deleted emails and saw where Dick was coming back at me for qualifying my ideas to Mary saying I was
      Message 2 of 16 , Nov 28, 2010
        Bill

        A few hours ago I was looking through a few of my deleted emails and saw where Dick was coming back at me for qualifying my ideas to Mary saying I was only shariing my current thoughts on a matter, and did not mean to be dogmatic or a Dickhead. This was what got him going.

        I have Dick blocked out now, and only see anything of his when I go to my deleted folder. I see Dick as distinguished from most people in 3 major areas. For one, according to his own admission, he has respect for very few people. Number 2 is that he speaks like he is being picked on, when most of the time criticism of him comes after he is showing great disrespect to others. And number 3 is extreme need to be the center of attention, and play the role of genius and seer. Probably there is a shadow self in us all in some ways akin to Dick; and the goal of any constructive type of transformation is to become more aware and less under its influence.

        Peace
        Tom
        ----- Original Message -----
        From: William
        To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2010 5:21 PM
        Subject: [existlist] Situation ethics



        Im sure you all remember the idea, it drove the old moralists wild and split the generations for good. Existentialists think ethics evolve with the people that design them.
        Last night I rewatched Woodstock and was amased again by all the naked and drugged out people. They were not tatooed and pierced freeks , they were collage people who had had enough of the straight world. The leaders had run the world into a dead end of war and morality and the times demanded change. Most of those people went back and turned to disko and the latest commercial fad. Few bothered to look for where such an idea of evolving morality could have come from. Camus was far beyond that, he was examining how a persons past binds him to his present. Since I know you can only change the present I write a good deal about current events. As to how I am attached to the past is of some interest, especially if a thoughtful person like Mary is examining the subject. She is one who looks for deeper meanings.
        This morning I listened to the curator of the art museum trying to explain to a local load announcer the significance of Bacon`s study of the vasqueses series of the popes. The pious announcer could not understand why anyone would paint a pope screaming. He also could not understand how a collage could impart meaning as he likes his meanings spelled out with good stern rules.
        Certainly a fellow like Dick is often a pain but he tries to navigate with few tools. That he suspects a substrate of causality beneath the surface of lies and misinformation is to his credit. Our existentialism is not the end all as the philosophy evolves with the practitioners. Now Dick is old and is devolving into his memories. That seems normal but I do not think he ever really understood the concept of endless and seemingly absurd change. Monumental happenings take time to set up and become recognisable reality. I think Dick has gone a good distance but did not have the education to put many of the pieces in place. That was why I sent him that long list of psychologists who were American and European. He did not know them and dodged the matter by saying he was not in that kind of psychology. He is abandoning the present and his past experience now guides his ethics and writings. Dick left the mainstreem in his admitted field long ago and does not even acknowledge his collegues. I really hope he is happy but he will not run this group into his rut. I am sorry Tom took the last blast of profanity , Tom has been a good participant and does not deserve that kind of lousey treatment. The only saving grace is that Tom can understand the situation. Bill





        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • William
        ... Tom, Well said. Bill
        Message 3 of 16 , Nov 28, 2010
          --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "tom" <tsmith17_midsouth1@...> wrote:
          >
          > Bill
          >
          > A few hours ago I was looking through a few of my deleted emails and saw where Dick was coming back at me for qualifying my ideas to Mary saying I was only shariing my current thoughts on a matter, and did not mean to be dogmatic or a Dickhead. This was what got him going.
          >
          > I have Dick blocked out now, and only see anything of his when I go to my deleted folder. I see Dick as distinguished from most people in 3 major areas. For one, according to his own admission, he has respect for very few people. Number 2 is that he speaks like he is being picked on, when most of the time criticism of him comes after he is showing great disrespect to others. And number 3 is extreme need to be the center of attention, and play the role of genius and seer. Probably there is a shadow self in us all in some ways akin to Dick; and the goal of any constructive type of transformation is to become more aware and less under its influence.
          >
          > Peace
          > Tom
          > ----- Original Message -----
          > From: William
          > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
          > Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2010 5:21 PM
          > Subject: [existlist] Situation ethics
          >
          >
          >
          > Im sure you all remember the idea, it drove the old moralists wild and split the generations for good. Existentialists think ethics evolve with the people that design them.
          > Last night I rewatched Woodstock and was amased again by all the naked and drugged out people. They were not tatooed and pierced freeks , they were collage people who had had enough of the straight world. The leaders had run the world into a dead end of war and morality and the times demanded change. Most of those people went back and turned to disko and the latest commercial fad. Few bothered to look for where such an idea of evolving morality could have come from. Camus was far beyond that, he was examining how a persons past binds him to his present. Since I know you can only change the present I write a good deal about current events. As to how I am attached to the past is of some interest, especially if a thoughtful person like Mary is examining the subject. She is one who looks for deeper meanings.
          > This morning I listened to the curator of the art museum trying to explain to a local load announcer the significance of Bacon`s study of the vasqueses series of the popes. The pious announcer could not understand why anyone would paint a pope screaming. He also could not understand how a collage could impart meaning as he likes his meanings spelled out with good stern rules.
          > Certainly a fellow like Dick is often a pain but he tries to navigate with few tools. That he suspects a substrate of causality beneath the surface of lies and misinformation is to his credit. Our existentialism is not the end all as the philosophy evolves with the practitioners. Now Dick is old and is devolving into his memories. That seems normal but I do not think he ever really understood the concept of endless and seemingly absurd change. Monumental happenings take time to set up and become recognisable reality. I think Dick has gone a good distance but did not have the education to put many of the pieces in place. That was why I sent him that long list of psychologists who were American and European. He did not know them and dodged the matter by saying he was not in that kind of psychology. He is abandoning the present and his past experience now guides his ethics and writings. Dick left the mainstreem in his admitted field long ago and does not even acknowledge his collegues. I really hope he is happy but he will not run this group into his rut. I am sorry Tom took the last blast of profanity , Tom has been a good participant and does not deserve that kind of lousey treatment. The only saving grace is that Tom can understand the situation. Bill
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
          Tom, Well said. Bill
        • dick.richardson@rocketmail.com
          As I said years ago this must be the most pathetic, idiotic and egocentric group on the whole of yahoo groups. It also has the the advantage that all these
          Message 4 of 16 , Nov 28, 2010
            As I said years ago this must be the most pathetic, idiotic and
            egocentric group on the whole of yahoo groups. It also has the the
            advantage that all these emails are in the public domain and they even
            come up on Google search. So, there for the record. Read yourselves, and
            for all those years. It is hilarious. I have directed a good many people
            to look at them, for it is the epitome of few back slapping old farts of
            utter bookworms (who forget about real life) and everybody else except
            them, the heroes of their books, are stupid and know nothing. It is the
            crème de la crème of crap and ignorant bullshit. So much so that
            it is funny. That you have severe existential life alienating problems,
            probably loneliness and a bad experience as a kid, (which others get
            over) results in this for a tiny few. It ought to go into a book. Maybe
            my next one. They all get well read. I wonder if yours will.


            --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "William" <v.valleywestdental@...>
            wrote:

            Tom, Well said. Bill




            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Louise
            There s a cheery morning thought for us all to ponder. I detect a lack of critical self-awareness, somehow, but guess I will not be believed by the man
            Message 5 of 16 , Nov 29, 2010
              There's a cheery morning thought for us all to ponder. I detect a lack of critical self-awareness, somehow, but guess I will not be believed by the man himself. Dick's esoteric self-knowledge immunises him against the more everyday kind.

              I am gazing out in some wonderment at trees loaded down with fresh snow, lit up by the morning sunlight. Winter has come early, a foot of soft snow lies over the ground, and the birds will struggle to find food. Stop the abuse, Dick. No one "brings you here" (as you claimed Tom had that power). It is personal decision alone. Why not have a beer.

              And, yes, I changed my mind a few days ago. I read Dick's posts if the mood so takes me. Whether contributors here read them or not, it makes no difference to the habits of multiple posting, scurrility and slander which mingle oddly with quaint appeals to the poetry of life - as though we were all invited to enjoy, in the intervals of being insulted. Strange. Such is human life. Persistingly strange. I know very little indeed, which is why I post rarely now. Did I used to know more? Yes, in a sense. Time for a coffee.

              Louise
            • tom
              Louise Nice to hear from you again. I think Dick means that I brought him here by making my reference to not wanting to be a Dick head;but that s just another
              Message 6 of 16 , Nov 29, 2010
                Louise

                Nice to hear from you again. I think Dick means that I brought him here by making my reference to not wanting to be a Dick head;but that's just another excuse to not follow through on the dozens of promises he has made to leave us alone. As for your reference to Dick's lack of critical self-awareness, that is my observation also. Any statements he makes regarding esoteric experiences he claims to have had nust be looked at in light of the fact that if lacking respect and courtesy for your fellow human beings, being paranoid, and lacking critical self awareness are the results of such experiences, of what value are they?

                Anyway, I appreciate you, and wish you the very best.

                Peace
                Tom

                ----- Original Message -----
                From: Louise
                To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
                Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 3:50 AM
                Subject: [existlist] Cuckoo in the nest



                There's a cheery morning thought for us all to ponder. I detect a lack of critical self-awareness, somehow, but guess I will not be believed by the man himself. Dick's esoteric self-knowledge immunises him against the more everyday kind.

                I am gazing out in some wonderment at trees loaded down with fresh snow, lit up by the morning sunlight. Winter has come early, a foot of soft snow lies over the ground, and the birds will struggle to find food. Stop the abuse, Dick. No one "brings you here" (as you claimed Tom had that power). It is personal decision alone. Why not have a beer.

                And, yes, I changed my mind a few days ago. I read Dick's posts if the mood so takes me. Whether contributors here read them or not, it makes no difference to the habits of multiple posting, scurrility and slander which mingle oddly with quaint appeals to the poetry of life - as though we were all invited to enjoy, in the intervals of being insulted. Strange. Such is human life. Persistingly strange. I know very little indeed, which is why I post rarely now. Did I used to know more? Yes, in a sense. Time for a coffee.

                Louise





                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • Mary
                Well, Louise, you certainly know propriety and beauty, even some ornithology, but are unaware of your stinginess in withholding your contributions :) Mary
                Message 7 of 16 , Nov 29, 2010
                  Well, Louise, you certainly know propriety and beauty, even some ornithology, but are unaware of your stinginess in withholding your contributions :) Mary

                  --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Louise" <hecubatoher@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > There's a cheery morning thought for us all to ponder. I detect a lack of critical self-awareness, somehow, but guess I will not be believed by the man himself. Dick's esoteric self-knowledge immunises him against the more everyday kind.
                  >
                  > I am gazing out in some wonderment at trees loaded down with fresh snow, lit up by the morning sunlight. Winter has come early, a foot of soft snow lies over the ground, and the birds will struggle to find food. Stop the abuse, Dick. No one "brings you here" (as you claimed Tom had that power). It is personal decision alone. Why not have a beer.
                  >
                  > And, yes, I changed my mind a few days ago. I read Dick's posts if the mood so takes me. Whether contributors here read them or not, it makes no difference to the habits of multiple posting, scurrility and slander which mingle oddly with quaint appeals to the poetry of life - as though we were all invited to enjoy, in the intervals of being insulted. Strange. Such is human life. Persistingly strange. I know very little indeed, which is why I post rarely now. Did I used to know more? Yes, in a sense. Time for a coffee.
                  >
                  > Louise
                  >
                • Louise
                  Thanks, Mary, for the generous remarks. True, I had not been aware of stinginess, because, in order to be more forthcoming, I would have to be more capable,
                  Message 8 of 16 , Nov 29, 2010
                    Thanks, Mary, for the generous remarks. True, I had not been aware of stinginess, because, in order to be more forthcoming, I would have to be more capable, something which I misjudge frequently, and find myself altered in disquieting ways by internet participation.

                    Existlist is very public, of course, as these things go. Maybe it even denotes a certain recklessness on my part, to contribute in an atmosphere where a determined interloper can try to hold us up to ridicule, as though it were wholesome, and that we can learn from it? I suppose that satire makes those sorts of claims, but then, that is satire. Or else it is an emotional brutality, the usual stuff of self-deception.

                    These days, when I post, I have usually weighed up whether or not to hit send for several minutes. And, quite often, I come to the conclusion, that, well, I don't know whether this or that should be put out there, but I also don't know that it shouldn't, and after that the answer may be yea or nay. I keep reading here, for the discussion, the inspired narratives, the reading recommendations, whatever the company brings along. One day I might feel again that I know something substantive, but, again, thanks for penetrating the gloom with your unfailingly uncondescending kindness.

                    I feel I am being quite un-English, somehow, and maybe that is good, to affront my own stereotype, rather as Rilke approved of the "unGerman" expressions used by a translator of his verses. "Maybe" again, the mark of uncertainty. Which reminds me of Keats' phrase, "negative capability", and the possibility that what seems a defect may be at the least acceptable. How much may one bear in mind without coming too quickly to a definite idea or decision, is how I understand the phrase. Going back now to my undergraduate days, for that memory. Resolved, then, on this occasion, not to be stingy, I shall release these few paragraphs from my self-sceptical mind, and let them find their own way amid the quiet and the cacophany.

                    Louise
                    (after a pause for decision)

                    ... everything is strange, like the frequent bluish-white lightning that has been flashing this evening just beyond the windows, reflected from the snow, followed quickly each time by a crash of thunder... such is present perception, this strangeness, not a steady thing, like the absurd. ??

                    --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > Well, Louise, you certainly know propriety and beauty, even some ornithology, but are unaware of your stinginess in withholding your contributions :) Mary
                    >
                    > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Louise" <hecubatoher@> wrote:
                    > >
                    > > There's a cheery morning thought for us all to ponder. I detect a lack of critical self-awareness, somehow, but guess I will not be believed by the man himself. Dick's esoteric self-knowledge immunises him against the more everyday kind.
                    > >
                    > > I am gazing out in some wonderment at trees loaded down with fresh snow, lit up by the morning sunlight. Winter has come early, a foot of soft snow lies over the ground, and the birds will struggle to find food. Stop the abuse, Dick. No one "brings you here" (as you claimed Tom had that power). It is personal decision alone. Why not have a beer.
                    > >
                    > > And, yes, I changed my mind a few days ago. I read Dick's posts if the mood so takes me. Whether contributors here read them or not, it makes no difference to the habits of multiple posting, scurrility and slander which mingle oddly with quaint appeals to the poetry of life - as though we were all invited to enjoy, in the intervals of being insulted. Strange. Such is human life. Persistingly strange. I know very little indeed, which is why I post rarely now. Did I used to know more? Yes, in a sense. Time for a coffee.
                    > >
                    > > Louise
                    > >
                    >
                  • Louise
                    ... Sorry for the confusing comment here: I think what I was remembering was that an English translator of Rilke s German felt his (translator s) phrasing to
                    Message 9 of 16 , Nov 29, 2010
                      --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Louise" <hecubatoher@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > Thanks, Mary, for the generous remarks. True, I had not been aware of stinginess, because, in order to be more forthcoming, I would have to be more capable, something which I misjudge frequently, and find myself altered in disquieting ways by internet participation.
                      >
                      > Existlist is very public, of course, as these things go. Maybe it even denotes a certain recklessness on my part, to contribute in an atmosphere where a determined interloper can try to hold us up to ridicule, as though it were wholesome, and that we can learn from it? I suppose that satire makes those sorts of claims, but then, that is satire. Or else it is an emotional brutality, the usual stuff of self-deception.
                      >
                      > These days, when I post, I have usually weighed up whether or not to hit send for several minutes. And, quite often, I come to the conclusion, that, well, I don't know whether this or that should be put out there, but I also don't know that it shouldn't, and after that the answer may be yea or nay. I keep reading here, for the discussion, the inspired narratives, the reading recommendations, whatever the company brings along. One day I might feel again that I know something substantive, but, again, thanks for penetrating the gloom with your unfailingly uncondescending kindness.
                      >
                      > I feel I am being quite un-English, somehow, and maybe that is good, to affront my own stereotype, rather as Rilke approved of the "unGerman" expressions used by a translator of his verses.

                      Sorry for the confusing comment here: I think what I was remembering was that an English translator of Rilke's German felt his (translator's) phrasing to be un-English, and Rilke asserted that his own poetry was often un-German in expression.

                      "Maybe" again, the mark of uncertainty. Which reminds me of Keats' phrase, "negative capability", and the possibility that what seems a defect may be at the least acceptable. How much may one bear in mind without coming too quickly to a definite idea or decision, is how I understand the phrase. Going back now to my undergraduate days, for that memory. Resolved, then, on this occasion, not to be stingy, I shall release these few paragraphs from my self-sceptical mind, and let them find their own way amid the quiet and the cacophany.
                      >
                      > Louise
                      > (after a pause for decision)
                      >
                      > ... everything is strange, like the frequent bluish-white lightning that has been flashing this evening just beyond the windows, reflected from the snow, followed quickly each time by a crash of thunder... such is present perception, this strangeness, not a steady thing, like the absurd. ??
                      >
                      > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@> wrote:
                      > >
                      > > Well, Louise, you certainly know propriety and beauty, even some ornithology, but are unaware of your stinginess in withholding your contributions :) Mary
                      > >
                      > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Louise" <hecubatoher@> wrote:
                      > > >
                      > > > There's a cheery morning thought for us all to ponder. I detect a lack of critical self-awareness, somehow, but guess I will not be believed by the man himself. Dick's esoteric self-knowledge immunises him against the more everyday kind.
                      > > >
                      > > > I am gazing out in some wonderment at trees loaded down with fresh snow, lit up by the morning sunlight. Winter has come early, a foot of soft snow lies over the ground, and the birds will struggle to find food. Stop the abuse, Dick. No one "brings you here" (as you claimed Tom had that power). It is personal decision alone. Why not have a beer.
                      > > >
                      > > > And, yes, I changed my mind a few days ago. I read Dick's posts if the mood so takes me. Whether contributors here read them or not, it makes no difference to the habits of multiple posting, scurrility and slander which mingle oddly with quaint appeals to the poetry of life - as though we were all invited to enjoy, in the intervals of being insulted. Strange. Such is human life. Persistingly strange. I know very little indeed, which is why I post rarely now. Did I used to know more? Yes, in a sense. Time for a coffee.
                      > > >
                      > > > Louise
                      > > >
                      > >
                      >
                    • tom
                      Louise You write I feel I am being quite un-English, somehow, and maybe that is good, to affront my own stereotype, rather as Rilke approved of the unGerman
                      Message 10 of 16 , Nov 29, 2010
                        Louise


                        You write

                        I feel I am being quite un-English, somehow, and maybe that is good, to affront my own stereotype, rather as Rilke approved of the "unGerman" expressions used by a translator of his verses.

                        Sorry for the confusing comment here: I think what I was remembering was that an English translator of Rilke's German felt his (translator's) phrasing to be un-English, and Rilke asserted that his own poetry was often un-German in expression.

                        I have heard that brighter and more creative people tend to be less dominated by nationality and race than the more mass types. The parable of the Good Samaritan was a humanist rather than an exclusively Jewish view of people from other tribes. Tribal and nationalist viewpoints historically are geared to create unity among the tribe or nation for warfare against other tribes or nations. Often, with the brighter and more creative people identification is more with kindred spirits than with other people from their tribe or nation.The Jewish masses chose Barnabus to be saved instead of Jesus.

                        Peace and best wishes
                        Tom
                        ----- Original Message -----
                        From: Louise
                        To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
                        Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 6:32 PM
                        Subject: [existlist] Re: Cuckoo in the nest



                        --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Louise" <hecubatoher@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > Thanks, Mary, for the generous remarks. True, I had not been aware of stinginess, because, in order to be more forthcoming, I would have to be more capable, something which I misjudge frequently, and find myself altered in disquieting ways by internet participation.
                        >
                        > Existlist is very public, of course, as these things go. Maybe it even denotes a certain recklessness on my part, to contribute in an atmosphere where a determined interloper can try to hold us up to ridicule, as though it were wholesome, and that we can learn from it? I suppose that satire makes those sorts of claims, but then, that is satire. Or else it is an emotional brutality, the usual stuff of self-deception.
                        >
                        > These days, when I post, I have usually weighed up whether or not to hit send for several minutes. And, quite often, I come to the conclusion, that, well, I don't know whether this or that should be put out there, but I also don't know that it shouldn't, and after that the answer may be yea or nay. I keep reading here, for the discussion, the inspired narratives, the reading recommendations, whatever the company brings along. One day I might feel again that I know something substantive, but, again, thanks for penetrating the gloom with your unfailingly uncondescending kindness.
                        >
                        > I feel I am being quite un-English, somehow, and maybe that is good, to affront my own stereotype, rather as Rilke approved of the "unGerman" expressions used by a translator of his verses.

                        Sorry for the confusing comment here: I think what I was remembering was that an English translator of Rilke's German felt his (translator's) phrasing to be un-English, and Rilke asserted that his own poetry was often un-German in expression.

                        "Maybe" again, the mark of uncertainty. Which reminds me of Keats' phrase, "negative capability", and the possibility that what seems a defect may be at the least acceptable. How much may one bear in mind without coming too quickly to a definite idea or decision, is how I understand the phrase. Going back now to my undergraduate days, for that memory. Resolved, then, on this occasion, not to be stingy, I shall release these few paragraphs from my self-sceptical mind, and let them find their own way amid the quiet and the cacophany.
                        >
                        > Louise
                        > (after a pause for decision)
                        >
                        > ... everything is strange, like the frequent bluish-white lightning that has been flashing this evening just beyond the windows, reflected from the snow, followed quickly each time by a crash of thunder... such is present perception, this strangeness, not a steady thing, like the absurd. ??
                        >
                        > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@> wrote:
                        > >
                        > > Well, Louise, you certainly know propriety and beauty, even some ornithology, but are unaware of your stinginess in withholding your contributions :) Mary
                        > >
                        > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Louise" <hecubatoher@> wrote:
                        > > >
                        > > > There's a cheery morning thought for us all to ponder. I detect a lack of critical self-awareness, somehow, but guess I will not be believed by the man himself. Dick's esoteric self-knowledge immunises him against the more everyday kind.
                        > > >
                        > > > I am gazing out in some wonderment at trees loaded down with fresh snow, lit up by the morning sunlight. Winter has come early, a foot of soft snow lies over the ground, and the birds will struggle to find food. Stop the abuse, Dick. No one "brings you here" (as you claimed Tom had that power). It is personal decision alone. Why not have a beer.
                        > > >
                        > > > And, yes, I changed my mind a few days ago. I read Dick's posts if the mood so takes me. Whether contributors here read them or not, it makes no difference to the habits of multiple posting, scurrility and slander which mingle oddly with quaint appeals to the poetry of life - as though we were all invited to enjoy, in the intervals of being insulted. Strange. Such is human life. Persistingly strange. I know very little indeed, which is why I post rarely now. Did I used to know more? Yes, in a sense. Time for a coffee.
                        > > >
                        > > > Louise
                        > > >
                        > >
                        >





                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      • dick.richardson@rocketmail.com
                        Feeling un-Nationalistic The epitome of the Nationalistic (tribe) flag waving mentality is as is seen in football hooligans. They must have something to belong
                        Message 11 of 16 , Nov 29, 2010
                          Feeling un-Nationalistic



                          The epitome of the Nationalistic (tribe) flag waving mentality is as is
                          seen in football hooligans. They must have something to belong to, to
                          feel a part of, for they are empty of anything else, and this is their
                          rope ladder to cling to; much like having a religion as a crutch or a
                          drug. Probably due to a severe identity crisis. "I have a name; I
                          have a club: I have a tribe: I have a religion: I have a nation",
                          etc etc. It is a gap filler. Know Thy SELF !



                          The opposite of this does not mean a negation or loathing of where one
                          landed here. No matter where you are born here, just get on with it. But
                          you are not a nation, you are not a club, you are not a religion, you
                          are not a body; you are an extant life form, and each one is unique; and
                          albeit all made of the same stuff at root, and no matter what nation or
                          planet one is born onto. A BEING ! A being does not need a flag or a
                          club or a guru because it already belongs to BEING. One has to live and
                          use that BEING. Be yourself – because there is not another one; and
                          there never will be another one like that. NO apologies are required for
                          EXISTING and being YOU.



                          If, at any point during life one feels a need to belong to something
                          then one should ask oneself as to why; for that is the first stage of
                          negating oneself and inflicting imprisonment onto oneself; the chains
                          that bind. One then (should that ever occur) find out what is wrong, and
                          as to why one is not free of this inner entropy and restriction. Why the
                          need to belong and to define oneself that way? I am a Greek Dustman !
                          No you aint, you are a life form. A BEING. Use it ! What the heck good
                          is life if you don't use it, but rather sit whimpering and cringing
                          under a bush and finding solace in something to cling to and defining
                          oneself. Defining closes down; restricts and confines. Have the courage
                          to liberate yourself and walk alone, for you are already a part of
                          something far bigger and more profound than a granny's knitting
                          circle – LIFE !



                          Such people also condemn LOVE as being a trap that binds them – any
                          excuse to be bound and tethered. That is because they DO NOT KNOW LOVE.
                          It is the ultimate tool that cuts through the chain which binds – if
                          only they did but know it. It is the ultimate liberation from the
                          restricted state of the egotic need to clinging. But one might as well
                          sing it to the moon, for they are not going to hear you. They are not on
                          that wavelength. But that is their problem. It is like the prisoner
                          yelling to the passer by – `be free like I am' !



                          Do you want to go on further or are you happy with the chains that bind
                          you where you are at? There is no cosmological law which states that
                          you cannot move on. If you are finding that there is then it is only you
                          that is making it so. Run with the crowd only if the crowd is running
                          your way. If it aint then run alone.



                          Dick Richardson



                          --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Louise" <hecubatoher@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > Thanks, Mary, for the generous remarks. True, I had not been aware of
                          stinginess, because, in order to be more forthcoming, I would have to be
                          more capable, something which I misjudge frequently, and find myself
                          altered in disquieting ways by internet participation.
                          >
                          > Existlist is very public, of course, as these things go. Maybe it
                          even denotes a certain recklessness on my part, to contribute in an
                          atmosphere where a determined interloper can try to hold us up to
                          ridicule, as though it were wholesome, and that we can learn from it? I
                          suppose that satire makes those sorts of claims, but then, that is
                          satire. Or else it is an emotional brutality, the usual stuff of
                          self-deception.
                          >
                          > These days, when I post, I have usually weighed up whether or not to
                          hit send for several minutes. And, quite often, I come to the
                          conclusion, that, well, I don't know whether this or that should be put
                          out there, but I also don't know that it shouldn't, and after that the
                          answer may be yea or nay. I keep reading here, for the discussion, the
                          inspired narratives, the reading recommendations, whatever the company
                          brings along. One day I might feel again that I know something
                          substantive, but, again, thanks for penetrating the gloom with your
                          unfailingly uncondescending kindness.
                          >
                          > I feel I am being quite un-English, somehow, and maybe that is good,
                          to affront my own stereotype, rather as Rilke approved of the "unGerman"
                          expressions used by a translator of his verses. "Maybe" again, the mark
                          of uncertainty. Which reminds me of Keats' phrase, "negative
                          capability", and the possibility that what seems a defect may be at the
                          least acceptable. How much may one bear in mind without coming too
                          quickly to a definite idea or decision, is how I understand the phrase.
                          Going back now to my undergraduate days, for that memory. Resolved,
                          then, on this occasion, not to be stingy, I shall release these few
                          paragraphs from my self-sceptical mind, and let them find their own way
                          amid the quiet and the cacophany.
                          >
                          > Louise
                          > (after a pause for decision)
                          >
                          > ... everything is strange, like the frequent bluish-white lightning
                          that has been flashing this evening just beyond the windows, reflected
                          from the snow, followed quickly each time by a crash of thunder... such
                          is present perception, this strangeness, not a steady thing, like the
                          absurd. ??
                          >
                          > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" josephson45r@ wrote:
                          > >
                          > > Well, Louise, you certainly know propriety and beauty, even some
                          ornithology, but are unaware of your stinginess in withholding your
                          contributions :) Mary
                          > >
                          > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Louise" <hecubatoher@> wrote:
                          > > >
                          > > > There's a cheery morning thought for us all to ponder. I detect a
                          lack of critical self-awareness, somehow, but guess I will not be
                          believed by the man himself. Dick's esoteric self-knowledge immunises
                          him against the more everyday kind.
                          > > >
                          > > > I am gazing out in some wonderment at trees loaded down with fresh
                          snow, lit up by the morning sunlight. Winter has come early, a foot of
                          soft snow lies over the ground, and the birds will struggle to find
                          food. Stop the abuse, Dick. No one "brings you here" (as you claimed
                          Tom had that power). It is personal decision alone. Why not have a
                          beer.
                          > > >
                          > > > And, yes, I changed my mind a few days ago. I read Dick's posts
                          if the mood so takes me. Whether contributors here read them or not, it
                          makes no difference to the habits of multiple posting, scurrility and
                          slander which mingle oddly with quaint appeals to the poetry of life -
                          as though we were all invited to enjoy, in the intervals of being
                          insulted. Strange. Such is human life. Persistingly strange. I know
                          very little indeed, which is why I post rarely now. Did I used to know
                          more? Yes, in a sense. Time for a coffee.
                          > > >
                          > > > Louise
                          > > >
                          > >
                          >



                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • Mary
                          Louise, Hard as it is to believe, many are the posts I ve canceled. Even now, as I was about to reproduce W.H. Auden s poem, Joseph Weinheber (1892-1945) , I
                          Message 12 of 16 , Nov 30, 2010
                            Louise,

                            Hard as it is to believe, many are the posts I've canceled. Even now, as I was about to reproduce W.H. Auden's poem, "Joseph Weinheber (1892-1945)", I decided instead on these words of Camus' from "The Myth of Sisyphus" . . .

                            "Any thought that abandons unity glorifies diversity. And diversity is the home of art. The only thought to liberate the mind is that which leaves it alone, certain of its limits and its impending end."

                            Mary

                            --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Louise" <hecubatoher@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > Thanks, Mary, for the generous remarks. True, I had not been aware of stinginess, because, in order to be more forthcoming, I would have to be more capable, something which I misjudge frequently, and find myself altered in disquieting ways by internet participation.
                            >
                            > Existlist is very public, of course, as these things go. Maybe it even denotes a certain recklessness on my part, to contribute in an atmosphere where a determined interloper can try to hold us up to ridicule, as though it were wholesome, and that we can learn from it? I suppose that satire makes those sorts of claims, but then, that is satire. Or else it is an emotional brutality, the usual stuff of self-deception.
                            >
                            > These days, when I post, I have usually weighed up whether or not to hit send for several minutes. And, quite often, I come to the conclusion, that, well, I don't know whether this or that should be put out there, but I also don't know that it shouldn't, and after that the answer may be yea or nay. I keep reading here, for the discussion, the inspired narratives, the reading recommendations, whatever the company brings along. One day I might feel again that I know something substantive, but, again, thanks for penetrating the gloom with your unfailingly uncondescending kindness.
                            >
                            > I feel I am being quite un-English, somehow, and maybe that is good, to affront my own stereotype, rather as Rilke approved of the "unGerman" expressions used by a translator of his verses. "Maybe" again, the mark of uncertainty. Which reminds me of Keats' phrase, "negative capability", and the possibility that what seems a defect may be at the least acceptable. How much may one bear in mind without coming too quickly to a definite idea or decision, is how I understand the phrase. Going back now to my undergraduate days, for that memory. Resolved, then, on this occasion, not to be stingy, I shall release these few paragraphs from my self-sceptical mind, and let them find their own way amid the quiet and the cacophany.
                            >
                            > Louise
                            > (after a pause for decision)
                            >
                            > ... everything is strange, like the frequent bluish-white lightning that has been flashing this evening just beyond the windows, reflected from the snow, followed quickly each time by a crash of thunder... such is present perception, this strangeness, not a steady thing, like the absurd. ??
                            >
                            > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@> wrote:
                            > >
                            > > Well, Louise, you certainly know propriety and beauty, even some ornithology, but are unaware of your stinginess in withholding your contributions :) Mary
                            > >
                            > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Louise" <hecubatoher@> wrote:
                            > > >
                            > > > There's a cheery morning thought for us all to ponder. I detect a lack of critical self-awareness, somehow, but guess I will not be believed by the man himself. Dick's esoteric self-knowledge immunises him against the more everyday kind.
                            > > >
                            > > > I am gazing out in some wonderment at trees loaded down with fresh snow, lit up by the morning sunlight. Winter has come early, a foot of soft snow lies over the ground, and the birds will struggle to find food. Stop the abuse, Dick. No one "brings you here" (as you claimed Tom had that power). It is personal decision alone. Why not have a beer.
                            > > >
                            > > > And, yes, I changed my mind a few days ago. I read Dick's posts if the mood so takes me. Whether contributors here read them or not, it makes no difference to the habits of multiple posting, scurrility and slander which mingle oddly with quaint appeals to the poetry of life - as though we were all invited to enjoy, in the intervals of being insulted. Strange. Such is human life. Persistingly strange. I know very little indeed, which is why I post rarely now. Did I used to know more? Yes, in a sense. Time for a coffee.
                            > > >
                            > > > Louise
                            > > >
                            > >
                            >
                          • dick.richardson@rocketmail.com
                            [ The only thought to liberate the mind is that which leaves it alone, certain of its limits and its impending end. Mary ] Upon what justifiable criteria
                            Message 13 of 16 , Nov 30, 2010
                              [ "The only thought to liberate the mind is that which leaves it
                              alone,

                              certain of its limits and its impending end." Mary ]

                              Upon what justifiable criteria of evidence did he judge that to be the
                              case? It does not correlate with human experience – NO WAY. To the
                              contrary in fact.

                              Also NO thoughts can leave the mind alone, that is ridiculous; thoughts
                              take place in the temporal ration discursive mind. He is no philosopher,
                              he is just guessing, and getting it very wrong obviously. Kids can make
                              guesses :- ) If anyone is going to talk about the human situation then
                              KNOW IT. DON'T talk about what you DON'T KNOW. It is STUPID.
                              LIFE is here – study it, and your self. A life not studied is a life
                              wasted. When will they ever learn! Negative Capability is what he
                              obviously had.


                              --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@...> wrote:

                              > " The only thought to liberate the mind is that which leaves it alone,
                              certain of its limits and its impending end."
                              >
                              > Mary




                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                            • Louise
                              Just to make clear what Keats meant by the term, negative capability , here is an extract from the letter to his brothers George and Thomas in which his
                              Message 14 of 16 , Dec 1, 2010
                                Just to make clear what Keats meant by the term, "negative capability", here is an extract from the letter to his brothers George and Thomas in which his explanation is given:

                                "I had not a dispute but a disquisition, with Dilke on various subjects; several things dove-tailed in my mind, and at once it struck me what quality went to form a Man of Achievement, especially in Literature, and which Shakespeare possessed so enormously - I mean Negative Capability, that is, when a man is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason-Coleridge, for instance, would let go by a fine isolated verisimilitude caught from the Penetralium of mystery, from being incapable of remaining content with half-knowledge. This pursued through volumes would perhaps take us no further than this, that with a great poet the sense of Beauty overcomes every other consideration, or rather obliterates all consideration."

                                http://www.mrbauld.com/negcap.html

                                I am not sure whether I understand Mary's quotation from "The Myth of Sisyphus" away from its immediate context, but on the face of it I cannot see how it violates human experience, as my own suggests that each mind is separate. Is it not our separateness which makes it meaningful that we are interdependent, and able to be influenced?

                                Louise

                                --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "dick.richardson@..." <dick.richardson@...> wrote:
                                >
                                >
                                > [ "The only thought to liberate the mind is that which leaves it
                                > alone,
                                >
                                > certain of its limits and its impending end." Mary ]
                                >
                                > Upon what justifiable criteria of evidence did he judge that to be the
                                > case? It does not correlate with human experience – NO WAY. To the
                                > contrary in fact.
                                >
                                > Also NO thoughts can leave the mind alone, that is ridiculous; thoughts
                                > take place in the temporal ration discursive mind. He is no philosopher,
                                > he is just guessing, and getting it very wrong obviously. Kids can make
                                > guesses :- ) If anyone is going to talk about the human situation then
                                > KNOW IT. DON'T talk about what you DON'T KNOW. It is STUPID.
                                > LIFE is here – study it, and your self. A life not studied is a life
                                > wasted. When will they ever learn! Negative Capability is what he
                                > obviously had.
                                >
                                >
                                > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@> wrote:
                                >
                                > > " The only thought to liberate the mind is that which leaves it alone,
                                > certain of its limits and its impending end."
                                > >
                                > > Mary
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                >
                              • Mary
                                After Louise introduced Keats concept, I found the letter she s now posted, and was once again reassured that poetry, like much fine art, can often offer more
                                Message 15 of 16 , Dec 2, 2010
                                  After Louise introduced Keats' concept, I found the letter she's now posted, and was once again reassured that poetry, like much fine art, can often offer more philosophical thought. With the Camus quote, I mistakenly left out "No doctrine tempts it," which might have provided some clarity. I don't believe Camus means we shouldn't consider the ideas of others but that we can lose ourselves to the certainty which others seem to possess. As to what a mind is, I am of several minds. Entertaining ideas is not thinking per se, but what is a mind without the thoughts of others? I believe minds are created by other minds, but that in no way cancels creativity and imagination which in turn may engage other minds.
                                  The Auden poem I chose not to reproduce dealt precisely with Keats' sentiment: "This pursued through volumes would perhaps take us no further than this, that with a great poet the sense of Beauty overcomes every other consideration, or rather obliterates all consideration." In the poem, Auden wondered about the darling poet of the Nazis, who lived in the same Austrian village, though not simultaneously. Josef Weinheber committed suicide and was buried like a dog in his garden, while Auden died of old age and was buried in this same village's cemetery. Would their considerations have been obliterated by the beauty they experienced in that lovely Austrian village? It was certainly possible.

                                  I'm enjoying the conversation about music and confess that last evening I listened to Sting's Brand New Day and let my clumsy feet and still somewhat graceful hands dance me away. I'm not admitting that any of our music choices qualify as fine art, but popular music can create a sweet camaraderie which often transcends considerations.

                                  Mary

                                  --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Louise" <hecubatoher@...> wrote:
                                  >
                                  > Just to make clear what Keats meant by the term, "negative capability", here is an extract from the letter to his brothers George and Thomas in which his explanation is given:
                                  >
                                  > "I had not a dispute but a disquisition, with Dilke on various subjects; several things dove-tailed in my mind, and at once it struck me what quality went to form a Man of Achievement, especially in Literature, and which Shakespeare possessed so enormously - I mean Negative Capability, that is, when a man is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason-Coleridge, for instance, would let go by a fine isolated verisimilitude caught from the Penetralium of mystery, from being incapable of remaining content with half-knowledge. This pursued through volumes would perhaps take us no further than this, that with a great poet the sense of Beauty overcomes every other consideration, or rather obliterates all consideration."
                                  >
                                  > http://www.mrbauld.com/negcap.html
                                  >
                                  > I am not sure whether I understand Mary's quotation from "The Myth of Sisyphus" away from its immediate context, but on the face of it I cannot see how it violates human experience, as my own suggests that each mind is separate. Is it not our separateness which makes it meaningful that we are interdependent, and able to be influenced?
                                  >
                                  > Louise
                                  >
                                  > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "dick.richardson@" <dick.richardson@> wrote:
                                  > >
                                  > >
                                  > > [ "The only thought to liberate the mind is that which leaves it
                                  > > alone,
                                  > >
                                  > > certain of its limits and its impending end." Mary ]
                                  > >
                                  > > Upon what justifiable criteria of evidence did he judge that to be the
                                  > > case? It does not correlate with human experience – NO WAY. To the
                                  > > contrary in fact.
                                  > >
                                  > > Also NO thoughts can leave the mind alone, that is ridiculous; thoughts
                                  > > take place in the temporal ration discursive mind. He is no philosopher,
                                  > > he is just guessing, and getting it very wrong obviously. Kids can make
                                  > > guesses :- ) If anyone is going to talk about the human situation then
                                  > > KNOW IT. DON'T talk about what you DON'T KNOW. It is STUPID.
                                  > > LIFE is here – study it, and your self. A life not studied is a life
                                  > > wasted. When will they ever learn! Negative Capability is what he
                                  > > obviously had.
                                  > >
                                  > >
                                  > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@> wrote:
                                  > >
                                  > > > " The only thought to liberate the mind is that which leaves it alone,
                                  > > certain of its limits and its impending end."
                                  > > >
                                  > > > Mary
                                  > >
                                  > >
                                  > >
                                  > >
                                  > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                  > >
                                  >
                                • Mary
                                  Inasmuch as aesthetics is a branch of philosophy, I ll position Camus It is not patient inquiry, the unceasing, sterile illustration of a thesis...
                                  Message 16 of 16 , Dec 3, 2010
                                    Inasmuch as aesthetics is a branch of philosophy, I'll position Camus' "It is not patient inquiry, the unceasing, sterile illustration of a thesis..." alongside Keats. In my uttermost, desolate moments of realizing the impossibility of fact and reason to provide comfort for myself or others, only then has there arisen a creative impulse. Counting myself fortunate.
                                    Mary

                                    --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Louise" <hecubatoher@...> wrote:
                                    >
                                    > Just to make clear what Keats meant by the term, "negative capability", here is an extract from the letter to his brothers George and Thomas in which his explanation is given:
                                    >
                                    > "I had not a dispute but a disquisition, with Dilke on various subjects; several things dove-tailed in my mind, and at once it struck me what quality went to form a Man of Achievement, especially in Literature, and which Shakespeare possessed so enormously - I mean Negative Capability, that is, when a man is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason-Coleridge, for instance, would let go by a fine isolated verisimilitude caught from the Penetralium of mystery, from being incapable of remaining content with half-knowledge. This pursued through volumes would perhaps take us no further than this, that with a great poet the sense of Beauty overcomes every other consideration, or rather obliterates all consideration."
                                    >
                                    > http://www.mrbauld.com/negcap.html
                                    >
                                    > I am not sure whether I understand Mary's quotation from "The Myth of Sisyphus" away from its immediate context, but on the face of it I cannot see how it violates human experience, as my own suggests that each mind is separate. Is it not our separateness which makes it meaningful that we are interdependent, and able to be influenced?
                                    >
                                    > Louise
                                    >
                                    > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "dick.richardson@" <dick.richardson@> wrote:
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > > [ "The only thought to liberate the mind is that which leaves it
                                    > > alone,
                                    > >
                                    > > certain of its limits and its impending end." Mary ]
                                    > >
                                    > > Upon what justifiable criteria of evidence did he judge that to be the
                                    > > case? It does not correlate with human experience – NO WAY. To the
                                    > > contrary in fact.
                                    > >
                                    > > Also NO thoughts can leave the mind alone, that is ridiculous; thoughts
                                    > > take place in the temporal ration discursive mind. He is no philosopher,
                                    > > he is just guessing, and getting it very wrong obviously. Kids can make
                                    > > guesses :- ) If anyone is going to talk about the human situation then
                                    > > KNOW IT. DON'T talk about what you DON'T KNOW. It is STUPID.
                                    > > LIFE is here – study it, and your self. A life not studied is a life
                                    > > wasted. When will they ever learn! Negative Capability is what he
                                    > > obviously had.
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@> wrote:
                                    > >
                                    > > > " The only thought to liberate the mind is that which leaves it alone,
                                    > > certain of its limits and its impending end."
                                    > > >
                                    > > > Mary
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                    > >
                                    >
                                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.