INTELLECTUALS WRITE IN RESPONSE
Specified below are some of the letters/responses received by author M. J. John from intellectuals, writers and friends from around the world, mainly of internet discussion forums in which he has been a member since the last few years. They are not the responses to this book parse but are replies or comments to his essays and articles published in those forums which can be read by clicking on to the respective sites address.
“Scott Nicholas” <snichola@…
snichola@…
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/progressivethinktank
Sun Dec 18, 2005 5:14 pm #814 of 1112
Re: Man Market and Machine: Some Food for Thought
Dear Muthukat,
I agree with many of the sentiments that you express. I wonder if you are familiar with the writings of John Ralston Saul? I think many of the problems you describe are caused by what Ralston Saul refers to as the the isolation of reason from all of the other human qualities. He makes the point that human beings possess at least six basic qualities: common sense, imagination, intuition, ethics, memory & reason.
The problems you describe below occur when we apply modern scientific or business methods using reason alone. Adolf Eichman used reason in isolation from ethics when he designed the holocaust program. Selling fast food only becomes a problem when one reasons – again unethically- that profit-maximization is the only goal worth pursuing (i.e., as opposed to selling “fast healthy food).
When Voltaire and Rousseau, during the enlightenment, argued that reason would liberate mankind they were struggling against the arbitrary power of kings & church. They could not have foreseen that reason would be “bastardized” or used in an isolated manner from say ethics, imagination, intuition etc. One task for progressively minded people is to argue for the restoration of balance or the restoration of an equilibrium in human affairs (Ralston Saul), where people are encouraged to use all of their qualities and not just reason alone.
kind regards
Scott
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/4DWorldx/message/515
Thu May 15, 20031:46 am
Dennis: “Metagroup International Inc.”
Re: Plain Speaking 101- was: [4DWorldx] “Sick Man Sick Leader”
John,
You articulate the problem admirably.
And, your courage to do so is commendable.
I agree totally, with your concern and would propose we pursue the idea of ‘plain speaking’ (or, ‘straight talk’ as others have been calling it).
There’s no doubt that higher-order dialogue is the key in addressing the issues facing humanity today. The problem has been initiating/sustaining such dialogue. As it happens, I’ve been working on this for some time and believe I have a way to expedite the process. Hitioshi and I have been discussing this (off-list) but, it would now appear that we’ve been overtaken by events. Thus, I propose we continue to develop both discussions in tandem. Hitoshi and I will continue our deliberations on the larger aspects of matter, while we begin to initiate such dialogue (on this list and others – there is global interest in what we are talking about – 100’s of thousands of NGO’s alone, all addressing one or another aspect of the global problems. If we can make it work for ourselves, we can help make it work for others).
I’m interleaving (all highlights are mine) but, first, there are 3 problems (as evidenced on these lists): 1) few are initiating ‘new’ thinking; 2) people find it difficult to respond to ‘and/or engage in such thinking; 3) most importantly, people can’t see any way out … they don’t think anything can be done. So why bother? (Ironic, at a time when there is every reason to bother). The approach we propose addresses all 3 problems. And, it wouldn’t take much ‘plain speaking’ to begin to sort this situation out.
Thanks for taking the time and having the courage to raise this matter. It could be the beginning of something which can really make a difference. Looking forward to working with you on this.
Dennis
P.S. I’ve only skimmed the following reponses (not much new but, some would seem to provide good background on where people are on the subject. Again, a good place to start. James Newell’s post (last one) is particularly insightful.
P.S.S. I seemed to have missed your post on ‘Sick Man Sick Leader’ could you forward me a copy?
From: James Newell
Date: Fri May 9, 2003 11:09 pm
Subject: Re: [Transpersonal_Psychology] Re: Sick Man Sick Leader
John,
Your perspective is pure gold. You too could be part of a large group of experts producing a plan for humanity. In the meantime, let us see if we can join hands across the world to get something started – along with as many others as become interested. I’m not really all that optimistic. A few years ago, I made this proposal more formally, including to some of the thinkers in the Indian development think-tanks. I got replies back that the idea was good, but it wouldn’t be politically feasible. Governments wouldn’t go along with it.
But of course, thinking something is not politically feasible, so not trying, makes it politically unfeasible because everybody is too hopeless to try, so it never even reaches the point of being tested to see if perhaps humanity might be agreeable to the idea after all. BUT even if the chance of success in saving humanity from destroying itelf is only one in one thousand, it is better to try for that one in one thousand chance than to do nothing at all. There are tens of millions of different book titles in the world’s libraries and numerous articles. Nobody can learn more than a tiny fraction of that material in a single lifetime. That means that I alone can’t do not come up with a workable plan for humanity, nor can any other single individual. But, a number of people, each with different knowledge and experience, could come up with a workable plan to keep humanity from destroying her own civilization. I would guess that several thousand experts in various areas would have to work on this full time for several years. Everybody would have some knowledge others didn’t have, and putting all that together in the context of the proper goal would lead to success as a possible plan. Then, if the plan were good enough, perhaps the governments of the world might adopt it.
One point would be for the experts to try to work up such a good plan that governments would want to adopt it. After all, government leaders have families, friends, etc. and they don’t really want something terrible to happen to them. If government leaders could be presented with something good enough so they thought it would work and protect their families and friends, very few would be against such a plan. Neither would ownersand executives in the large corporations. After all, they have families and friends also, and if humanity destroys herself, their families and friends will also be destroyed. Supercomputers do give us an option we didn’t have fifty years ago. Formulas can be solved for optimum results by supercomputers. If a group of really expert computer programmers were included in the above group, they could create a supercomputer program that would be a model of the world economy, down to individual businesses and families, which could be solved for everyone doing well. That is to say, after a necessary period of building new factories (perhaps ten to twenty years if the world economy as a whole could grow at a historically normal take off rate) every family could have a safe and secure standard of living, every company could be adequately profitable, and this could be done with a mix of products and services that would be safe for the environment.
To provide for every family (I include individuals living alone as well) there would almost certainly have to be some social programs to provide for those who the private economy didn’t need as employees at a high level world minimum wage or above. People who are too disabled to work would of course just be supported. People who could work might be given a guaranteed job by the government, doing something worthwhile they had the skills for, or could learn the skills for if put through a training program. We have many needs that are not being provided for. Just a few examples: people to visit and make better the elderly disabled in convalescent hospitals.People to keep collections of all rare plants and animals going in special facilities. People to provide supplemental activities and teaching of school children. People to do art work that otherwise would earn enough money for they to live on. People to work as laboratory assistants in research. People could choose any of these as their guaranteed job, and the government would pay them a salary that would provide them with a good standard of living. Of course, many people would have jobs in the private economy and laws would be set so that they would also all have a good standard of living, in an economy in which the corporations could pay their employees that well and still be profitable. The supercomputer model would be programmed to look for a coordination of the world economy that would do all that for everyone.
Since this message is becoming rather long, I will continue with another message separately.
**To leave not a single person twisting in the wind**
Jim
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/philosophyforum2/message/23207
Sat Jun 26, 2004 2:34 am
Kotrix
Re: Majority is the Problem, not the Solution
I agree with you 100% on the merits of democracy. It is a false idol. Nowadays it is taken for granted that democracy is the best form of government. No debate, nothing. At the same time, as a society we
preach individuality and innovation. The two are not always compatible. For, in Democracy, the society is, by definition, ruled by mediocrity. Look at the prime example of democracy. The U.S. George Bush! The epitome of what is wrong with democracy. They say he won because he is likeable, because the common (mediocre) man can relate to him. All this is considered a virtue. Who cares that during his election debate he called Jesus, without blushing or anything, the political scientist thato has influenced him the most! And etc.,
etc.
Kotrix
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Mr_Tracys_Corner/message/50281
Sun Oct 16, 2005 10:46 pm
Tracy Jones
Re: [Mr_Tracys_Corner] Obesity : More a matter of the Mind
Thank you for the introduction. As I was reading through it, certain remedies came forth in my mind but your approach to man’s problems did not mentioned any of them. Maybe it’s because you like so many others think only of patching the existing system whereas, the system itself is wrong and has always been so. Why not just change the system? Why not try Absolute Freedom making everyone responsible for themselves and the means to provide themselves a healthy life-style at the same time? We have the technology to do so, all that needs to be done is to make it public and use it.
Your statement on causes comes close but doesn’t hit the mark. For example your statement; The theory
behind obesity is that many people fail to lose weight not because they cannot stop eating but because the brain will not let them do so. Previous studies have shown that once a person gains extra weight, the brain ‘re-programmes’ itself to accept this as normal.
According to Dr. Beck whom I met while he was still alive, the cause is parasites creating a craving for
more food especially dead food. Get rid of the parasites and you lose weight. He was a living example
of this and when I met him while curing my sister of AIDS, he looked very healthy and trim whereas before
he used his own machine, he was very fat like most doctors I see today.
Digestion in the pancreas cannot be facilitated fully unless you have two enzymes, which most people ignore, that are provided by fresh pineapple and papaya. Once your body runs out of its set quota of metabolic enzymes used in place of these two necessary digestive enzymes, the body dies from malnutrition through one or more dieseases. Cancer is a primary example.Feeding the body dead cooked food is the surest way to bring on premature death. When the Annuanki told Moses to cook their meat, it
was then Humans took the wrong path for a healthy body for they being ignorant as most still remain today
assumed that’s the way to eat food.
Yes, the world needs reprogramming but the approach to doing this will not work if everyone insists on
maintaining the current system of serving those who are in control. Change the system, do away with the
controllers, and not only do you save humans from themselves but also save Mother Earth. And the way to
do this most economically and in the shortest amount of time is with Absolute Freedom.
Tracy
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pass-greens/message/3490
Mon Dec 1, 2003 1:36 am
“Emily Dale”
Dear John:
Simply remember to listen to your inner wisdom. Spirit is guiding you into a
new world where everything is respected and nourished. So long as we allow our spirit to be free, so are we free, regardless of our physical circumstances. Any change, regardless of whether it is only self or the universe, begins from within. Be a leader only in the manner of being a good example for others, and they may see the light and follow your example themselves in their lives. In this way, change will be beneficial. Do not despair, so long as there are people such as you walking this earth there is nothing to fear.
With regard and respect,
Emily
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bahai-environment/message/1482
Re: Proud of this age but ashamed of its leaders
Re: MODERN MAN IS DOUBLE PRISONER,
I think, dear John, you would be like Jean-Jacques Rousseau when
he wrote:
“A deep and sweet revelry seizes your senses, and you lose yourself with a delicious drunkenness in the immensity of this beautiful system with which you identify yourself. Then all particular objects fall away; you see nothing and feel nothing except in the whole. . . I never meditate or dream more delightfully than when I forget my self. I feel indescribable ecstasy, delirium in melting, as it were, into the system of beings, in identifying myself with the whole of nature. [Seventh promenade]”
Rousseau also had ideas of education which were similar to your own.
– Art
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/communicationalism/message/452
Thu Jul 8, 20048:44 pm
#452 of 553
Msg List <Prev document.writeln(“<Prev“); | Next> document.writeln(“Next>“);
View Source
Use Fixed Width Font
Unwrap Lines
“Tommy Beavitt”
communicationalism@yahoogroups.com: Re: Modern Society is a Super Myth
John,
I very much enjoyed your post, Modern Society is a Super Myth. You have a very poetic writing style which uses great sentence construction, repetition and a strong sense of rhythm to convey your message.
I won’t attempt to criticize it in detail, as the style of writing does not lend itself to detailed critique but I would like, if I may, to take a couple of your general points.
First of all, I entirely agree with your generalization that modern man “cannot understand anything… that is not analytically compartmentally and mechanically explained”. This is truly the
result of the triumph of analytic philosophy in terms of its alignment with the axis of global power post WW2 (white, Anglo-Saxon, English-speaking). What this has resulted in is – and I am sure we still in full agreement here – the degradation of science as a means of explanation into mere technology and the triumph of cause and effect – of projection of power – over the necessity for understanding.
However, what I find strange about your argument (and it is possible that there are cultural barriers here) is the way that you are constantly comparing the analytical with the “natural” – as if
there were some means of choosing between them.
Let us be clear – to the extent that there is such a thing as “natural” – it cannot be opposed to a method of obtaining understanding. What we are talking about is epistemology, the study of the extent to which we can have knowledge. By opposing nature to the analytic, you are tending to ignore the distinction between that-which-is and the knowledge we are able to gain of it through sense apparatus and intellectual method.
I read in this morning’s Independent newspaper here in the UK that “nearly 3,000 farmers have taken their lives in Andhra Pradesh over the past six years” (http://news.independent.co.uk/world/asia/story.jsp? story=537264). Reasons given for this astonishing suicide rate are the lack of water and the high interest rates charged by money lenders. I guess that your rather gloomy prognosis of the ecological situation also reflects a
general perception in rural India, that much of what is good is being lost and replaced with much that is not good.
However, I do find it strange that in India of all places, there is apparently such a resistance to change, such a clinging to ingrained identities and personalities. I thought it was only in the West that people did that! I have been very inspired by Indian spiritual traditions which place the egocentric westerner in a very bad light – but perhaps you have your problems with egotism there also. Why does a farmer with failing crops and a debt burden feel it necessary to commit suicide? Why does he not just change instead? There is a phenomenal growth rate in the Indian economy: plenty of opportunities for a farmer to transform himself into something else.
I guess that someone who has been accustomed to a role defending the survival of his family in a particular location for all his life, a role that is being continued down several generations, will not
easily make the changes demanded of him by a rapidly changing world. But there is no reason why he shouldn’t – if he wants to. Then again, if men who are not able to gain an understanding of the world around them choose to take their own lives, there is an opportunity for younger men
and women to find new forms of understanding.
If you believe in reincarnation – which I guess most rural Indians do? – then there is also an opportunity for that farmer to come back in a different body and gain a new understanding that way…
Back to “natural” – it seems to me that naturalism such as yours is responsible for a great deal of suffering, of people clinging to constructions which are no longer compatible with the external
world of fact and communication. There is no satisfactory philosophical definition of “natural” other than “all that is” – and this would clearly include man and all his technologies, however
environmentally degrading.
The world has been marked by many, many environmental catastrophes during its evolution, some of which have wiped out entire species at a stroke. There have been ice ages, periods of rampant desertification. Whole continents have broken away from their neighbors and rejoined
others. Fossilized ocean beds have been pushed miles into the sky.
In spite of the many environmental problems which you describe, there is still an abundance of ecological niches for mankind. The cult of technology may be in some senses the antithesis of philosophical and scientific understanding, but technologies themselves can be very useful for preserving and enhancing ecological niches. For example, if India used its tremendous technological and economic potential to concentrate on renewable energy production which was in turn used to power desalination plants along the coast which pumped fresh water inland through pipelines, then perhaps the suicide rate amongst farmers in Andhra Pradesh could start dropping again.
Obviously this would take finance and political will, both of which are practically finite, but you understand what I am driving at.
Nothing lasts, everything changes. This is especially true of our personalities – but also of the ecological niches within which we adapt and for some time survive. Technology is not an enemy to the project of surviving within an ecological niche but a friend. However, in order to be able to harness technology to this end it will be necessary to communicate, to enter into a political process.
Clearly, to do this we will not primarily require compartmentalized, mechanical forms of knowledge but instead we will require what you call holistic knowledge. This can only be obtained through communication – and not just a specific communication with a colleague working within a field, but Communication in the wider sense of the word, which drives at a general understanding.
It is strange that we seem both very much in agreement about some things – but very much opposed in others!
Best regards
Tommy Beavitt
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/communicationalism/message/425
Re: [communicationalism] Modern Man: A suicidal victim of his own Training
Sat Jun 5, 20049:03 pm
#425 of 553
Msg List <Prev document.writeln(“<Prev“); | Next> document.writeln(“Next>“);
View Source
Use Fixed Width Font
Unwrap Lines
Amy Wing <loconito442@…
Hi M.J.,
Wow! What you have taken the time to articulate is incredibly refective..
I agree wholeheartedly with so many points that you made like the “modern world seems to be making serious errors and blunders: it is not giving man a chance, it is not giving truth a chance”. At times I was a bit leary when spoke of “truth”. And I think that any time “truth” is written in the singular form I become leary. I think that truth written in the plurl is more reflective of “truth” in general. But I think that in the context of your writting that this is more of a technical issue. I think that when you say: “Today the burning questions are: How long can we continue sweeping things under the carpet?” that you are here emphasiseing that some truths are being emphasized while other truths are being hidden. Politics is all a game where politicans try and get us to focus our
attention on what they want us to focus on in order that they can manipulte our opinions about things. So many of the truths that you wrote about are not being taken seriously, because of exactly what you wrote, modern world seems to be making serious errors and blunders: it is not giving man a chance, it is not giving truth a chance”.
I would like to question you on this peice:
The philosophy of even the `sayable’ and the intentioned object of thought are not only not being understood by the reader but also not properly been written by the author, however perfect the former and the latter are. Today we understand human mind only in isolation, away from its natural social environment and practice when it finds _expression through languages and formulae. This is further distanced by the distinction between being and seeming, as how things are and as how things seems; what seems right may be wrong often.
Are you simply stating how imperfect language is, or stating how imperfect human understanding is?
…
“You can not buy peace just as you can buy things in the market. You can only get peace only by giving peace a chance which can be made possible only by giving truth a chance, by giving man
a chance. Solutions to all human problems depend on the unhindered expressions of independent human thoughts and their communication among one another. ”
I also love what you said here, and I would just like to add that giving something a chance means giving it time.
Thank you for posting this brilliant piece.
All best,
Amy
“Today we need not start war, we are already in it.”
(M.J.John)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hermitwannabes/message/3057
Fri Jun 11, 20042:06 am
#3057 of 6127
Msg List <Prev document.writeln(“<Prev“); | Next> document.writeln(“Next>“);
View Source
Use Fixed Width Font
Unwrap Lines
“Mick”
hermitwannabes@yahoogroups.com, Re: Modern Man: A suicidal victim of his own Training
MJ John
What you’ve written here is pretty much on point, I agree with almost all of it. I have also noticed the growing awareness in people of how fucked up modern society really is, it’s always good to
know that not all of your fellow human beings are living in a fantasy world where the only things that really matter are money/material possessions and working to get more money/material possessions. But I can’t see much changing at all anytime soon, definately not within my
lifetime. Most of society is in love with this greedy materialistic age, they’ve been programmed from birth to believe in it and to treat anybody who thinks differently with complete indifference. I truly believe that eventually the Earth is going to shit itself and we’ll go into another Ice Age before anything can be done to cure society of it’s sickness(I get all warm and fuzzy inside when I think about another Ice Age….bring it on!!!). While deep down I’d love to wake up to find that the world has woken up to it’s own miserable existence and has decided to change it’s ways……………..I just can’t see that happening. — In
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hermitwannabes/message/2379
Tue Mar 4, 20038:16 pm
#2379 of 6127
Msg List <Prev document.writeln(“<Prev“); | Next> document.writeln(“Next>“);
View Source
Use Fixed Width Font
Unwrap Lines
disillusioned_with_society
Re: Professionalism and AIDS: the Unfolding Link
I’m really impressed with your post and I went to the links you provided and they are GREAT! I’d like to quote a woman from “The Disciplined Minds” site. She is a single mother of a 6 year old son. She says:
“I have made a conscious decision to never join the professional class……For me I came out of a pregnancy of starvation and rejection, anger and then determination and a disdain for the system that creates the inhumanity that I experienced……. I worry about how long I can maintain my
integrity and provide for my son while we live in a world where we are not valued…..I wonder often how right I am. I can’t seem to submit…”
Well I hope she does not ever submit. I relate to her as she says she makes around $500 a month. I too only bring in a little over $600 a month and have a 7 yr. old girl. It’s rough. I do have
some college education and am a certified EKG tech and I could be working in a hospital making decent money and have had some good paying jobs ( including 2 manager positions), but I
never lasted long. I was always unhappy and just could not deal with people anymore and the bull that went with it. I just can’t fathom working my life away just to profit someone else. All it gave me was GRIEF. Now I work a low paying, part time job but have no hassles and I work by myself. At this point in my life I have to maintain a little work, but at least now it’s tolerable.
Well anyhow excellent post and it also helped to reinforce my way of thinking and makes me realize that I’m not alone……….
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/philosophyforum2/message/22011
Tue Mar 25, 20037:14 pm
#22011 of 26315
Msg List <Prev document.writeln(“<Prev“); | Next> document.writeln(“Next>“);
View Source
Use Fixed Width Font
Unwrap Lines
happy_colander
Re: Creating dangerous social Vacuum
Not to give short shrift to you argument but wouldn’t you say that Saddam Hussein is a “type”? Isn’t it less about one dictator and more about separate visions of the world’s future and what can be allowed to stand? Isn’t it more true that whatever stands in the way of global commerce is the enemy? The Red Chinese government leaders are some of the biggest capitalists on earth. America exists for business and our entire economy’s health is based on consumer spending. Are not all political considerations in this millennium based on money, eventually, even if morality, religion, and geo- political concerns from history are displayed as the real reason? Just some questions I had.
“After all, the chief business of the American people is business.” President Calvin Coolidge in his speech called “The Press Under A Free Government” given before the American Society of Newspaper editors in Washington DC on January 17, 1925.
However, he goes on to say next;
“Of course the accumulation of wealth cannot be justified as the chief end of existence.”
I think the last paragraph of that speech underscores the confusion that my fellow countrymen possess in all their global activities,that war between idealism and greed. Here it is;
“We make no concealment of the fact that we want wealth, but there are many other things that we want very much more. We want peace and honor, and that charity which is so strong an element of all civilization. The chief ideal of the American people is idealism. I cannot repeat too often that America is a nation of idealists. That is the only motive to which they ever give any strong and lasting reaction.”
Making the world a safe place for business must be viewed upon in light of God’s admonition about greed;
“For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.” 1 Timothy 6:10 and the fact that God denies that just because you have wealth does not mean that you are somehow good which is another fallacy that is developed in a wealthy society;
“Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself.” 1 Timothy 6:5
and His rejection of the patriotic “stay hungry” attitude of wealth accumulation;
“But godliness with contentment is great gain.” 1 Timothy 6:6
I believe that with regard to motives for military or any global action for any country there are the stated objectives which are almost always a lie, PR, or propaganda, the real reasons which are
usually hid from the public, the historical reasons which are justifications made by the victors and usually half-truths, and finally , what I will call, a superior motive which few if any understand and which is more of a movement behind the history where many people come together for a purpose they hardly understand, including the leaders. I think history is moved in that way. And, of course, being a believer in the Bible, I believe history is moved by God. Basically, my final premise is the most sickening thought of all.
The leaders of the world are clueless, always have been, always will be, and we give our loyalty and pledge our lives to them (and eventually the lives of our children).
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/technocalypse/message/5056
Tue Jul 6, 20048:09 am
Show Message Info
#5056 of 7353
Msg List <Prev document.writeln(“<Prev“); | Next> document.writeln(“Next>“);
View Source
Use Fixed Width Font
Unwrap Lines
Steve Kudlak <chromazine@…
Re: [technocalypse] Re: Modern Society is a Super Myth (CAE Defense People Excuse the Long PreambleO
My feelings exactly. I mean I am showing my age but I have read such people as Ellul and the kind of new agey William Irwin what’s his name. In fact since I live near the (in)famous Santa Cruz, California so I hear plenty of New Age criticisms of soi-disant Modern Society. I don’t mind them as long offer new insights, or redo the older views in a new way. But it has to be more
than just a rehash of what has become pretty much an anti-technological doctrine.
For example one of the issues never addresses it seems is that we sort of believe in free-trade as if it were a religion. Right now we are going through limited resources rather quickly because free trade dictates since labour is cheap in other places (right now it is Chiua) we have to have things manufactured there ans shipped here wasting energy. It’s not technology that dictates this it is economic doctrine.
It certainly would be perfectly easy to use the technological power and facilities we have at hand to distribute things in an even handed manner that would look for high quality local and domestic producers of stuff first, and expand to say Canada, Mexico, Japan(I have friends there), France, EU, Brazil(more friends), Maroc(friends again), then China , Israel, Iran and other places I am uncomfortable dealing with and which have repressive gfovernements. I kind of have a kludgey system that does this and, it has for seriously augmented the amount of stuff I buy that is made in Canada.Lower cost and just as high quality. I also like the Challenge Butter churned in the European method.
Anyway yes, yes, yes I have heard that particular set of arguments befoie. Worse yet I think the
central thesis is flawed. The problems are real, my nasty review is they are just complex. This is
dauntying to some, who would prefer to just dismiss them as “unreal, abstract and hypothetical”..
This is dangerously dismissive in my not so humble opinion. A person in the 19th Century presented without our understanding of how epilepsy functions as a disease and how we control it would see our current medical practice as unbelievably weir convoulted and complex, its treatment would seem like the practice of some bizarre form of sorcery, when the simple clear
answer that everyone from the Church Elders to the local pastor was that it was caused by moral
weakness and the simple, direct solution was to get the person back to a clean and moral life and avoid all these silly new fangled ideas.
The big mystery here is whether M.J..John and Alex K. the same person am I confused. To reassure people I have never stopped speaking to someone because of a paper or book that they wrote.
Have Fun,
Sends Steve
P,S, I will read and consider most anything. Just send them or pointers or links to them along.
N.B. I am going to write a paper on the Steve Kurtz and FBI case. This is very interesting for all of us who want to see the power of science and technology ieven distributed to anyone who will reasonable with its use, not just tied up in institutions serving instutional and global capitalistic
purposes pretty much exclusively
http://tv.groups.yahoo.com/group/quietfoxfire/message/3914
Quietfoxfire <angel_queen_fox2@…
Re: [quietfoxfire] Wartime readings written in Peacetime
Why thank you John, dearest brother. Those were some very nice words. I think I’ll pass them onto my other groups . . . It is a most welcome outlook on life . . . I think Jesus would have done the same . . . being passive that is.
And I know we are all quite busy these days and worrying about war . . . But I thank you all for your comments when you can . . . I should say you are all a very intelligent bunch and very informed with various opinions. . . Whether off the top of our headd or looking far beneath the surface of an issue, I think this is a very well-rounded forum. I’ve seen some interesting comments from other forums, even in philosphy, but I think you to be superior in thought and your message does not get lost in a sea of filth . . . I like strong minds that are not afraid to boldly speak truth . . . So this Dear John, I truly appreciate of you . . .
Take Care . .
I hope one day to meet you . .
http://tv.groups.yahoo.com/group/quietfoxfire/message/3865
Re: [quietfoxfire] Modern man is double slave
I’m not quite sure what to do with you or your brains Dear Brother . . . I think God made you just to tease me if not outsmart me altogether. Truly, I love your way . . . I have yet to find any animosity or hostility for an avenging Angel of the Loris forum (Smile). Actually, I admire your gentle but empowering nature, boldness for the truth and deep things of God, your contempt of man and his modern technologies and inventions.
The modern man is enslaved although he fights for freedom . . . And As he fights for freedom, he enslaves others . . . He makes war in the name of freedom, and under this guise, freedom is commercialization and the free market economy. Tack on some human rights later and there you have freedom, democracy and human rights. The same was the North that subdued the South for the Union had to remain strong to prosper and grow . . . but over 150 years later, the descendants of slaves were still fighting to be free of oppression.
“All this I have seen, and there was an applying of my heart to every work that has been done under the sun, [during] the time that man has dominated man to his injury.” Eccl. 8:9 The mentality of man is enslavement and to enslave his fellowman.
In Man’s attempt to be free of his Creator, and free to rule himself, he instead became a slave of his own doing. Instead of the perfect free gift of everlasting life, he became a slave to sin and error, and the curse of death. Generations became enslaved, imperfection was an inheritance, sickness and dying a punishment meted out to the world by just one perfect man whose desires became unrighteous.
Progress is high-tech cannibalism where unborn fetuses are manipulated by the millions in laboratories from human to human, pollinated like flower and stem, bred like farm animals and reproduced to mimic individual organs or human beings to get the desired characteristics. Is it an illusion or is it real?
Man can only mimic nature or God’s creation. . . The way a bird knows how to fly, where and when . . . the fish swim as deep as the depths of the oceans . . . the seasons change all by themselves . . . Not even the most advanced commercial aircraft, weather radar, thermometer, or superior fleet of navy vessel or cruise ship can compare. “Ask the very beasts, and they will teach you; ask the wild birds–they will tell you; crawling creatures will instruct you, fish in the sea will inform you.”–Job 12:7, 8, Moffatt.
We are all enslaved to sin and “The wages sin pays is death, but the gift God gives is everlasting life by Christ Jesus our Lord. Rom. 6:23
Yet we do not have to be imperfect in doing God’s will and in doing so our reward is everlasting life on earth.
” Come, YOU people, behold the activities of Jehovah, How he has set astonishing events on the earth. He is making wars to cease to the extremity of the earth. The bow he breaks apart and does cut the spear in pieces; The wagons he burns in the fire. Give in, YOU people, and know that I am God. I will be exalted among the nations, I will be exalted in the earth.” Psalms 46:8-10
And God Bless You Dear John
Your Sister, Angel
SHADOWPSYCHOLOGY AND MJ JOHN
By J. Wyatt Ehrenfels, author of Fireflies in the Shadow of the Sun
A coalition of critics consisting of authors agreed to throw their support behind J. Wyatt Ehrenfels (Fireflies in the Shadow of the Sun) and his campaign to liberate thinkers from institutionalized requirements that arbitrarily, unnecessarily, or prejudicially constrain and domesticate independent thinkers intent on exploring meaningful questions at the heart of their disciplines. With negotiations underway with authors spanning the gamut of natural and social sciences, the current list of committed authors includes Jeff Schmidt (Disciplined Minds), William Arnott (Why Not Do God?), Elio Frattaroli (Healing the Soul in the Age of the Brain), MJ John (Professionalism: Bane of Human Civilisations), Robert Roerich (Why You Feel How You Feel: Means of Crossing The River), Alice Andrews (Trine Erotic), and John Hewitt (The Architecture of Thought).
During the lag leading up to the release of Fireflies, Ehrenfels sought new tactics in his bid to energize the movement to reform departments of psychology, a campaign dubbed ‘Operation Firefly.’ “If there is anything my efforts over the past two years have shown, it is that good ideas are where you find them. This is a diverse, inclusive group representing various disciplines and backgrounds, all calling for the freedom and fidelity necessary to restore our faith in higher education. As a group, we are not going to agree on everything. I am not concerned with the extent to which are criticisms of psychology overlap, though they would not have contacted me had they not found appealing at least some load-bearing pillar of my critique. This group is strengthened by its diversity. I view the unique strengths and views of my allies as tools in the arsenal of a mobile and adaptible army that can hit you many different ways. This campaign, first and foremost, is about reviving (or injecting) the diversity that has been concealed, suppressed, disarmed, or sanitized by Psychology’s academic and professional communities. Obviously, it would be unctuous of me, if not plainly hypocritical, to require uniformity among my allies.
I have been questionned for finding fault in Psychology’s aacdemic and professional communities. “The APA alone boasts over 60,000 members. How can 60,000 professionals be wrong?” And that sort of thing. When we deal with communities, it is important to keep in mind that we are not dealing with 60,000 individual minds, but essentially with one mind, and thus in a war of wits, this alliance outnumbers the APA. For those of you who actually need to hear this, the preceding remark is admittedly an oversimplification, a bit of hyperbole to make a point, the point being that an individual enjoys potentially greater resources than loyalists who sell their wits, freedoms, and motives for membership in a community in exchange for access to external sources of identity, guidance, and validation. If we apply evolutionary principles to the development and maintenance of a social institution like Psychology, we can understand how standard practices and committee thinking shape professional member selection and training into well-oiled machines that homogenize and bureaucratize the psychological community and work against the personal growth and development of its individual members.
We in the ShadowPsychology alliance may appear more raw and rough around the edges, and a little less polished than the professionals (and we are certainly less ‘connected’), but we have managed to preserve our own integrity and the integrity of our ideas and to keep open the conduit to vital sources of inspiration, innovation, discovery, and serendipity. I once wondered why collegial relationships among academics and professionals were so harmonious yet poorly developed, almost primitive, and I realized that the vital contributing factor to relationships is diversity (i.e., differences). Psychology professors do rhapsodize fetishistically about racial and ethnic diversity, but then they seek a racially and ethnically diverse community of like-minded drones. Psychology professors do vary widely in their research interests and clinical specializations, but they hardly speak about one another’s research around the water cooler, and they create this overarching paradigm to give them something to talk about, some common alphabet, and to conceal and compensate for their various specializations. And as for the natural diversity of pet theories, well, this is suppressed and restricted to the point where human nature, and especially the human psyche, is the 800 pound gorilla in the psychology department. We in the ShadowPsychology Alliance understand the difference between real relationships and community management, between real science and institutional paradigm, between callings and careers, and between true professional development and ritual imitation. Our heads extend just a little further into the clouds and our feet are planted more firmly on the ground. Our tree of science is measured by the height of its crown and by the depth of its roots.
“While I contend wholeheartedly that the trends I describe are most conspicuous and counterproductive in Psychology, I also understand that they are not unique to Psychology. That being said, owing to the specific nature of my experiences and credentials, I decided that I could enhance my credibility by confining my arguments to the field in which I am a subject matter expert (i.e., psychology) while enlisting the support of authors whose works call attention to similar trends in other fields. My goal eventually is to go on the road with a group of authors, or their works, to lecture at universities and bookstores around the country. Perhaps even phone local networks and coordinate coverage for a press conference that would create publicity for our campaign and tour itinerary.” Having enjoyed a research and development phase, repeated overtures from his publisher have forced Ehrenfels to forge ahead with plans to collaborate with top lieutenants on strategies and tactics. “The honeymoon is over. We’ve created and refined our tools, and while we will continue to expand them — the book, the web site, the stores — it is time to seriously think of how we could best put our tools on the street. This means e-mailing psychology students with the information they need to reconsider their choice of major. This is the social and financial base of Psychology, because notwithstanding a growing consortium of professional schools, the training of the vast majority of therapists is still powered by universities. It is also important to match the American Psychological Association stride for stride in spamming legislators with self-serving concerns about preserving or growing public subsidies for frivolous or corrupt enterprises. The evil empire needs to understand it now has a natural enemy on the Hill.”
Having yet to systematically and comprehensively explore the universe of suitable authors, Ehrenfels is only beginning to compile a list of promising prospects
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nietzschesphilosophy/message/5333
“Juan Carlos Cruz” <juan_carlos_cruzzz@…>
Re: [Nietzsche’s Philosophy] Proud of this age but ashamed of its leaders
you are right, that’s herd-mentality, most people do what’s in, and not what’s against the system. It’s a feminization of mankind, and they praise the leaders because of too afraid of revolting
Juan Carlos
“He’s not concerned with yesterday, he knows constant change is here today. He’s noble enough to know what’s right but weak enough not to choose it. He’s wise enough to win the world nut fool enough to lose it. He’s a New WorldMan.” -New World Man, Rush
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Herbal_Remedies/message/75824
Sun Dec 18, 200510:11 pm
Re: Herbal Remedies – Man Market and Machine: Some Food for Thought
Yes, I agree with most of this, but you forgot one very important point. WHY! Why do people do this? Why do they toute all these things as great miracles of science and refuse to listen to any other opinions? The answer is simple. Selfishness. It is easier to not have to think, selfishly saving your brain and time for what pleasures that you want. It is Selfish desire for instantanious gratification with no work that leads to both fast food and soil pollution with fertilizers. I want it and I want it now! We now are in our third or fourth generation of people who have not known want, who build useless gadgets to take up their time because they are not involved with doing anything
worth while. Hard work is not a virtue, it is for suckers, and it is more respected to find a way around it, and stick someone else with the problems than to grit your teeth and do it yourself.
Industries have long valued the bottom line above the health and safety of their workers, but now we are in a state where the industies desire for money is contaminating not just the environment, but our food and even our bodies as they peddle their miracle cures each with side effects needing more miracle cures.
And where is society going with this? Just ask the people who neglect their children by pursuing their “satisfying” careers. The men and women who just want nice little dolls they can trot out occasionally and then put back in nanny governed storage. Or the men and women who have their children in daycare from 5 a.m. til 10 p.m. (yes there are daycares open that late and that
early.) Children are only to make them feel good, to make them feel fulfilled– selfishness. And what are they teaching the next generation? Each one has been more self indulgent than the last since we left the family farm. Each generation has been more involved with self gratification, having more things, instant fulfillment and whatever cost (as long as they think someone else is paying the cost.)
So what has this to do with natural healing? Simple. Man (and I am using the correct English gender neutral) is more than physical. He is also emotional, spiritual, mental and social. Each is as important as the other in determining well being. The five parts of man are so intensely integrated that they have an effect on the others. Depression (a mental and sometimes spiritual ill) has physical ramifications, as does stress, loneliness and even selfishness. It is not enough to focus on the purely physical manifestations of greater problems. Other underlying ills must be addressed before the physical can be solved. The selfish desease must be cured.
Ramona
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SECULARHUMANIST/message/54517
Sun Oct 2, 20054:27 pm
#54517 of 88792
Msg List <Prev document.writeln(“<Prev“); | Next> document.writeln(“Next>“);
View Source
Use Fixed Width Font
Unwrap Lines
“Stephen Clementson” <stephen.clementson@…>
Dear “Mr John”,
(Is this the name that you would prefer to use, as I do not wish to appear discourteous?) I live in Great Britain, and I don’t understand why there is so much waste and wonton environmental destruction in the world. It makes no sense; surely things don’t have to be like this? I do not share this vision of being an American, which is based on a desire to accrue great wealth. I do not need great wealth to live, as great wealth does not equate to life.
The notion that great wealth means a great life is artificial and shallow. A rich man never has true friends; a rich man’s money has all the friends. I am angered by those who would kill for oil, just as I am angered by the fools who would permit them to kill.
Stephen Clementson
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/progressivethinktank/message/386
Sun Oct 2, 20057:53 am
#386 of 1114
Msg List <Prev document.writeln(“<Prev“); | Next> document.writeln(“Next>“);
View Source
Use Fixed Width Font
Unwrap Lines
Michael Barker <michael.barker@…>
A new member from the East
Hi Muthukat
Thanks for the brilliant opening email, fantastic!
Its interesting that you’ve just joined us as I am going through a phase of telling everyone I know about Jeff Schmidt’s book (for everyone elses benefit): Disciplined Minds: A critical look at salaried professionals and the soul-battering system that shapes their lives.
So I for one would be really interested in hearing more about your book, Professionalism: Bane of Human Civilizations. I couldnt find it when I did a quick search for it online, does that mean its just about to come out?
You might also like another book:
Edwards, D. (1995) Free to be human: intellectual self-defence in an age of illusions
Also see his work at www.medialens.org
Speak to you soon, and everyone else
Mike barker
Tommy Beavitt is a singer-songwriter based in the Highlands of Scotland. He has been recording and performing original material since 1989, touring throughout Europe and also in America and Australia. His songs are humorous and quirky but unafraid to venture into the darker realms of human experience. A key influence on his sparse, fluid guitar style and expressive vocal style has been Michael Hurley, doyen of the currently voguish Americana genre. Tommy has performed and recorded with some of Scotland’s finest musicians including Toby Shippey (Salsa Celtica), Conrad Ivitsky (Shooglenifty), McFall’s Chamber Orchestra, John Rae, Stevie Christie (Proclaimers) and David “Demus” Donnelly. The recent Holding Water was released on Boatshed Records and co-produced by Toby Shippey and James Locke (Chimes)
History:
Tommy Beavitt was born in Sydney, Australia on the ninteenth of April, 1968, to an English couple who were half way through their journey along the hippy trail of Asia. As a baby he travelled back with in an old British Army Jeep through some of the most exotic countries in the world. He has therefore, visited such landmarks as Samarkand, the Khyber Pass, Hiroshima, Moscow, but unfortunately can’t remember any of them. After a spell in Northamptonshire, England his parents took him to the “dropout community” of Scoraig in the north west of Scotland, which he continues to frequent.After a spell sampling the delights of the festival scene in the mid eighties and a couple of years working on a fishing boat, Tommy followed his own wanderlust over the Atlantic to visit his mentor Michael Hurley, an American troubadour. After touring with Hurley (aka snock) he went to Australia where he worked variously as a musician, farm worker, builder and fisherman.On his return to Scotland in 1989 and armed with a repertoire of self-penned songs, Tommy recorded his first album. Called Breaking Wind, it sold 500 copies and formed the basis for Edinburgh band, the Night Kitchen. In 1994 In the Night Kitchen, featuring a further 10 original songs, was recorded. Various tours around Europe with a nine piece band ensued, culminating with a headlining show to several thousand people at Edinburgh’s Beltane Fire festival in 1996.The Night Kitchen was disbanded shortly after and Tommy has been performing solo or with guest musicians ever since.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/communicationalism/message/
Re: [communicationalism] MANKIND IS COMMITTING SUICIDE; MARKET IS CELEBRATING IT
Dear M.J. John,
I am very pleased and honoured to have you contributing once more to
this group. I have just read your entire piece and have to say that I
agreed with almost every word of it.
However, I must make a small confession.
This is the first time I have ever read one of your posts from
beginning to end. I have to concede that the main reason for not
having done so before may be that your style of writing interfered
with my own egotistical wish for “my” voice to be heard.
For those whose egos or lack of time also prevent them from reading
this piece, I will attempt to distill some of the key points together
with commentary in order that they may stimulate discussion.
On 27 Jan 2007, at 04:47, M.J.John wrote:
> Machination of Mankind
> Machination of mankind started at the moment when man became a
> professional and encouraged others to become professionals–
> mechanical (or the machine-like beings) for the sustenance of his
> own way of life–professionalism. Thus man became a parasite of the
> same species. Globalization of machination made the whole mankind a
> giant social machine.
I’m not sure about this word “machination”. My dictionary defines the
word “machination” as “to engage in plots and intrigues; scheme”.
I think a better word here would be “mechanisation”. This is also the
word that Gurdjieff used to describe the means by which individuals
are made to respond to situations by forcing them to “identify” in a
certain way.
Sartre had a similar thing in mind I think when he spoke about the
“bad faith” used to justify behaviour: “I had to do it because that’s
just the way that I am”.
Of course nobody “just is” anything; they pretend that they are to
excuse the fact that they are prey to all kinds of identifications
caused by the situations that they find themselves in.
This emphasises M.J. John’s argument about professionalisation and
the ways that the overwhelming centrality of money in people’s lives
causes them to behave.
> The living is sustained by eating the live; the non-living, like the
> machine, is sustained or fueled by the dead or non-living food. Thus
> man should eat live food whereas machine is run by the dead fossils
> (fuels). Modern man prefers the dead food like the junk food and
> highly processed and other synthetic foods, because he is mostly
> mechanical and leastly human.
Well, in response to that, it is very interesting how the movement
for “real food” has become extremely powerful in this postindustrial
society (UK). Literally about 25% of TV programmes are now about food
and cooking, and the market for organic and free range food is
burgeoning. I expect that the tendency is in the opposite direction
in rapidly “developing” countries like China and India.
> Degenerating Mankind and the fast Shrinking Options
> Today man is doing all things in the wrong way simply because there
> is no option left to do it in the right way. What frightens me is
> not merely the fact that America had to kill Saddam Hussein to bring
> peace to the world, but the fact that it simply had no other option
> left.
I will return to this theme of the removal of Saddam Hussein later. I
find it quite striking that in general “the east” rejects the
attempts by “the west” to foist western style democracy on them. And
this seems to be linked to the idea that people need strong
leadership, not the kind of leadership that is constrained, even
bought by the market. (The idea in political science that democratic
politics should be – indeed is – marketised needs no explanation to
American or British citizens. But it is not a foregone conclusion
elsewhere)
> Mankind is committing suicide. And Market is celebrating it by
> toying in the arts, the sciences, the media, the judiciary, the
> politicians, the experts, the voluntary organizations….
> For the first time in history, man is suicidally caught in a deadly
> vicious circle of his own making, from which not even the leaders
> seem to find any way out. George W. Bush, Tony Blair, Vladamin
> Putin, Bill Gates,….. are all being functioning as the puppets,
> being operated by the force of the `current’ of this vicious cycle.
> It is a fact that only the right leadership can develop a right
> society. The problem today is that man has only helpless leader–
> leaders with no options to do the right things.
Yes, that is what the market does. And it appears to be extremely
short term in the kind of collective thinking it encourages. People,
i.e. consumers, are in basic denial about their own mortality, let
alone that of the planet. Tony Blair, when challenged last week about
the environmental cost of his Christmas holiday in Florida, said that
“science will find a way”. But the evidence is that for the last 100
years or so, “science” has been moving us the opposite direction from
that in which we have a chance of “finding a way”.
The application of the principles of holistic science, as exemplified
in the Third Law of Thermodynamics, on the other hand, points towards
the scale of environmental catastrophe confronting us. However, this
is a rare and exceptional departure from the compartmentalised
scientific specialisms that have been so effective in driving
consumer capitalism “forward”.
> Human society, as a whole, is treading without on agenda. Badly and
> suicidally caught in the current of this giant vicious circle, man
> is led more by his passivity than by his activity.
Yes. And working for a large corporation or a governmental
organisation, one quickly becomes aware that “activity” is a recipe
for career disaster; only true passivity can lead to a smooth
progression up the career ladder…
> Ignorance is Knowledge divided: the Growing De-knowledge Process
> For millions of years, man used to live in exploiting nature, by
> feeding on it which is a very simple method for which not much
> training is needed. However, in modern history, man lives by
> exploiting and feeding, not on nature, but on another man, which,
> however, is a complex and complicated process for which much
> training and `know-how’ is needed.
I am not sure that we the argument that we have stopped exploiting
nature and started to exploit each other is a very sound one. How
about “in modern history man has systematised his exploitation of
nature such that the behaviour of individuals is no longer relevant
as to how this exploitation takes place”?
> This being a fraud process, in
> which much has to be done in denying the right knowledge and
> information to the exploited party by the exploitive party. This
> explains the hectic spreading much ignoratism and disinformation
> today. The process is a one-up game. The modern education process is
> indeed a cumulative process of adding more and more years to such
> real de-knowledge process.
I have no problem with this, however.
> The Invisible World Leadership
> The leader of all leaders is the Mr. Invisible. He is not any
> President, Prime Minister, King or Queen. Nor is he the Pope nor the
> Mullah, nor he the richest man nor any Nobel Laureate. All these
> categories of leaders however are just the servants of this super
> leader.
>
> Then, who is he?
> Certainly, he is not a human being. Bible described him as the
> Lucifer. Mary Shelly called him the Frankenstein. However, in
> reality, he is what we see him everywhere today : as the Mr.
> Helplessness, the Mr. Passivity, the Mr. Ignorance, the Mr.
> Optionlessness…etc.
“Everyman” is the boiled down exemplar of the process of segmentation
by the market. Marketeers know that certain people will prefer
different things. The global behemoth of Google uses this principle
as its basic operational motive. To infinitely pare down the
differences between people so that marketing messages can be ever
more precisely targeted. You could say that the market capitalisation
of Google – as large as the total amount of money in a medium sized
country – is a direct reflection of its ability to do this. But,
conversely, Google’s metrics also tell what the average person is
likely to want. Their accumulation of terabytes of information
concerning the differences between people only ends up making people
more and more similar in the extent to which they can be expected to
respond to marketing messages.
> Vitiation of Leadership
> It is a fact that only the right leadership can develop a right
> society. The problem today is that man has only helpless leader–
> leaders with no options to do the right things. This means the whole
> society is vitiated and thus the society can prop up only wrong
> leaders. We have seen that the whole modern society itself is highly
> vitiated and is on the verge of demise with the vitiation having
> become much chronic.
I don’t think that you can claim “that only the right leadership can
develop a right society” to be a fact. Indeed, I think that there are
many on this group who would disagree with you here. It is a Platonic
idea, and many western intellectuals devoted a lot of energy to
refuting Plato, especially on this particular point. Read Karl
Popper’s “The Open Society and Its Enemies” if you don’t believe me.
Talk to George Soros, whose hundred billion dollar Quantum fund and
Open Society Foundation is inspired by Popper’s reasoning.
> Passivity and Americans
> And, at long last, the last bastion too falls: Americans too are
> increasingly caught under the fear phobia. Long accustomed to
> frighten the world at large under false alarm and under false omen
> (as part of their strategy), Americans who, in reality, used to be
> courageous, well-informed, spontaneous and very timely responding to
> human dangers today seem to be caving into the fear phobia. Being
> well-informed—and much in advance, thanks to their superior
> intelligence work– Americans used to be much immunized against the
> virus of pessimism and other false threat. But today, the case is no
> longer true. Today, 95% of the people all over the world, including
> Americans, thanks to globalization says `yes’ to the prevailing
> system dictates when they really want to say `no’.
I particularly want to emphasise your statement “Today 95% of the
people all over the world, including Americans, thanks to
globalization says ‘yes’ to the prevailing system dictates when they
really want to say ‘no'”
But who are these people? How can we say what they “really want to
say”? They are only identifying appropriately to the situation within
which they find themselves. What else can they do? How else can they
identify? Who else can they be, other than the appropriate
identification?
> The agony of modern man is that he can live only by availing the
> loan or advances from the market for his moment’s escape which later
> proves to be a false escape leading to sickness and destruction in
> the near future. This means he cannot live today without
> guaranteeing his destruction tomorrow.
Yes, this is true in many senses. You can apply it to the credit
system, especially in the UK and USA. Many people in my country have
more debt than they could ever repay through labour efforts, even if
they were to progress smoothly up a career ladder. Their only hope is
to benefit from the rapid increase in the value of their properties,
if they are “lucky” enough to own them. But this pressure only leads
them to consume more, and perpetuate the cycle of unsustainability.
We are literally borrowing nature’s capital without any idea of how
we will be able to pay her back.
> The British did not colonize the world. The modern science and
> market did it. And that is why the whole world – including the
> British, no matter the colonized world hypothetically drove away the
> British colonizers— are still in the captivity of science and
> market. The ongoing Globalization frenzy by the market is a
> Juggernaut that is out of control, dominated by a corporate world-
> system that is able to shift resources to any part of the globe
> regardless of national interests. Apart from that, globalization is
> destroying the nation-state.
Globalisation has already more or less destroyed the nation state. I
argued on my last post that we might as well dispense with the
charade of parliamentary democracy since it is evident that our
politicians are bought and sold by moneyed interests.
Why not move towards global democracy by giving every man and woman a
shareholding in the top 100 global corporations? That would be far
more democratic than the current situation.
> Media
> Media only ceased to function their role as social informers. Ever
> since their integration with market force and their starting
> functioning as an industry, their role got just reversed: now as the
> social misinformers, dis-informers and as the hiders and
> manipulators of truth and realities. And it is in the manipulation
> of truth and realities where the making of profit–money– lies. And
> an industry is all about making profit.
This is also largely true. But how would you characterise, for
example your own and my actions in contributing content to media. I
regularly “blog” the Guardian (UK newspaper) news website and in
doing so am certain that my views are acknowledged by some powerful
“movers and shakers”. Why does the Guardian allow me to do this? I am
genuinely curious! Perhaps I am thus “part of the problem”?
> Today, individual media people are as helpless and as innocent as
> the people at large. They can only play to the sway of the ongoing
> trends meticulously being played by the global players and thus
> remain in business, or they can go out of business and jeopardize
> their carrier by being independents and by doing justice to truth,
> realities and to their conscience.
You do notice a big difference between the views expressed by paid
Guardian columnists and those expressed by the unpaid independents
such as myself. I am aware that if I were to become a professional
journalist I would probably have to temper the expression of some of
my more “extreme” opinions.
> The World on the Run
> Exploitation of man by man has been the hallmark of human
> civilization from immemorial. But it had never reached the suicidal
> level until the mode of exploitation changed from being physical to
> spiritual in modern history.
Yes, and yet the growing interest in “spirituality” in the west is
perhaps a reaction against this. Even a year ago, respectable liberal
opinion in this country was skewed in favour of atheism and hostile
to all forms of religion. Yet, it became quickly obvious how
dependent these people were on a metaphysical faith-based position
themselves and some of their most important self-appointed spokesmen
– like Richard Dawkins – have fallen out of favour.
> What is wrong in theory cannot be right in practice. Science is
> basically wrong, be it in minute fraction, mathematically. Modern
> society is a giant machine exclusively built by modern science and
> market and it is with loopholes and cracks at every branch and sub
> branch. And a small leak- let alone many big leaks — is enough to
> sink a giant ship.
Gödel explained this in 1934, but only mathematicians were able to
understand him. But recently Stephen Hawking has acknowledged that a
“theory of everything” will never be possible. Perhaps there is a
dawning realisation that the position you articulate here is
basically correct.
> What America did to planet earth in terms of pollution generation
> in the last 50 years, India and China are doing to it in five years
> today. The question is whether the planet will tolerate
> more `Americas’—the ongoing frenzied modernization drive in the rest
> world– particularly at a line when it is surrounded by not much
> natural recycling zones, as buffer zones, to compensate any further
> mechanization – throttling of nature. As modernization picks up for
> the whole planet in one go with the ongoing globalization and
> liberalization going on a frenzied pitch and as SOS signals seem
> emanating from here and there, I think the human society in all
> poised for the impending Big Crunch.
It seems very likely that you will be proved correct here. But
perhaps there are chinks of light. What happens when the oil really
does run out? It can’t be more than a decade away before the oil that
has been lubricating consumer capitalism since its inception becomes
impossible to afford. Then we will have to change.
We have the possibility of beginning to articulate how that change
could happen before it is upon us. The Internet and other recent
achievements may hold the key here.
Just imagine how responsive 6 billion people connected to the
Internet, with their survival interests and those of their children
fundamentally linked to a market-based system, could be to every
nuance in the changing environment.
If only we could all be made to somehow understand that the external
enemy is no longer “communism” or “militant Islam” but the
depredation of the global habitat!
> For a while, scientists, mathematicians, engineers and doctors, by
> controlling nature, baffled mankind through their stunning
> achievements, discoveries and technologies. Now it is the turn of
> nature to show its `marvels’ and super stunning `techniques’, too.
> The question is whether any scientists, engineers and doctors –and
> their sponsors– let alone any ordinary human being, will be left
> behind in the ensuing melee to witness the great nature’s show.
I have some faith in human rationality left. I do believe that we may
be able to firmly implant in people’s minds the fact that the
interests of nature and their own are inextricably linked. That has
to be what we are all working towards, with all of this doomsday
prophesying.
> The Progression of Ignorance: Saving Man is Impossible
> The greatest dilemma of the time is that we can destroy the human
> society without its knowledge and consent, whereas it is impossible
> to save man with his knowledge and consent because, in this age of
> all sorts of massive exploitation of man by man, all sorts of
> false `prophets’—phony saviors and fake problem solvers who always
> win with false promises and sure betrayals, have thus immunized the
> whole society against all genuine attempt in helping mankind or
> saving them. Further, the cognition capacity of modern man to
> understand wholesome truth is fast getting reduced today as the
> machine-like species has only the higher compartmentalized and
> specialized mindset. Modern man is expert in being micro right even
> as he remains macro wrong which is far beyond his micro vision to
> recognize.
You are correct: this is a major problem.
I think you mean “holistic”, not “wholesome”.
Holistic thinking is possible, of that I am sure. Whether, in the
current situation, a holistic thinker will be able to survive long
enough to make a difference is a moot point…
> Despite being bluntly exploitive the mechanized part of the planet
> earth and the mechanized part for the artificial of the human
> society used to be well taken care of by the larger non-mechanized
> part (natural part) of the planet earth and human society since the
> last 200 years. The exploitation (by the highly mechanized world
> still continues with more force and speed, but what is not happening
> is the `taking care of’. For the fast globalization that is taking
> place at a frenzied pitch since the last two decades has not left
> any part of the planet earth natural or non-mechanized. Now, in
> order to be taken care of by nature, we urgently need to immigrate
> to some non-mechanized part of the world which seem to be only
> outside the planet earth, like the moon or the planet Venus.
Yes.
> “The survival of the human race depends on its ability to find new
> homes elsewhere in the universe because there’s an increasing risk
> that a disaster will destroy the Earth, and that humans should have
> a permanent base on the moon in 20 years and a colony on Mars in the
> next 40 years.”, said Stephen Hawking, the greatest scientist of our
> time and the author of the global best seller A Brief History of
> Time. One of the best-known theoretical physicists of his
> generation, Hawking, who was on a lecture tour in Hong Kong, was
> speaking to the press on June05, 2006, according to an Associated
> Press report. He has done groundbreaking research on black holes and
> the origins of the universe, proposing that space and time have no
> beginning and no end. “We won’t find anywhere as nice as Earth
> unless we go to another star system and start settlement in another
> planet” Hawking added.
We have recently had this discussion. I don’t think anyone doubts
that if we were to survive long enough we would eventually develop
the capacity to colonise space. Whether current efforts to colonise
space will result in any increase in survivability remains highly
doubtful
> Earlier, 1,300 leading scientists from 95 countries who published a
> detailed assessment of the state of the world at the start of the
> new millennium had concluded:
>
> “Earth’s life support system is disintegrating; the modern society
> is literally undoing the work of organic evolution; the institutions
> we have created are destroying the livability of the whole world.
> Planet Earth stands on the cusp of disaster and people should no
> longer take it for granted that their children and grandchildren
> will survive in the environmentally degraded world of the 21st
> century.”
Can you provide a citation here? I have no doubt but that you are
right, but it would be useful to be able to reference who these
leading scientists are.
> As is evident, the above central observations are not the doom-laden
> talk of green activists. Until recently, the talk of any possible
> global collapse or big crunch was the preserve of lunatics and
> cults. In the past few years, however, an increasing number of
> intelligent and credible people have been warning that global
> collapse is a genuine possibility. And many of them are great, sober
> scientists, including Lord May, David King and Jared Diamond —
> people not usually given to exaggeration or drama.
> As for the condition of man today, his position in society seems
> much frightening. Human resource, the world discovers, has today
> become a liability, not an asset. Sometimes it feels cruel that we
> are proceeding at a breakneck speed towards more sophisticated
> automation when labour is so cheap and the unemployment situation so
> acute. Even after getting employed with much effort or luck, we are
> also seeing a disturbing trend where one can be gainfully employed
> only for a very short time. By the time one approaches the late 30’s
> one can sense the pink slip approaching. Career opportunities for
> the middle aged are restricted. The board room is getting younger by
> the day with young recruits occupying senior positions.
One of the less depressing aspects of our current times is that as
energy becomes relatively more expensive, as it undeniably will,
human labour may become more valued.
For example, in Edinburgh, where I currently live, I currently offer
a digging service. On smaller jobs, I can easily compete on equal
terms with a man with a mechanical excavator, in terms of cost,
quality and customer experience. Yet, the truism is still that
machines are putting people out of work. You would think that the
“market” would sort this out.
> The future seems bleak. To keep up with the times, one has to
> earn fast and earn the maximum while the going is good. All our
> efforts at framing a corruption-less society may well be a dream.
> Honesty and ethics are all loads on the shoulder; they have to be
> offloaded in order to progress in the “right direction”. Honesty is
> no longer the best policy; it is a millstone around the neck. It is
> no surprise to realize to fast emerging fact that man everywhere
> today has come to increasingly think that he has no future. Never in
> the history of mankind has man faced such a pathetic state of his
> society when he, along with his global leaders and even his
> religions have all come to be led by such a pathetic force called
> the market force.
Well, we can choose to not progress our careers. Obviously most
currently do not, but we may well see a movement in this direction as
the logic of “progress” continues to break down. We can but hope…
> More terrifying is the news from the human health front. A decade
> ago, Clifton Meador, MD, director of the Meharry Vanderbilt Alliance
> in Nashville, predicted that it wouldn’t be long before there wasn’t
> a single healthy person left in the United States. Now his forecast
> might have come to fruition.”I don’t know the last time I saw a
> really well person,” said Dr. Meador, “Everybody’s got
> something.” “Are we all sick?” Doctors debate “medicalization” of
> life. Human conditions previously thought of as normal now warrant
> treatment. Medical guidelines are being expanded. And genetic tests
> are turning more people into patients.
Then let us individually prepare for a non-medicalised, dignified
death. I personally am boycotting all technologically-driven health
services. I encourage others to join me. People are becoming
increasingly amenable to such reasoning.
> The Degeneration of Mankind: This is about the sudden and across-the-
> board degeneration that has set in on the species man as a whole in
> modern history, which is all set to mark the end of mankind as a
> species. Or, it is about the modern social development and as to how
> man and nature, contrary to their co-existence for millions of years
> as mutually interconnected and interdependent, have suddenly entered
> on a collision course in modern history, and embarked on its
> eventual and inevitable fallout.
I can’t believe you really are as gloomy as your writing makes out!
Otherwise you wouldn’t be motivated to do it! Being a Jeremiah is a
thankless task, but still we are driven to do it. Let’s make a pact
to also attempt to articulate what we see as a possible way out.
> The concept describing the “degeneration” of Man is inseparable from
> that of the evolution of Man. In truth, people of the modern world
> have been taught to view the history of mankind almost entirely
> upside-down. We speak of “the rise of Man” and assume “the ignorance
> of ancient peoples”, when in actual fact nothing could be more the
> contrary. From a more objective point of view, the history of
> mankind on this Earth has apparently been a progressive descent or
> degeneration; a degeneration which appears to have reached it’s
> nadir in exactly this period in which we are now living.
You could well be right. But where is such an “objective” point of
view? You’re not confusing it with your own subjective viewpoint, are
you?
If the objective viewpoint exists, then let us point to it with as
much clarity as we are able.
> Degenerating life sources: In 2020, we may well be asking
> not, “Why we didn’t go to Venus?” but “Why did we go to moon when we
> couldn’t protect earth?”
I agree. Space colonisation will never be a consolation for the
despoliation of earth. And what is to say we won’t go and make the
same mistake there, even if we do manage to make another planet
inhabitable?
> Mind and matter, man and nature are interconnected and
> interdependent. At the dawn of civilization when man was hunting and
> gathering food, nature remained almost undisturbed. During the age
> of settled agricultural life, irrigation schemes were developed and
> the face of nature was modified to a certain extent. The industrial
> revolution brought about further changes with excessive exploitation
> of natural resources and mass production. The twentieth century,
> which boasts of 90% of the scientists the world has ever produced,
> has ushered in the Nuclear Age and the Space Age.
Yes.
> Thus we see how human ideas have brought about vast changes in
> nature, to such an extent that Nature’s purifying, rejuvenating and
> replenishing capacities have been outstripped by man’s activity of
> exploitation, causing unprecedented pollution and impoverishment.
> Then there developed other types of degeneration, like moral,
> mental, intellectual, sexual degenerations. When moral degeneration
> becomes rampant in society, it causes adverse changes in the human
> body and in our environment. Moral degeneration causes the loss of
> beauty in the human personality and depletion of natural food
> resources in the external world. These adverse repercussions are
> proportionate to the extent of moral degradation.
Yes, but why don’t you articulate morality instead of its lack? If we
need leadership, why do you not at least attempt to provide it?
> War and natural calamities, epidemics of fatal diseases seem the
> only solution. Or is it? That is a question no one likes to answer,
> but the answer stares us in the face. There is no escaping it.
> As for the new doomsayers, they all point to the same collection of
> threats — climate change, resource depletion and spreading diseases
> being the most important. What makes them especially afraid is that
> many of these dangers are interrelated, with one tending to
> exacerbate the others. It is necessary to tackle them all at once if
> we are to have any chance of avoiding global collapse, they warn.
I thank you for raising all of these very important issues. I hope
that you will continue to do so, but please! try and balance negative
criticism with some ideas for a way forward.
And I would also like to suggest that it would benefit you to work
with an editor so that your writings can reach a larger audience,
which they certainly deserve.
Tommy Beavitt
Tommy Beavitt is a singer-songwriter based in the Highlands of Scotland. He has been recording and performing original material since 1989, touring throughout Europe and also in America and Australia. His songs are humorous and quirky but unafraid to venture into the darker realms of human experience. A key influence on his sparse, fluid guitar style and expressive vocal style has been Michael Hurley, doyen of the currently voguish Americana genre. Tommy has performed and recorded with some of Scotland’s finest musicians including Toby Shippey (Salsa Celtica), Conrad Ivitsky (Shooglenifty), McFall’s Chamber Orchestra, John Rae, Stevie Christie (Proclaimers) and David “Demus” Donnelly. The recent Holding Water was released on Boatshed Records and co-produced by Toby Shippey and James Locke (Chimes)
Re: [Wholism] Re: Sick Man Sick Society Sick Planet
Hello John,
I read your comments about wholistic health etc. with interest. The social
aspects of health, the health of the society, the health of the planet etc.
which you discuss, are described in terms of wholism.org as the health of
the individual’s soul, the health of the group soul, the health of the
planetry soul.
The problem with industrial/mechanistic/robotic man appears to be that he
has lost touch with his feeling nature, with his own soul and with the
greater souls of which he is a part (but now apart).
Anybody in touch with their own soul, with how they are feeling in the
moment, will have great difficulty in operating within the industrial
complex, because in order to do so they have to deny the feeling aspect of
themselves.
How is it possible to be in touch with your own soul whilst working on a
production line? Be that in a factory or in an office.
How can you be in touch with your own soul if you are destroying nature? If
you are killing others in a military situation?
To do these things you must deny and lose a part of your humanity. As one
great spiritual leader said, “What profit it a man if gain the whole world
but loses his own soul?”
Best Wishes
Tony
In pass-greens@yahoogroups.com, “emily dale” <emily_dale@h…>
wrote:
Dear M.J. John:
What a delightful surprise to hear from you, although the circumstances of the absence of your messages in my incoming e-mails is very sad. You have words that must be read by many, as they are clear, concise and thoughtful interpretations of the morass that the world is within nowadays. I hope this message reaches you in your village halfway around the earth from us. The Internet is our greatest hope for the dissemination of truth. May you be blessed by the Supreme Being for your efforts to make a change.
Best regards, Emily Dale
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/oneworldmanyopinions/message/16601
Mon Oct 17, 2005 5:43 pm #16601 of 25230
Msg List <Prev document.writeln(“<Prev“); | Next> document.writeln(“Next>“);
View Source — Use Fixed Width Font — Unwrap Lines
Obese Global Psyche
Re: [oneworldmanyopinions] Obese Global Psyche
Its new to me and yet I find it really interesting…I used to be a socialist, idealist but me currently taking up nursing by force and conscience on helping my family just deteriorates me being one…and after reading your long but worthwhile text awaken me,
telling me hey “its not all about the money”…i don’t know if you’ll understand it…we got different culture but since were both human going through what human works just makes me understand you.
I really appreciate there’s still people who heartily cares in this busy selfish society.
