I recently read a wonderful story 'A Need to Believe," by Daniel Pinchbeck, about his father's life and work as an unrecognised abstract expressionist. This is my response to his article.
Years ago as an aspiring poet and artist, I lived and worked in a poky pub in Greenwich village London, pulling pints of brown swill for an endless procession of tourists who filed up the hill to the Observatory. They stopped to sample T&J Bernard's podgy pies and complain about the shabby British service. None of the staff in the Tavern were British and I had my suspicions about Hussein’s pie preparation. We were grossly understaffed and overstretched to maximize profit margins. The Kings Arms Tavern was more Mcfranchise than English tradition, with hundreds of identically furnished establishments placed strategically along tourist routes, and appropriately priced for customers who were never likely to return. T&J's authentic pub experience could be relied upon to dampen moods more thoroughly than the insipid London weather, and I marvelled at how many people travelled so far to have such a thoroughly awful time.
My parents, worrying that I had been drifting aimlessly for far too many years, visited me from New Zealand, sugesting that I return to finish a Degree. They looked doubtful when Hussein reassured them that I was doing all right. I personally felt less in need of orientating influences than the aged tourists who hoped to capture 'Greenwich Mean Time,' on their video cameras, or any other edification the Observatory might offer. Being so desperately short on time, I wondered if they sat in the pub contemplating how a life of hard work and responsibility was culminating in the abject suffering of an eternity waiting for Hussein’s podgy pies. I cheered myself by reassuring the most miserable whingers that at least that much of their experience was thoroughly English.
In the evenings, the locals would filter back in, wary from their grey office jobs, and resign themselves to their places in front of the slot machines. Or take in the England Germany game, resuscitating the tired glories of "two world wars and one world cup," in a histrionic chorus of drunken song.
At the local markets, I bought a book on Ancient Chinese Landscape art. Opening its dusty cover revealed a world far removed from the pies and pokies of the tavern; it elevated my imaginings to the mystical peaks of Taoist philosophy. The landscapes and accompanied writings danced with poetic and mystical significance, speaking of the lost ancient world of the Chinese philosopher sages whose beautiful scrolls revealed “waves of silence” their mountainous peaks shrouded by “intangible, instinctive, and emotional perceptions, such as flavour and resonance, which escape recognition by the eye and definition by the mind, and defy linear drawing.” The writing was unapologetically romantic, yielding an ethereal quality in words and images, sentiments of a profound spiritual reverence for nature that I felt was sadly absent from the mediocre world around me. Inspired by youthful idealism and romantic escapist fantasies I copied into my diary a sentence that had particular resonance. “By freeing oneself progressively from the demands of false ideals, academia, and stylistic convention, the minds contact with the surrounding universe becomes correspondingly closer.”
Worn down by the monotony of menial jobs I eventually returned to New Zealand to finish a degree in Fine Arts, mindful of the polarities between the business materialism of the commercial art world and the joyful child like purity of undiluted creative freedom. Reading this wonderful story about your father’s life and work has prompted me to recollect this episode in my life, stimulating my contemplation of the relationships between the grating callings of life and responsibility, and the romantic artistic struggle for pure authenticity and sublime creative release.
The need to believe available: http://www.realitysandwich.com/need_believe
In his paintings Wang Wei could sugest the indescribable and the unshapable, instinctive and emotion perceptions such as flavour and resonance which escape recognition by the eye and definition by the mind and defy linear drawing. He could capture those ineffable perfumes and waves of silence which can only be siezed upon by a highly aware sensability and picked up by a heart that is perfectly calm, devoid of egotistical desire and fully contemplative, an echo chamber at the centre of being wich must not be desturbed by interuptive inner sounds. The heart should be a celestial promenade. The depths of the heart must remain permeable to the influx of heaven
Thursday, 22 January 2009
Thursday, 15 January 2009
Yeats, the Magical Visionary
Yeats, the Magical Visionary
Yeats thought himself to be one of the last of the classical Romantics; he celebrated the power of imagination to help people see and empathize deeply, he recognized the dangers of abstract reasoning divorced from imagination and the natural world, and he sought a kind of lost knowledge not taught in schools or churches. Yeats rejected realistic, imitative art. He believed that only art that recognized and celebrated the panpsychic power of imagination, myth, and symbol could reveal the deeper truths and intuitive meanings underlying everyday experience. In his poem “Who Goes with Fergus?” Yeats invokes the ancient king of Irish legend who abandoned his high office and its grating, relentless demands to head to the woods and learn the mysterious “dreaming wisdom” of the Druid priests.
For Fergus rules the brazen cars,
And rules the shadows of the wood,
And the white breast of the dim sea
And all dishevelled wandering stars.
Fergus is a hero of the imagination who leaves the everyday human world to revel in the mysteries of nature and spirit. The “shadows of the wood” and “the white breast of the dim sea” represent primeval knowledge and beauty that can only be glimpsed through experiences of wilderness solitude, trance, magic, and meditation. Full of fantasies of a better world, the young Yeats struggled to accept regular life on earth and sought desperately to find a way into other dimensions of space and time. In “The Stolen Child,” he portrays an alluring, otherworldly kingdom that calls us from the frustrations of everyday life to the eerie phantasm of the faery dance.
Where the wave of moonlight glosses
The dim grey sands with light,
Far off by furthest Rosses
We foot it all the night,
Weaving olden dances,
Mingling hands and mingling glances
Till the moon has taken flight;
To and fro we leap
And chase the frothy bubbles,
While the world is full of troubles and is anxious in its sleep
Come away, O human child!
To the waters and the wild
With a faery, hand in hand,
For the world’s more full of weeping than you can understand.
The landscape is lit up with moonlight, under which things dark and hidden become visible. The powerful faeries (creatures who in Celtic tradition are emphatically not small, cute, or winged) call the poet to “the waters and the wild,” the fluid, frothy, and sometimes freaky realm of visionary trance and imagination.
Available: http://www.realitysandwich.com/yeats_magical_visionary
For Fergus rules the brazen cars,
And rules the shadows of the wood,
And the white breast of the dim sea
And all dishevelled wandering stars.
Fergus is a hero of the imagination who leaves the everyday human world to revel in the mysteries of nature and spirit. The “shadows of the wood” and “the white breast of the dim sea” represent primeval knowledge and beauty that can only be glimpsed through experiences of wilderness solitude, trance, magic, and meditation. Full of fantasies of a better world, the young Yeats struggled to accept regular life on earth and sought desperately to find a way into other dimensions of space and time. In “The Stolen Child,” he portrays an alluring, otherworldly kingdom that calls us from the frustrations of everyday life to the eerie phantasm of the faery dance.
Where the wave of moonlight glosses
The dim grey sands with light,
Far off by furthest Rosses
We foot it all the night,
Weaving olden dances,
Mingling hands and mingling glances
Till the moon has taken flight;
To and fro we leap
And chase the frothy bubbles,
While the world is full of troubles and is anxious in its sleep
Come away, O human child!
To the waters and the wild
With a faery, hand in hand,
For the world’s more full of weeping than you can understand.
The landscape is lit up with moonlight, under which things dark and hidden become visible. The powerful faeries (creatures who in Celtic tradition are emphatically not small, cute, or winged) call the poet to “the waters and the wild,” the fluid, frothy, and sometimes freaky realm of visionary trance and imagination.
Available: http://www.realitysandwich.com/yeats_magical_visionary
New Zealand Herald Debate on Tibet/China conflict
Nick (Auckland)
A group of prominent Chinese intellectuals recently called on their government to begin talks with the Dalai Lama and allow UN investigators into Tibet. In an open letter, a group of 30 writers, university professors and rights activists urged the Communist Party to hold direct dialogue with the Dalai Lama. It seems there are different view points on the Tibetan conflict even within the Chinese community. My understanding is that the Dalai Lama does not want independence but rather "a meaningful degree of autonomy under Chinese rule". This would allow the Tibetan people the freedom to practice ideological/cultural forms that differ from Chinese Communism without the fear of persecution. Currently the cultural values of the Tibetan people are being systematically erased by the Chinese government. I acknowledge that Western countries are also guilty of trampling on human rights, and N.Z. Pakeha have a chequered history in relation to the Maori. Do Chinese people think China could benefit from dialogue with the Tibetan people like New Zealand has benefited from dialogue with the Maori through the Treaty of Waitangi?
Wayne Lo (Hong Kong)
Nick (Auckland): you say "cultural values of the Tibetan people are being systematically erased by the Chinese government." This is wrong. If the Chinese wished to 'systematically' erase Tibetan culture, they would have done this when China was completely shut off from the outside world during the first 30 years of the PRC, when the government was openly anti-religion, anti-old traditions - of all of China's ethnic groups, including the majority Han. Just think. About 2million Tibetans in 1950, 450million Chinese. If there was ever any intention at cultural or physical genocide, the Tibetans would have disappeared as quickly as the Tasmanian aborigines.Yet in the first 60 years of 'colonial' Chinese rule, Tibetan population,life expectancy has doubled. Compare this with the situation in NZ between 1840 and 1900. Maori population declined from 200,000 to 50,000 (6% of population). Tibetans are still 90% of Tibet. But yes, Tibetan traditions are being eroded-but not by the Chinese. Instead by a process called 'modernization.' In respect of this I refer you to the wonderfully nuanced posts of one Mark Anthony Jones.http:/www.blackandwhitecat.org/2008/04/01/separatism-and-tibet/
Nick (Auckland)
Wayne Lo (Hong Kong): You make some valid points about the negative impact of colonial rule on indigenous cultures. However, I think it is wrong to site Maori population decline from 1840-1900 as a comparative moral victory for China's conduct in Tibet. There were mitigating factors in Maori population decline during that period such as the use of the musket in inter-tribal warfare and European diseases. I suggest ethical standards are a more exacting measure of our countries different colonial attitudes. Maori are not tortured for exercising freedom of speech, waving the Maori flag, or voicing support for Tino Rangatiratanga (Maori sovereignty). I am grateful that we have a forum here for open debate. Maori also have a high percentage of representation in New Zealand parliament. What percentage of representation do Tibetan people have in Chinese politics? I question the figures you present on Chinese population transfer. "Tibetans are still 90% of Tibet." This from the Tibetan government in exile website. "In Tibet today there are over 7.5 million non-Tibetan settlers including Chinese and Hui Muslims while Tibetans inside Tibet comprise only six million. The increasing Chinese population transfer into Tibet has reduced the Tibetan people to a minority group in their own land.”
Your earlier comments have prompted me to further research the Tibetan issue from a Chinese perspective, and the historical context which gave rise to the Peoples Republic. The gross exploitation of the Chinese at the hands of imperialist powers during the Opium Wars, and invasions by multiple foreign powers until WWII places the preceding hard-line PRC policies in a more understandable context. But this does not make totalitarianism any less frightening. I am glad that the Chinese modernization of Tibet has aided in the dissemination of the profound wisdom of Tibetan Buddhism to a world that is currently destroying itself. This Tibetan conflict is symptomatic of a much larger problem that all of humanity is embroiled in. How can we live together on this earth without destroying each other and the planet?
Wayne Lo (Hong Kong)
Nick of Auckland: I appreciate your efforts to appreciate the Chinese perspective.My figures are for the Tibetan Autonomous Region. Tibetan exile groups are hardly a non-biased source, but in any case their figures, are I believe for all of what they consider to be the historical Tibet - not just the TAR. But thanks - I will look more into this.I take your point about the differences in circumstance between Maoris and Tibetans, which caused the decline (initially) of the former, although my main point stands. There was never any attempt at genocide against the Tibetans, contrariwise the Chinese govt has improved the lives of Tibetans in countless objective ways.It is true that there is less freedom of speech in China than in NZ. But you imply that Tibetans are singled out for particularly rough treatment. This is untrue. The human rights problems, real or perceived, are no more, no less than for all other Chinese. Even during the Cultural Revolution, there was no campaign against Tibetans. There was a campaign against all Chinese culture of all nationalities. In fact most of the damage to Tibetan cultural relics at the time was by Tibetan Red Guards - the sons of former serfs.
A group of prominent Chinese intellectuals recently called on their government to begin talks with the Dalai Lama and allow UN investigators into Tibet. In an open letter, a group of 30 writers, university professors and rights activists urged the Communist Party to hold direct dialogue with the Dalai Lama. It seems there are different view points on the Tibetan conflict even within the Chinese community. My understanding is that the Dalai Lama does not want independence but rather "a meaningful degree of autonomy under Chinese rule". This would allow the Tibetan people the freedom to practice ideological/cultural forms that differ from Chinese Communism without the fear of persecution. Currently the cultural values of the Tibetan people are being systematically erased by the Chinese government. I acknowledge that Western countries are also guilty of trampling on human rights, and N.Z. Pakeha have a chequered history in relation to the Maori. Do Chinese people think China could benefit from dialogue with the Tibetan people like New Zealand has benefited from dialogue with the Maori through the Treaty of Waitangi?
Wayne Lo (Hong Kong)
Nick (Auckland): you say "cultural values of the Tibetan people are being systematically erased by the Chinese government." This is wrong. If the Chinese wished to 'systematically' erase Tibetan culture, they would have done this when China was completely shut off from the outside world during the first 30 years of the PRC, when the government was openly anti-religion, anti-old traditions - of all of China's ethnic groups, including the majority Han. Just think. About 2million Tibetans in 1950, 450million Chinese. If there was ever any intention at cultural or physical genocide, the Tibetans would have disappeared as quickly as the Tasmanian aborigines.Yet in the first 60 years of 'colonial' Chinese rule, Tibetan population,life expectancy has doubled. Compare this with the situation in NZ between 1840 and 1900. Maori population declined from 200,000 to 50,000 (6% of population). Tibetans are still 90% of Tibet. But yes, Tibetan traditions are being eroded-but not by the Chinese. Instead by a process called 'modernization.' In respect of this I refer you to the wonderfully nuanced posts of one Mark Anthony Jones.http:/www.blackandwhitecat.org/2008/04/01/separatism-and-tibet/
Nick (Auckland)
Wayne Lo (Hong Kong): You make some valid points about the negative impact of colonial rule on indigenous cultures. However, I think it is wrong to site Maori population decline from 1840-1900 as a comparative moral victory for China's conduct in Tibet. There were mitigating factors in Maori population decline during that period such as the use of the musket in inter-tribal warfare and European diseases. I suggest ethical standards are a more exacting measure of our countries different colonial attitudes. Maori are not tortured for exercising freedom of speech, waving the Maori flag, or voicing support for Tino Rangatiratanga (Maori sovereignty). I am grateful that we have a forum here for open debate. Maori also have a high percentage of representation in New Zealand parliament. What percentage of representation do Tibetan people have in Chinese politics? I question the figures you present on Chinese population transfer. "Tibetans are still 90% of Tibet." This from the Tibetan government in exile website. "In Tibet today there are over 7.5 million non-Tibetan settlers including Chinese and Hui Muslims while Tibetans inside Tibet comprise only six million. The increasing Chinese population transfer into Tibet has reduced the Tibetan people to a minority group in their own land.”
Your earlier comments have prompted me to further research the Tibetan issue from a Chinese perspective, and the historical context which gave rise to the Peoples Republic. The gross exploitation of the Chinese at the hands of imperialist powers during the Opium Wars, and invasions by multiple foreign powers until WWII places the preceding hard-line PRC policies in a more understandable context. But this does not make totalitarianism any less frightening. I am glad that the Chinese modernization of Tibet has aided in the dissemination of the profound wisdom of Tibetan Buddhism to a world that is currently destroying itself. This Tibetan conflict is symptomatic of a much larger problem that all of humanity is embroiled in. How can we live together on this earth without destroying each other and the planet?
Wayne Lo (Hong Kong)
Nick of Auckland: I appreciate your efforts to appreciate the Chinese perspective.My figures are for the Tibetan Autonomous Region. Tibetan exile groups are hardly a non-biased source, but in any case their figures, are I believe for all of what they consider to be the historical Tibet - not just the TAR. But thanks - I will look more into this.I take your point about the differences in circumstance between Maoris and Tibetans, which caused the decline (initially) of the former, although my main point stands. There was never any attempt at genocide against the Tibetans, contrariwise the Chinese govt has improved the lives of Tibetans in countless objective ways.It is true that there is less freedom of speech in China than in NZ. But you imply that Tibetans are singled out for particularly rough treatment. This is untrue. The human rights problems, real or perceived, are no more, no less than for all other Chinese. Even during the Cultural Revolution, there was no campaign against Tibetans. There was a campaign against all Chinese culture of all nationalities. In fact most of the damage to Tibetan cultural relics at the time was by Tibetan Red Guards - the sons of former serfs.
Tuesday, 2 December 2008
Response to Zeitgeist 9/11 theories
In my opinion, conspiracy theories form part of an emerging 'New Age' mythology, generated by those who have lost trust in western institutions and their ability to deal with the awesome challenges this planet is now facing. The creation of this counter-culture mythology forms part of an attempt to break away from old patterns of culturally conditioned thought, and behavior, systemic of our current global crisis. This myth making (propagated by pseudo documentaries like Zeitgeist) is a valuable process in so far as it challenges the status quo, prompting people to question their basic assumptions, but fails to serve anybody when it becomes an escape into fantasy and delusion. The ideas in Zeitgeist, that people should not lend unthinking acquiescence to what they are told by government or the media is certainly worthy. However, wallowing in a bunch of alternative history or alternative reality theories that are no more substantiated is not likely to create an environment of critical thinking.
Those who recognise the urgency of ushering in a new paradigm, and are seriously engaged in the process of change, should exercise a degree of sobriety and rationality in their thought and action because, as we all know, our beliefs shape reality. The disastrous results of constructing a world view based on flawed and ill conceived beliefs are coalescing in our current global crisis, and serve as strong testimony for the importance of maintaining critical awareness. Noam Chomsky criticises the 9/11 Truth movement for its low level of critical engagement.
People who know nothing about civil engineering, except what they picked up on the internet somewhere, are giving learned treatise on what must have happened: How could a building do this, that, and the other thing? These are not trivial matters. You can’t just look up on the internet and say, “I’m an accomplished civil engineer.” So those who make such claims just don’t understand the nature of evidence. (Chomsky, 2007, p.13)
Noam Chomsky’s stance on 9/11 is that the debate over whether or not the Bush administration was involved in blowing up the World Trade Centre is periphery to far more serious problems and serves as a kind of distraction from the real, proven, and ongoing crimes of the U.S. administration. These crimes form part of America's quest for global domination that began after World War II, a quest which is now entering an advanced stage. This should be far more concerning than 9/11 conspiracy theories as Chomsky states:
Power centers treat (conspiracy theories) very sympathetically, which takes us to another point. Why are they treated sympathetically? Because It’s diverting enormous amounts of energy away from real crimes of the administration, which are far more serious, even than what they are accused of at 9/11. So suppose they blew up the World Trade Center. By their standards, that’s a minor crime. Take increasing the threat of nuclear war and environmental disaster. That’s a far worse crime, and it may lead to extinction of the species. Take the invasion of Iraq. Take the invasion of Lebanon. Take what they are doing to working people in the U.S. The list goes on and on and there is very little protest. One reason is that an enormous amount of potential activist energy has been directed into this so from their point of view its great. (Chomsky, 2008)
I can understand why Chomsky is dismayed with the 911 Truth movement. He has devoted his life to uncovering real atrocities committed by the U.S. government. His books point with laser accuracy to U.S. war crimes involving the slaughter of millions of people in the name of materialism and U.S. global hegemony. He is a true scholar, prolific in his publication of reasoned intelligent argument supported by meticulously researched facts that demonstrate the real and provable ways in which the US Government is threatening global security, waging a militant and propagandistic war on democracy, freedom, and life. Chomsky has already done all the hard work to bring this to people's attention! In comparison the 9/11 Truth movement looks facile and misguided, displaying all the worst qualities of blind fanaticism and hysteria. With the quality of the evidence provided in support of 9/11 theories you could prove that the White House was blown up yesterday. This is why Chomsky regards these theories as a drain on energy. He suggests that they are actually encouraged by the establishment as a smoke screen, to distract people from real issues.
References
Chomsky, N. (2007). Perilous power: the middle east and U.S. foreign policy. Paradigm Publishers, London
Chomsky, N. (2008) Noam Chomsky on 9/11 conspiracy theories. Available: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76eSchi4heU&feature=related
Comments Submitted from postings to other sites
Maynard Kings wrote on February 25, 2009 at 12:22pm
If the USG is in anyway involved in 9-11 then it is a real issue. Your very well spoken and address several valid points, although I feel taking attention away from something that can be proved scientifically, and drawing attention to something more ambiguous or esoteric only perpetuates confusion. I love Chomsky, seriously but hegemony or survival isn't the most accessible material for someone who needs something tangible to hold whist questioning the very fabric of there reality (in my opinion most people are not educated enough to be able to conceptualize hegemony or it's affect on society)
I advocate information to the lowest common denominator, and admit that disinformation is as prevalent in my campaign as truth. But certain things are inalienable, beyond the realm of theory situated in fact. Acknowledge the truth, i am a structural engineer and i specialize in demolition, please friend take my word for it something is wrong.
good night and good luck
Post #3You wrote on April 11, 2009 at 4:13pm
I don't discount the possibility of controlled demolition. I am not an engineer so I cant contribute to any educated scientific debate. I think it is important to maintain an open mind and I'm always ready to re-evaluate my opinion when I’m presented with credible evidence to the contrary. I watched a presentation recently by a structural engineer who made a strong case for controlled demolition. Good luck with your campaign.
Post #4Maynard King wrote on April 12, 2009 at 4:51pm
thank you
yourself as well
That's quite the conspiracy
Submitted by optigon on Sat, 02/06/2010 - 20:04.
That's quite the conspiracy theory there coming from someone who classifies them as mythology. There are nearly a thousand engineers signed on to one facet of this 'truth' movement. So, no... the evidence is not coming form a bunch of people surfing the internet claiming to have the knowledge of a civil engineer. There are plenty of credible folks on board for truth from many professions. Furthermore, just because someone is a professional making a living doing something, that does not mean someone with average to above average intellectual abilities cannot do some reading, educate themselves a bit, and grasp the concepts and laws involved. We really need to stop depending on the scientific 'priesthood' to provide all of our answers, as if somehow there's something magical going on granting them superior understanding. Information is everywhere now and it's available to us all. In many cases, these professionals tend to be very dogmatic and fearful of controversy among their peers, especially regarding 9/11. So independent research, with no ties to an employer, corporation, or institution can be liberating.
"With the quality of the evidence provided in support of 9/11 theories you could prove that the White House was blown up yesterday."
Sorry, but that statement is just ridiculous. Either you haven't looked at any of the evidence or you're just making things up.
"I can understand why Chomsky is dismayed with the 911 Truth movement. He has devoted his life to uncovering real atrocities committed by the U.S. government."
Real atrocities? Exactly how is 9/11 NOT A REAL ATROCITY?! And, how can you expect us to uncover the larger conspiracy (which I don't doubt exists) if we can't even uncover 9/11 for what it was? And contrary to what you say, the evidence is staggering. In my opinion, 9/11 is our only hope, and a gateway to revealing the grand conspiracy that you've outlined.
I stand corrected
Submitted by nickysurf on Sat, 02/06/2010 - 20:28.
Yes, I could be guilty of parroting Chomsky here... I will take a closer look at the evidence for controlled demolition... Thanks for the response.
Ongoing crimes of the U.S. Administation
Submitted by nickysurf on Sat, 02/06/2010 - 20:45.
No commision of inquiry needed here:
The illegal invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan have resulted in more deaths than 9/11 Here are some other worthy causes for political dissent:
Depleted Uranium Radioactive Contamination In Iraq: http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=3116
Afghanistan, Another Untold Story http://www.michaelparenti.org/afghanistan%20story%20untold.html
thought experiment...
Submitted by E. Sam on Mon, 02/08/2010 - 02:07.
It seems to me that some 911 U.S.G. conspiracy believers are rational, and I think in principle we could have a reasonable discussion about evidence and so forth. However, I have noticed that some, perhaps only a very tiny minority, and I am not accusing anyone in particular, are not as rational as they think, despite writing their "arguments" clearly and succinctly. Now again, I am not accusing anyone, but what I perceive is perhaps a mild case of psychosis or schizophrenia; and such people are furthermore just beyond the reach of rational argument.
Often, when we try to argue for something logically, behind the logic is intuition (gut instincts). And because we deem ourselves clear-thinking, when we go to translate this intuition to written logical argument, we trust that the correspondence will be seamless. This is very much like what happens in writing mathematical proofs (for those who know a little math -- I assume most people have at least a very crude understanding of what a mathematical proof is): One usually starts with an intuitive idea of how the proof should go, and then one translates ones intuition into logic. The trouble is that if one is mentally ill, one often has impaired metacognitive powers, and so cannot perceive that ones intuition does not match logic. So, fitting ones intuition to logic is like trying to fit a square peg to a round hole, and what comes out superficially looks logical, but isn't -- this is much like how anosognosiacs can offer quasi-logical arguments that they have no handicaps, even though it is evident to a third-person observer (psychiatrist) that they do.
As a thought experiment, I want you to read the Unabomber Manifesto. And then I want to you play prosecutor, and look for even the tiniest logical error you can find. Don't accept one of Kaczynski's arguments just because it feels right and is well-written -- ask yourself whether it is logical. I have read it, and it is full of logical errors, as one would expect from a schizophrenic. Most of them seem to be non-sequitirs. Try it and see if you agree, and then ask yourself whether your arguments are illogical.
Can you give an example of a
Submitted by optigon on Mon, 02/08/2010 - 02:28.
Can you give an example of a popular 9/11 conspiracy argument that you think is intuition translated into logic? There are only a handful of key issues that are argued as contradicting the official story, so that should be easy to do. Or are you mainly talking about the more speculative issues (ie, why they did it, how it was pulled-off, etc.)?
I only ask because I think your point will be made much more easily that way. Unfortunately, I don't think many of us have the time to read the Unabomber Manifesto any time soon. At least, I don't.
your question...
Submitted by E. Sam on Mon, 02/08/2010 - 18:51.
I was thinking more to certain particular people's arguments (even though I don't want to accuse them publically), not general arguments about 911 conspiracy. I don't want to get into a long, drawn-out back-and-forth, so I will not point out which individuals I think have illogical arguments; furthermore, I don't want to be impolite.
If you noticed, there is a slight non-sequitir in one of the things that I wrote above. Specifically, one of the sentences beginning with ``So,...''. That sentence should perhaps begin with ``and, in such a case...''. See how easy it is to miss illogical comments? -- I would have thought a 911 person would have jumped right on it! (I had planned to edit it last night after posting, but you wrote your response too soon after I had finished! )
Looking again just now at the Manifesto, it seems like there are more ``Just-so'' unsubstantiated or false statements than outright non-sequitirs (though there are still plenty). Particularly, read the section on ``The Motives of Scientists''.
This is my last posting to this thread.
Those who recognise the urgency of ushering in a new paradigm, and are seriously engaged in the process of change, should exercise a degree of sobriety and rationality in their thought and action because, as we all know, our beliefs shape reality. The disastrous results of constructing a world view based on flawed and ill conceived beliefs are coalescing in our current global crisis, and serve as strong testimony for the importance of maintaining critical awareness. Noam Chomsky criticises the 9/11 Truth movement for its low level of critical engagement.
People who know nothing about civil engineering, except what they picked up on the internet somewhere, are giving learned treatise on what must have happened: How could a building do this, that, and the other thing? These are not trivial matters. You can’t just look up on the internet and say, “I’m an accomplished civil engineer.” So those who make such claims just don’t understand the nature of evidence. (Chomsky, 2007, p.13)
Noam Chomsky’s stance on 9/11 is that the debate over whether or not the Bush administration was involved in blowing up the World Trade Centre is periphery to far more serious problems and serves as a kind of distraction from the real, proven, and ongoing crimes of the U.S. administration. These crimes form part of America's quest for global domination that began after World War II, a quest which is now entering an advanced stage. This should be far more concerning than 9/11 conspiracy theories as Chomsky states:
Power centers treat (conspiracy theories) very sympathetically, which takes us to another point. Why are they treated sympathetically? Because It’s diverting enormous amounts of energy away from real crimes of the administration, which are far more serious, even than what they are accused of at 9/11. So suppose they blew up the World Trade Center. By their standards, that’s a minor crime. Take increasing the threat of nuclear war and environmental disaster. That’s a far worse crime, and it may lead to extinction of the species. Take the invasion of Iraq. Take the invasion of Lebanon. Take what they are doing to working people in the U.S. The list goes on and on and there is very little protest. One reason is that an enormous amount of potential activist energy has been directed into this so from their point of view its great. (Chomsky, 2008)
I can understand why Chomsky is dismayed with the 911 Truth movement. He has devoted his life to uncovering real atrocities committed by the U.S. government. His books point with laser accuracy to U.S. war crimes involving the slaughter of millions of people in the name of materialism and U.S. global hegemony. He is a true scholar, prolific in his publication of reasoned intelligent argument supported by meticulously researched facts that demonstrate the real and provable ways in which the US Government is threatening global security, waging a militant and propagandistic war on democracy, freedom, and life. Chomsky has already done all the hard work to bring this to people's attention! In comparison the 9/11 Truth movement looks facile and misguided, displaying all the worst qualities of blind fanaticism and hysteria. With the quality of the evidence provided in support of 9/11 theories you could prove that the White House was blown up yesterday. This is why Chomsky regards these theories as a drain on energy. He suggests that they are actually encouraged by the establishment as a smoke screen, to distract people from real issues.
References
Chomsky, N. (2007). Perilous power: the middle east and U.S. foreign policy. Paradigm Publishers, London
Chomsky, N. (2008) Noam Chomsky on 9/11 conspiracy theories. Available: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76eSchi4heU&feature=related
Comments Submitted from postings to other sites
Maynard Kings wrote on February 25, 2009 at 12:22pm
If the USG is in anyway involved in 9-11 then it is a real issue. Your very well spoken and address several valid points, although I feel taking attention away from something that can be proved scientifically, and drawing attention to something more ambiguous or esoteric only perpetuates confusion. I love Chomsky, seriously but hegemony or survival isn't the most accessible material for someone who needs something tangible to hold whist questioning the very fabric of there reality (in my opinion most people are not educated enough to be able to conceptualize hegemony or it's affect on society)
I advocate information to the lowest common denominator, and admit that disinformation is as prevalent in my campaign as truth. But certain things are inalienable, beyond the realm of theory situated in fact. Acknowledge the truth, i am a structural engineer and i specialize in demolition, please friend take my word for it something is wrong.
good night and good luck
Post #3You wrote on April 11, 2009 at 4:13pm
I don't discount the possibility of controlled demolition. I am not an engineer so I cant contribute to any educated scientific debate. I think it is important to maintain an open mind and I'm always ready to re-evaluate my opinion when I’m presented with credible evidence to the contrary. I watched a presentation recently by a structural engineer who made a strong case for controlled demolition. Good luck with your campaign.
Post #4Maynard King wrote on April 12, 2009 at 4:51pm
thank you
yourself as well
That's quite the conspiracy
Submitted by optigon on Sat, 02/06/2010 - 20:04.
That's quite the conspiracy theory there coming from someone who classifies them as mythology. There are nearly a thousand engineers signed on to one facet of this 'truth' movement. So, no... the evidence is not coming form a bunch of people surfing the internet claiming to have the knowledge of a civil engineer. There are plenty of credible folks on board for truth from many professions. Furthermore, just because someone is a professional making a living doing something, that does not mean someone with average to above average intellectual abilities cannot do some reading, educate themselves a bit, and grasp the concepts and laws involved. We really need to stop depending on the scientific 'priesthood' to provide all of our answers, as if somehow there's something magical going on granting them superior understanding. Information is everywhere now and it's available to us all. In many cases, these professionals tend to be very dogmatic and fearful of controversy among their peers, especially regarding 9/11. So independent research, with no ties to an employer, corporation, or institution can be liberating.
"With the quality of the evidence provided in support of 9/11 theories you could prove that the White House was blown up yesterday."
Sorry, but that statement is just ridiculous. Either you haven't looked at any of the evidence or you're just making things up.
"I can understand why Chomsky is dismayed with the 911 Truth movement. He has devoted his life to uncovering real atrocities committed by the U.S. government."
Real atrocities? Exactly how is 9/11 NOT A REAL ATROCITY?! And, how can you expect us to uncover the larger conspiracy (which I don't doubt exists) if we can't even uncover 9/11 for what it was? And contrary to what you say, the evidence is staggering. In my opinion, 9/11 is our only hope, and a gateway to revealing the grand conspiracy that you've outlined.
I stand corrected
Submitted by nickysurf on Sat, 02/06/2010 - 20:28.
Yes, I could be guilty of parroting Chomsky here... I will take a closer look at the evidence for controlled demolition... Thanks for the response.
Ongoing crimes of the U.S. Administation
Submitted by nickysurf on Sat, 02/06/2010 - 20:45.
No commision of inquiry needed here:
The illegal invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan have resulted in more deaths than 9/11 Here are some other worthy causes for political dissent:
Depleted Uranium Radioactive Contamination In Iraq: http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=3116
Afghanistan, Another Untold Story http://www.michaelparenti.org/afghanistan%20story%20untold.html
thought experiment...
Submitted by E. Sam on Mon, 02/08/2010 - 02:07.
It seems to me that some 911 U.S.G. conspiracy believers are rational, and I think in principle we could have a reasonable discussion about evidence and so forth. However, I have noticed that some, perhaps only a very tiny minority, and I am not accusing anyone in particular, are not as rational as they think, despite writing their "arguments" clearly and succinctly. Now again, I am not accusing anyone, but what I perceive is perhaps a mild case of psychosis or schizophrenia; and such people are furthermore just beyond the reach of rational argument.
Often, when we try to argue for something logically, behind the logic is intuition (gut instincts). And because we deem ourselves clear-thinking, when we go to translate this intuition to written logical argument, we trust that the correspondence will be seamless. This is very much like what happens in writing mathematical proofs (for those who know a little math -- I assume most people have at least a very crude understanding of what a mathematical proof is): One usually starts with an intuitive idea of how the proof should go, and then one translates ones intuition into logic. The trouble is that if one is mentally ill, one often has impaired metacognitive powers, and so cannot perceive that ones intuition does not match logic. So, fitting ones intuition to logic is like trying to fit a square peg to a round hole, and what comes out superficially looks logical, but isn't -- this is much like how anosognosiacs can offer quasi-logical arguments that they have no handicaps, even though it is evident to a third-person observer (psychiatrist) that they do.
As a thought experiment, I want you to read the Unabomber Manifesto. And then I want to you play prosecutor, and look for even the tiniest logical error you can find. Don't accept one of Kaczynski's arguments just because it feels right and is well-written -- ask yourself whether it is logical. I have read it, and it is full of logical errors, as one would expect from a schizophrenic. Most of them seem to be non-sequitirs. Try it and see if you agree, and then ask yourself whether your arguments are illogical.
Can you give an example of a
Submitted by optigon on Mon, 02/08/2010 - 02:28.
Can you give an example of a popular 9/11 conspiracy argument that you think is intuition translated into logic? There are only a handful of key issues that are argued as contradicting the official story, so that should be easy to do. Or are you mainly talking about the more speculative issues (ie, why they did it, how it was pulled-off, etc.)?
I only ask because I think your point will be made much more easily that way. Unfortunately, I don't think many of us have the time to read the Unabomber Manifesto any time soon. At least, I don't.
your question...
Submitted by E. Sam on Mon, 02/08/2010 - 18:51.
I was thinking more to certain particular people's arguments (even though I don't want to accuse them publically), not general arguments about 911 conspiracy. I don't want to get into a long, drawn-out back-and-forth, so I will not point out which individuals I think have illogical arguments; furthermore, I don't want to be impolite.
If you noticed, there is a slight non-sequitir in one of the things that I wrote above. Specifically, one of the sentences beginning with ``So,...''. That sentence should perhaps begin with ``and, in such a case...''. See how easy it is to miss illogical comments? -- I would have thought a 911 person would have jumped right on it! (I had planned to edit it last night after posting, but you wrote your response too soon after I had finished! )
Looking again just now at the Manifesto, it seems like there are more ``Just-so'' unsubstantiated or false statements than outright non-sequitirs (though there are still plenty). Particularly, read the section on ``The Motives of Scientists''.
This is my last posting to this thread.
Humility
It was a solid day of pumping surf at Manu bay. I was suiting up and debating whether to enter the line up from Jump Rock at the top of the point, or via the safety paddle from the inside. A brave crew of surfers had gathered waiting to charge the Jump Rock, but the tide was a little too high because the waves were slamming over the rocks, sending spray to the heavens. It looked sketchy, and a crowd of people had gathered to watch the mad dash, jump, and paddle. I've done that jump often, but in retrospect I was feeling a little over confident considering the less than ideal conditions, and maybe also the audience of hot girls injected me with fools courage and bravado! Anyway, let’s just say my judgment was suffering from ‘chronic’ maladjustment. My vision was 240/2-4-7.
I joined the waiting crew as they stood poised before a relentless bombardment of Raglan’s angriest. Suddenly, a local girl in the group bolted, skipping the 20 meters across the rocks and jumping onto the back of a smaller wave, perfectly timed and executed she snuck out through the sharks jaws. Everyone in the group was hooting, "GO GO GO, Fark, she’s got it! Bullshit!" And I was all dutch courage and adrenaline thinking; If a girl can do it what are you guys waiting for?! And I yelled out "Hell I’m goin!"
There was good reason the crew were waiting, the rocks were slippery and hard to negotiate. The gaps between the bigger sets were few and far between. Once on the rocks its complete isolation and there’s no turning back. Fully committed you’re racing against an on coming wave over sharp irregular reef towards a slippery jump rock, from which to launch yourself into the swirling maelstrom, or be cut down and suffer the beating of a lifetime!
So there I was, charging across the rocks timing it to leap onto the back of a smaller wave. As I ran, looking fixedly at the rocks to negotiate their slippery angles, I noticed the noise from the spectator crowd growing in volume, so I stole a glance at the oncoming wave, re-estimating it might require more of a jump up and over. Then looking down again super focused and what do I hear? Surely not? Alarmed shouting coming from the car park?! Another furtive glance at the approaching wall reveals a bionic jump might be more appropriate, oh hell... make that more of a leaping penetration into the pitching face!
At this point in proceedings the watching crew were wailing and howling, sending my adrenaline levels into hyper-drive, and that jump rock was looking further and further away, like in a horror movie pull focus when perspective becomes warped through the onset of sheer terror. Suddenly I was feeling real lonely as an awful realisation seeped into my mull clouded consciousness; I am now charging, Kamikaze styles, across sharp unforgiving reef into a stacked Raglan Bomb set. Oh my God! Maybe if I just crawl under one of these rocks!
The full hillside audience was roaring at this point, baying for blood, and everyones attention was fully focused on my grizzly predicament... It was ugly, carnage. I didn't make that jump rock. The final humiliation; I slipped and dropped my board and it was all over! Dude, I swear I had a moment of clarity lying there on my back and gazing up at the clouds. Have you ever had that experience when you know you’re completely fucked, I mean really truly and completely fucked and there is absolutely nothing that can be done about it? It was like, in that moment I accepted everything with absolute humility, not just the beating I was about to receive but everything, the absurdity of life and the whole cosmic paradox, and in that acceptance there was a moment of quiet, an instant of absolute peace...
The first wave picked me up and cart-wheeled me across the rocks. As it sucked back out l somehow managed to stand up, reclaim my board, and like a punch drunk dervish struggle back for round two... the next double overhead bomb with teeth was right there smiling at me and all I could do was this mad comic lunge into the face as it powered onto the rocks, collapsing over my head in an exploding avalanche of white water...
Miraculous as it may seem I surfaced exactly where I wanted to be, in the water in front of the rocks, no damage done to board or body, and I stroked out to the peak with a full standing ovation from the crowd! I have since been told that Raglan is strong with Tangaroa (the Maori God of the sea) and on that day I swear I saw him out the back.
I joined the waiting crew as they stood poised before a relentless bombardment of Raglan’s angriest. Suddenly, a local girl in the group bolted, skipping the 20 meters across the rocks and jumping onto the back of a smaller wave, perfectly timed and executed she snuck out through the sharks jaws. Everyone in the group was hooting, "GO GO GO, Fark, she’s got it! Bullshit!" And I was all dutch courage and adrenaline thinking; If a girl can do it what are you guys waiting for?! And I yelled out "Hell I’m goin!"
There was good reason the crew were waiting, the rocks were slippery and hard to negotiate. The gaps between the bigger sets were few and far between. Once on the rocks its complete isolation and there’s no turning back. Fully committed you’re racing against an on coming wave over sharp irregular reef towards a slippery jump rock, from which to launch yourself into the swirling maelstrom, or be cut down and suffer the beating of a lifetime!
So there I was, charging across the rocks timing it to leap onto the back of a smaller wave. As I ran, looking fixedly at the rocks to negotiate their slippery angles, I noticed the noise from the spectator crowd growing in volume, so I stole a glance at the oncoming wave, re-estimating it might require more of a jump up and over. Then looking down again super focused and what do I hear? Surely not? Alarmed shouting coming from the car park?! Another furtive glance at the approaching wall reveals a bionic jump might be more appropriate, oh hell... make that more of a leaping penetration into the pitching face!
At this point in proceedings the watching crew were wailing and howling, sending my adrenaline levels into hyper-drive, and that jump rock was looking further and further away, like in a horror movie pull focus when perspective becomes warped through the onset of sheer terror. Suddenly I was feeling real lonely as an awful realisation seeped into my mull clouded consciousness; I am now charging, Kamikaze styles, across sharp unforgiving reef into a stacked Raglan Bomb set. Oh my God! Maybe if I just crawl under one of these rocks!
The full hillside audience was roaring at this point, baying for blood, and everyones attention was fully focused on my grizzly predicament... It was ugly, carnage. I didn't make that jump rock. The final humiliation; I slipped and dropped my board and it was all over! Dude, I swear I had a moment of clarity lying there on my back and gazing up at the clouds. Have you ever had that experience when you know you’re completely fucked, I mean really truly and completely fucked and there is absolutely nothing that can be done about it? It was like, in that moment I accepted everything with absolute humility, not just the beating I was about to receive but everything, the absurdity of life and the whole cosmic paradox, and in that acceptance there was a moment of quiet, an instant of absolute peace...
The first wave picked me up and cart-wheeled me across the rocks. As it sucked back out l somehow managed to stand up, reclaim my board, and like a punch drunk dervish struggle back for round two... the next double overhead bomb with teeth was right there smiling at me and all I could do was this mad comic lunge into the face as it powered onto the rocks, collapsing over my head in an exploding avalanche of white water...
Miraculous as it may seem I surfaced exactly where I wanted to be, in the water in front of the rocks, no damage done to board or body, and I stroked out to the peak with a full standing ovation from the crowd! I have since been told that Raglan is strong with Tangaroa (the Maori God of the sea) and on that day I swear I saw him out the back.
Sunday, 23 September 2007
Saturday, 22 September 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
