Callers: John In Tennessee, Ronni In Oregon
Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome. Lark In Texas with you… on this Saturday – November 12th, 2011 – for the next hour.
Republic Broadcasting exists to bring forth real news and information… you’d be hard-pressed to find… anywhere else.
As are you, I’m Justa Numerican… concerned about the same things you’re concerned about… the separating of facts… from fiction… and the best investment value… for our time… spent together.
This is why… you too… are as reliable… a news medium – in what’s left of America – without a doubt.
And besides all else… you’re tuned to RBN… because you can handle the truth!
<|>
Our call-in number today… is 800-313-9443. Your calls are an important part of what makes this network unique…
… Since RBN is talk radio… entirely supported by producers… of first-quality products… and YOU… are a one-of-a-kind listener!
So check out that website. Republic Broadcasting [dot] o-r-g is well worth a visit!
If you’re from my neck-o-the-woods… and you’ve tuned to 1140… on your AM dial –
that’s KHFX out of Cleburne, in north central Texas, and points beyond –
we’d especially like to hear from you!
For detailed program notes of this broadcast, currently posted – or any of those previous – refer to the web address http://larkintexas.blogspot.com … and you will find the web log… for Justa Numerican.
<|>
“The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.”
Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius (A.D. 121-180)
<|>
Clouded judgment - its nexus, human failing - begins with the definitions, meanings or nuances of interpretation we are acculturated to, and then assign to the signs and symbols... within the many domains... of language.
The urge to organize, or to systematize, first by way of reason (a branch of logic) and predicated upon supposed knowledge which is too often narrowly considered or construed – whether deliberate or not; and second, the perceived desire for change – customarily something masquerading as need or necessity – causes groups to coalesce around memoranda of understanding [or agreement], which then results in compacts, covenants, or contracts to be entered into. Even though the “consensus of learned opinion” remained divided… and unchanged... from the start...
... And the people find... they have entered themselves... once again...into various forms... of contract bondage.
<|>
Question:
Where is the [famous] quote “That government is best that governs least” [originally attributed]?
Answer:
The quote can be found in Henry David Thoreau's essay entitled Civil Disobedience published in 1849. However the quote is often attributed to Thomas Jefferson, but there is no writing suggesting Jefferson actually said it.
[Edit: Indeed Jefferson did NOT coin this phrase. This motto (originally "The best government is that which governs least") was in fact that of the monthly periodical of the mid-19th century called "United States Magazine and Democratic Review," it is a most excellent read too. Archives can be found in the Cornell Library.]
<|>
Question:
Am I understanding communitarianism correctly in this debate?
The question I'm debating is- Resolved: Individuals have a moral obligation to assist people in need. I wanted to argue that if you help other people, they will help you in turn. What I understood from communitarianism is that it meant morals came from that of the community. So I want to say that if you help others, it will reinforce a community expectation to help others. Sort of like a ‘what goes around, comes around’ argument. Am I interpreting this correctly? Is there a better philosophy to use? Thank you!
Answer:
Communitarianism = Collectivism = Socialism = Totalitarianism = Scientific Dictatorship = Contract Bondage = Parasitism = Slavery = Gangsterism = Systemic Organized Crime = Racketeering = Freeloading = Human Trafficking = Obscurantism
Communism (Monopoly State Capitalism) + Syndicalism (From "progressivism", a systemization of "worker" trade unions and "professional" or "white collar" trade associations woven into "binding contracts" amidst interlocking corporate directorships) + Corporatism (Fascism) = Communitarianism
Communism + Capitalism = Communitarianism = Full Spectrum Dominance = Total Information Awareness = Technocracy
Communitarianism = Dictatorship of "the Community"
Darwinism (the process of natural selection + Man originally evolved from "the primordial ooze", then from the "lower" [animals] monkeys and apes [of which some are more "fit" to make decisions for the perceived or alleged "unfit" = less-than-moral/ethical justification for immoral/unethical behaviors [like slavery, slow poisonings, or mass murder] + Malthusianism (too many people causes destabilization and stress upon the ecosphere, necessitating the "need" to carefully manage, even to "cull" [shorten the lives of; murder], the uninformed masses of the wider human population) + Scientism (primacy of science is the deciding factor over all other evaluations/considerations) + Futilitarianism (futility + utilitarianism; See bioethics commissar Ezekiel Emmanuel’s endorsement of the “duty to die” doctrine in Obamacare) + Mercantilism (managed global "free trade") =
Communitarianism
Communitarianism
Under this socialist system of "global communitarian governance" (New Order of the Ages; See Panopticon) the "scientific/technocratic" management of governing/controlling/ruling over interdependent nation-states is folded into territorial/regional blocs; and all individual or negative rights are systematically replaced by positive rights to perform "duties and responsibilities" in volunteer service [servitude] to society-at-large [the community].
If you want to adopt a moral philosophy that validates your argument why not consider the Golden Rule? It may seem unfashionable, but it’s never been bested.
Sources: YouTube channels “AlaskaTentLady” and “MDJarv”; Living Outside The Dialectic http://nikiraapana.blogspot.com
Stockholm Syndrome
A phenomenon in which a hostage begins to identify with and grow sympathetic to his or her captor
[After STOCKHOLM, where a hostage in a 1973 bank robbery became romantically attached to one of her captors]
In psychology, Stockholm Syndrome is a term used to describe a real paradoxical psychological phenomenon wherein hostages express empathy and have positive feelings towards their captors, sometimes to the point of defending them. These feelings are generally considered irrational in light of the danger or risk endured by the victims, who essentially mistake a lack of abuse from their captors for an act of kindness. The FBI’s Hostage Barricade Database System shows that roughly 27% of victims show evidence of Stockholm Syndrome. The Syndrome is named after the Norrmalmstorg robbery of Kreditbanken at Norrmalmstorg in Stockholm, in which bank employees were held hostage from August 23 to August 28, 1973. In this case, the victims became emotionally attached to their captors, and even defended them after they were freed from their six-day ordeal. The term "Stockholm Syndrome" was coined by the criminologist and psychiatrist Nils Bejerot, who assisted the police during the robbery, and referred to the Syndrome in a news broadcast. It was originally defined by psychiatrist Frank Ochberg to aid the management of hostage situations.
Evolutionary explanations
The Syndrome has also been explained in evolutionary terms a phenomenon sometimes referred to as "Capture-bonding".
In the view of evolutionary psychology "the mind is a set of information-processing machines that were designed by natural selection to solve adaptive problems faced by our hunter-gatherer ancestors."
One of the "adaptive problems faced by our hunter-gatherer ancestors," particularly our female ancestors, was being abducted by another band. Life in the human "environment of evolutionary adaptiveness" (EEA) is thought by researchers such as Azar Gat to be similar to that of the few remaining hunter-gatherer societies. "Deadly violence is also regularly activated in competition over women. . . . Abduction of women, rape, . . . are widespread direct causes of reproductive conflict . . ." I.e., being captured and having their dependent children killed might have been fairly common. Women who resisted capture in such situations risked being killed.
Azar Gat argues that war and abductions (capture) were typical of human pre-history. When selection is intense and persistent, adaptive traits (such as capture-bonding) become universal to the population or species. (See Selection)
Partial activation of the capture-bonding psychological trait may lie behind battered-wife syndrome, military basic training, fraternity hazing, and sex practices such as sadism/masochism or bondage/discipline.
Notable examples
•Mary McElroy was kidnapped and held for ransom in 1933 and released by her captors unharmed. When three of her four captors were apprehended and given maximum sentences (including one death sentence), McElroy defended them. According to reports, she suffered from feelings of guilt concerning the case which compromised her mental and physical health. She took her own life in 1940.
•Patty Hearst was kidnapped by the Symbionese Liberation Army in 1974. After two months in captivity, she actively took part in a robbery they were orchestrating. Her unsuccessful legal defense claimed that she suffered from Stockholm Syndrome and was coerced into aiding the SLA. She was convicted and imprisoned for her actions in the robbery, though her sentence was commuted in February 1979 by President Jimmy Carter, and she received a Presidential pardon from President Bill Clinton on January 20, 2001 (among his last official acts before leaving office).
•Jaycee Lee Dugard was abducted at age 11 by Phillip and Nancy Garrido at a school bus stop in 1991 and was imprisoned at their residence for 18 years. In August 2009, Phillip brought Nancy and Jaycee (who was living under the alias "Allissa") along with two girls that Garrido fathered with Jaycee during her captivity, to be questioned by Garrido's parole officer after he noticed some suspicious behavior. She did not reveal her identity when she was questioned alone. Instead, she told investigators she was a battered wife from Minnesota who was hiding from her abusive husband, and described Garrido as a "great person" who was "good with her kids". Dugard has since admitted to forming an emotional bond with Garrido with great guilt and regret.
Lima Syndrome
An inverse of Stockholm Syndrome called "Lima Syndrome" has been proposed, in which abductors develop sympathy for their hostages. It was named after an abduction at the Japanese Embassy in Lima, Peru in 1996, when members of a militant movement took hostage hundreds of people attending a party in the official residence of Japan's ambassador. Within a few hours, the abductors had set free most of the hostages, including the most valuable ones, due to sympathy.
In popular culture
•The popular tale Beauty and the Beast is a classic example of Stockholm syndrome.
•The term Helsinki Syndrome has been used erroneously to describe Stockholm Syndrome, popularized by the movie Die Hard. It is also used in The X-Files episode "Folie a Deux". Also, it was mistaken by BBC Top Gear's Richard Hammond while reviewing the Lamborghini Aventador in series 17.
•The English rock band Muse wrote a song named Stockholm Syndrome which appeared on their 2003 album Absolution.
•The American pop-punk band Blink-182 wrote a song named Stockholm Syndrome which appeared on their 2003 album Blink-182.
•The American indie-rock band Yo La Tengo wrote a song named Stockholm Syndrome which appeared on their 1997 album I Can Hear the Heart Beating as One.
See also
•Attachment
•Brainwashing
•Nils Bejerot
•Victimization
•Victimization Symptoms
References
1.^ de Fabrique, Nathalie; Romano, Stephen J.; Vecchi, Gregory M.; van Hasselt, Vincent B. (July 2007). "Understanding Stockholm Syndrome". FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin (Law Enforcement Communication Unit) 76 (7): 10–15. ISSN 0014-5688. Retrieved 17 November 2010
2.^ "'Stockholm Syndrome': psychiatric diagnosis or urban myth?" (in London, UK.). Department of Psychiatry and Behavioural Sciences, Hampstead Campus (Royal Free and University College Medical School) 2007 November 19 PMID 18028254
3.^ G. Dwayne Fuselier, “Placing the Stockholm Syndrome in Perspective,” FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, July 1999, 22-25.
4.^ Nils Bejerot: The six day war in Stockholm New Scientist 1974, volume 61, number 886, page 486-487
5.^ Ochberg, Frank "The Ties That Bind Captive to Captor", Los Angeles Times, April 8, 2005
6.^ Evolutionary Psychology: A Primer - Leda Cosmides & John Tooby
7.^ Published in Anthropological Quarterly, 73.2 (2000), 74-88. THE HUMAN MOTIVATIONAL COMPLEX: EVOLUTIONARY THEORY AND THE CAUSES OF HUNTER-GATHERER FIGHTING Azar Gat Part II: Proximate, Subordinate, and Derivative Causes"
8.^ "The percentage of females in the lowland villages who have been abducted is significantly higher: 17% compared to 11.7% in the high
highland villages." (Napoleon Chagnon quoted at Sexual Polarization in Warrior Cultures)
9.^ "Elena Valero, a Brazilian woman, was kidnapped by Yanomamo warriors when she was eleven years old . . . . But none were so horrifying as the second [raid]: ‘They killed so many.’ . . . The man then took the baby by his feet and bashed him against the rocks . . . ." (Hardy quoted in Sexual Polarization in Warrior Cultures)
10.^ "The Shaur and Achuar Jivaros, once deadly enemies . . . . A significant goal of these wars was geared toward the annihilation of the enemy tribe, including women and children. . . . . There were however, many instances where the women and children were taken as prisoners . . . . A woman who fights, or a woman who refuses to accompany the victorious war-party to their homes and serve a new master, exposes herself to the risk of suffering the same fate as her men-folk." (Up de Graff also in Sexual Polarization in Warrior Cultures)
11.^ Published in Anthropological Quarterly, 73.2 (2000), 74-88. THE HUMAN MOTIVATIONAL COMPLEX: EVOLUTIONARY THEORY AND THE CAUSES OF HUNTER-GATHERER FIGHTING Azar Gat Part II: Proximate, Subordinate, and Derivative Causes"
12.^ Being captured by neighbouring tribes was a relatively common event for women in human history, if anything like the recent history of the few remaining primitive tribes. In some of those tribes (Yanomamo, for instance) practically everyone in the tribe is descended from a captive within the last three generations. Perhaps as high as one in ten of females were abducted and incorporated into the tribe that captured them. Once you understand the evolutionary origin of this trait and its critical nature in genetic survival and reproduction in the ancestral human environment, related mysterious human psychological traits fall into place. Battered-wife syndrome is an example of activating the capture-bonding psychological mechanism, as are military basic training, fraternity bonding by hazing, and sex practices such as sadism/masochism or bondage/discipline. Evolutionary Psychology, Memes and the Origin of War, H. Keith Henson, Mankind Quarterly, Volume XLVI Number 4, Summer 2006.
13.^ Traumatic entrapment, appeasement and complex post-traumatic stress disorder: evolutionary perspectives of hostage reactions, domestic abuse and the Stockholm Syndrome.
14.^ Human Chemistry (Volume Two)
15.^ Psychology Behind Ragging © Harsh Agarwal, 2010
16.^ Allen, Nick (November 5, 2009). "Jaycee Lee Dugard showed signs of Stockholm Syndrome". The Daily Telegraph (London). Retrieved May 24, 2010
17.^ PTSD. Springer Science+Business Media. 2006. ISBN 4431295666.
18.^ "Africa Politics". International Press Service. July 10, 1996. Retrieved 2009-05-08
19.^ "Memorable quotes for Die Hard (1988)". Internet Movie Database
• This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: de Fabrique, Nathalie; Romano, Stephen J.; Vecchi, Gregory M.; van Hasselt, Vincent B. (July 2007). "Understanding Stockholm Syndrome". FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin (Law Enforcement Communication Unit) 76 (7): 10–15. ISSN 0014-5688. Retrieved 17 November 2010
External links
•'Understanding Stockholm Syndrome' (pdf, page 10), Federal
Bureau of Investigation (FBI)
•Love and Stockholm Syndrome: The Mystery of Loving an Abuser Psychologist Dr. Joseph Carver, writing at CounsellingResource.com
•Nils Bejerot's article about the events at Norrmalmstorg
•"Unbewußte Liebesbeziehung zum Folterer?" Kritik und Alternativen zu einer "Psychodynamik der traumatischen Reaktion", von Freihart Regner (German)
•Why do kidnap victims sometimes fail to escape, even when they have a chance to run? at everydaypsychology.com
•The Relationship Between Stockholm Syndrome and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder in Battered Women
•A Brief History of Stockholm Syndrome from Time.com
•Stockholm Syndrome Prime Health Channel
<|>
Knowledge
The state or fact of knowing
Familiarity, awareness, or understanding gained through experience or study.
The sum or range of what has been perceived, discovered, or learned.
Learning; erudition: teachers of great knowledge
Specific information about something
Carnal knowledge
[Middle English knoulech: knouen, to know; see know + -leche, n. suff]
Knowledge is a familiarity with someone or something, which can include information, facts, descriptions, and/or skills acquired through experience or education. It can refer to the theoretical or practical understanding of a subject. It can be implicit (as with practical skill or expertise) or explicit (as with the theoretical understanding of a subject); and it can be more or less formal or systematic. In philosophy, the study of knowledge is called epistemology, and the philosopher Plato famously defined knowledge as "justified true belief." There is however no single agreed upon definition of knowledge, and there are numerous theories to explain it.
Knowledge acquisition involves complex cognitive processes: perception, learning, communication, association and reasoning; while knowledge is also said to be related to the capacity of acknowledgment in human beings
Theories of knowledge
See also: Epistemology
“The eventual demarcation of philosophy from science was made possible by the notion that philosophy's core was "theory of knowledge," a theory distinct from the sciences because it was their foundation… Without this idea of a "theory of knowledge," it is hard to imagine what "philosophy" could have been in the age of modern science.”
— Richard Rorty, Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature
The definition of knowledge is a matter of on-going debate among philosophers in the field of epistemology. The classical definition, described but not ultimately endorsed by Plato,[3] specifies that a statement must meet three criteria in order to be considered knowledge: it must be justified, true, and believed. Some claim that these conditions are not sufficient, as Gettier case examples allegedly demonstrate. There are a
number of alternatives proposed, including Robert Nozick's arguments for a requirement that knowledge 'tracks the truth' and Simon Blackburn's additional requirement that we do not want to say that those who meet any of these conditions 'through a defect, flaw, or failure' have knowledge. Richard Kirkham suggests that our definition of knowledge requires that the evidence for the belief necessitates its truth. [4]
In contrast to this approach, Wittgenstein observed, following Moore's paradox, that one can say "He believes it, but it isn't so", but not "He knows it, but it isn't so". [5] He goes on to argue that these do not correspond to distinct mental states, but rather to distinct ways of talking about conviction. What is different here is not the mental state of the speaker, but the activity in which they are engaged. For example, on this account, to know that the kettle is boiling is not to be in a particular state of mind, but to perform a particular task with the statement that the kettle is boiling. Wittgenstein sought to bypass the difficulty of definition by looking to the way "knowledge" is used in natural languages. He saw knowledge as a case of a family resemblance. Following this idea, "knowledge" has been reconstructed as a cluster concept that points out relevant features but that is not adequately captured by any definition. [6]
Communicating knowledge
Symbolic representations can be used to indicate meaning and can be thought of as a dynamic process. Hence the transfer of the symbolic representation can be viewed as one ascription process whereby knowledge can be transferred. Other forms of communication include observation and imitation, verbal exchange, and audio and video recordings. Philosophers of language and semioticians construct and analyze theories of knowledge transfer or communication.
While many would agree that one of the most universal and significant tools for the transfer of knowledge is writing (of many kinds), argument over the usefulness of the written word exists however, with some scholars skeptical of its impact on societies. In his collection of essays Technopoly Neil Postman demonstrates the argument against the use of writing through an excerpt from Plato's work Phaedrus (Postman, Neil (1992) Technopoly, Vintage, New York, pp 73). In this excerpt the scholar Socrates recounts the story of Thamus, the Egyptian king and Theuth the inventor of the written word. In this story, Theuth presents his new invention "writing" to King Thamus, telling Thamus that his new invention "will improve both the wisdom and memory of the Egyptians" (Postman, Neil (1992) Technopoly, Vintage, New York, pp 74). King Thamus is skeptical of this new invention and rejects it as a tool of recollection rather than retained knowledge. He argues that the written word will infect the Egyptian people with fake knowledge as they will be able to attain facts and stories from an external source and will no longer be forced to mentally retain large quantities of knowledge themselves (Postman, Neil (1992) Technopoly, Vintage, New York, pp 74).
Andrew Robinson also highlights, in his work The Origins of Writing, the possibility for writing to be used to spread false information and therefore the ability of the written word to decrease social knowledge (Robinson, Andrew (2003) The Origins of Writing in Crowley and Heyer (eds) Communication in History: Technology, Culture, Society, Boston pp 34). People are often internalizing new information which they perceive to be knowledge but in reality fill their minds with false knowledge.
The above points are moot in the modern world. Verbal communication lends itself to the spread of falsehoods much more so than written, as there is no record of exactly what was said or who originally said it (usually neither the source nor the content can be verified). Gossip and rumors are common examples. As to value of writing, the extent of human knowledge is now so great that it is only possible to record it and to communicate it through writing. Major libraries today can have millions of books of knowledge (in addition to works of fiction). It is only recently that audio and video technology for recording knowledge have become available and the use of these still requires replay equipment and electricity. Verbal teaching and handing down of knowledge is limited to those few who would have contact with the transmitter person - far too limited for today's world. Writing is still the most available and most universal of all forms of recording and transmitting knowledge. It stands unchallenged as mankind's primary technology of knowledge transfer down through the ages and to all cultures and languages of the world.
Situated knowledge
Situated knowledge is knowledge specific to a particular situation. [7]
Some methods of generating knowledge, such as trial and error, or learning from experience, tend to create highly situational knowledge. One of the main attributes of the scientific method is that the theories it generates are much less situational than knowledge gained by other methods.[citation needed] Situational knowledge is often embedded in language, culture, or traditions.
Knowledge generated through experience is called knowledge "a posteriori", meaning afterwards. The pure existence of a term like "a posteriori" means this also has a counterpart. In this case that is knowledge "a priori", meaning before. The knowledge prior to any experience means that there are certain "assumptions" that one takes for granted. For example if you are being told about a chair it is clear to you that the chair is in space, that it is 3D. This knowledge is not knowledge that one can "forget", even someone suffering from amnesia experiences the world in 3D. See also: a priori and a posteriori.
Partial knowledge
One discipline of epistemology focuses on partial knowledge. In most realistic cases, it is not possible to have an exhaustive understanding of an information domain, so then we have to live with the fact that our knowledge is always not complete, that is, partial. Most real problems have to be solved by taking advantage of a partial understanding of the problem context and problem data. That is very different from the typical simple math problems one might solve at school, where all data is given and one has a perfect understanding of formulas necessary to solve them.
This idea is also present in the concept of bounded rationality which assumes that in real life situations people often have a limited amount of information and make decisions accordingly.
Scientific knowledge
The development of the scientific method has made a significant contribution to our understanding of knowledge. To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry must be based on gathering observable, empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning.[8] The scientific method consists of the collection of data through observation and experimentation, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses.[9] Science, and the nature of scientific knowledge have also become the subject of Philosophy. As science itself has developed, knowledge has developed a broader usage which has been developing within biology/psychology—discussed elsewhere as meta-epistemology, or genetic epistemology, and to some extent related to "theory of cognitive development".
Sir Francis Bacon, "Knowledge is Power"
Note that "epistemology" is the study of knowledge and how it is acquired. Science is “the process used every day to logically complete thoughts through inference of facts determined by calculated experiments." Sir Francis Bacon, critical in the historical development of the scientific method, his works established and popularized an inductive methodology for scientific inquiry. His famous aphorism, "knowledge is power", is found in the Meditations Sacrae (1597). [10]
Until recent times, at least in the Western tradition, it was simply taken for granted that knowledge was something possessed only by humans — and probably adult humans at that. Sometimes the notion might stretch to (ii) Society-as-such, as in (e.g.) "the knowledge possessed by the Coptic culture" (as opposed to its individual members), but that was not assured either. Nor was it usual to consider unconscious knowledge in any
systematic way until this approach was popularized by Freud. [11]
Other biological domains where "knowledge" might be said to reside, include: (iii) the immune system, and (iv) in the DNA of the genetic code. See the list of four "epistemological domains": Popper, (1975);[12] and Traill (2008:[13] Table S, page 31)—also references by both to Niels Jerne.
Such considerations seem to call for a separate definition of "knowledge" to cover the biological systems. For biologists, knowledge must be usefully available to the system, though that system need not be conscious. Thus the criteria seem to be:
The system should apparently be dynamic and self-organizing (unlike a mere book on its own).
The knowledge must constitute some sort of representation of "the outside world", [14] or ways of dealing with it (directly or indirectly).
There must be some way for the system to access this information quickly enough for it to be useful.
Scientific knowledge may not involve a claim to certainty, maintaining skepticism means that a scientist will never be absolutely certain when they are correct and when they are not. It is thus an irony of proper scientific method that one must doubt even when correct, in the hopes that this practice will lead to greater convergence on the truth in general. [15]
Religious meaning of knowledge
In many expressions of Christianity, such as Catholicism and Anglicanism, knowledge is one of the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit. [16]
The Old Testament's tree of the knowledge of good and evil contained the knowledge that separated Man from God: "And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil…" (Genesis 3:22)
In Gnosticism divine knowledge or gnosis is hoped to be attained and escape from the demiurge's physical world. And in Thelema knowledge and conversation with one's Holy Guardian Angel is the purpose of life, which is similar to Gnosis or enlightenment in other mystery religions.
Hindu Scriptures present two kinds of knowledge, Paroksha Gnyana and Prataksha Gnyana. Paroksha Gnyana (also spelled Paroksha-Jnana) is secondhand knowledge: knowledge obtained from books, hearsay, etc. Prataksha Gnyana (also spelled Prataksha-Jnana) is the knowledge borne of direct experience, i.e., knowledge that one discovers for oneself. [17]
In Islam, knowledge (Arabic: علم, ʿilm) is given great significance. "The Knowing" (al-ʿAlīm) is one of the 99 names reflecting distinct attributes of God. The Qur'an asserts that knowledge comes from God (2:239) and various hadith encourage the acquisition of knowledge. Muhammad is reported to have said "Seek knowledge from the cradle to the grave" and "Verily the men of knowledge are the inheritors of the prophets". Islamic scholars, theologians and jurists are often given the title alim, meaning "knowledgable".
In Jewish tradition, knowledge (Hebrew: דעת da'ath) is considered one of the most valuable traits a person can acquire. Observant Jews recite three times a day in the Amidah "Favor us with knowledge, understanding and discretion that come from you. Exalted are you, Existent-One, the gracious giver of knowledge." The Tanakh states, "A wise man gains power, and a man of knowledge maintains power", and "knowledge is chosen above gold".
See also
Analytic-synthetic distinction
Descriptive knowledge
Epistemic logic
Explicit knowledge
Figurative system of human knowledge
Intelligence
Intuition as an unconscious form of knowledge
Knowledge discovery
Knowledge engineering
Knowledge relativity
Knowledge retrieval
Learning
Metaknowledge
Philosophical skepticism
Procedural knowledge
Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge
Tacit knowledge
Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities
Wisdom
References
^ Stanley Cavell, "Knowing and Acknowledging," Must We Mean What We Say? (Cambridge University Press, 2002), 238–266.
^ In Plato's Theaetetus, Socrates and Theaetetus discuss three definitions of knowledge: knowledge as nothing but perception, knowledge as true judgment, and, finally, knowledge as a true judgment with an account. Each of these definitions is shown to be unsatisfactory.
^ Ludwig Wittgenstein, On Certainty, remark 42
^ Gottschalk-Mazouz, N. (2008): „Internet and the flow of knowledge“, in: Hrachovec, H.; Pichler, A. (Hg.): Philosophy of the Information Society. Proceedings of the 30. International Ludwig Wittgenstein Symposium Kirchberg am Wechsel, Austria 2007. Volume 2, Frankfurt, Paris, Lancaster, New Brunswik: Ontos, S. 215–232. http://www.uni-stuttgart.de/philo/
fileadmin/doc/pdf/gottschalk/ngm-internetflow-2008.pdf
^ Haraway, Donna 1998. Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective.
^ "[4] Rules for the study of natural philosophy", Newton 1999, pp. 794–6, from the General Scholium, which follows Book 3, The System of the World.
^ scientific method, Merriam-Webster Dictionary.
^ "Sir Francis Bacon - Quotationspage.com". Retrieved 2009-07-08
^ There is quite a good case for this exclusive specialization used by philosophers, in that it allows for in-depth study of logic-procedures and other abstractions which are not found elsewhere. However this may lead to problems whenever the topic spills over into those excluded domains—e.g. when Kant (following Newton) dismissed Space and Time as axiomatically "transcendental" and "a priori" — a claim later disproved by Piaget's clinical studies. It also seems likely that the vexed problem of "infinite regress" can be largely (but not completely) solved by proper attention to how unconscious concepts are actually developed, both during infantile learning and as inherited "pseudo-transcendentals" inherited from the trial-and-error of previous generations. See also "Tacit knowledge".
Piaget, J., and B.Inhelder (1927 / 1969). The child's conception of time. Routledge & Kegan Paul: London.
Piaget, J., and B.Inhelder (1948 / 1956). The child's conception of space. Routledge & Kegan Paul: London.
^ Popper, K.R. (1975). "The rationality of scientific revolutions"; in Rom Harré (ed.), Problems of Scientific Revolution: Scientific Progress and Obstacles to Progress in the Sciences. Clarendon Press: Oxford.
^ This "outside world" could include other subsystems within the same organism—e.g. different "mental levels" corresponding to different Piagetian stages. See Theory of cognitive development.
^ "Part Three, No. 1831". Catechism of the Catholic Church. Retrieved 2007-04-20
^ Swami Krishnananda. "Chapter 7". The Philosophy of the Panchadasi. The Divine Life Society. Retrieved 2008-07-05
<|>
Epistemology
The branch of philosophy that studies the nature of knowledge, its presuppositions and foundations, and its extent and validity
The branch of philosophy concerned with the theory of knowledge. One of the oldest of philosophical debates concerns the origin of human knowledge. Empiricists traditionally maintain that all knowledge is ultimately derived from sensory experience. According to John Locke the mind at birth is a blank sheet, or tabula rasa: 'how then comes it to be furnished with that vast store which the busy and boundless fancy of man has painted on it? To this I answer in one word, from experience' (Essay Concerning Human Understanding, 1690). Rationalist philosophers such as René Descartes, by contrast, insist on the doctrine of innate ideas — that the mind is furnished from birth with certain fundamental concepts which enable it to arrive at knowledge a priori, independently of the senses (see innate
ideas). The question of whether human knowledge can transcend the senses, and of whether, and in what sense, a priori knowledge is possible, is one of the major themes of the philosophy of Immanuel Kant (see Kant's philosophy of mind).
A central epistemological issue that goes right back to Plato is the question of what is the difference between knowledge and mere belief. In what sense does the person who has knowledge differ from one who has a belief that may happen to be true? Much recent work in epistemology has been concerned with answering this question by analysing the concept of knowledge, and attempting to formulate a precise set of necessary and sufficient conditions for the truth of statements such as S knows that P. (See essence; knowledge.)
(Published 1987, Oxford Companion to the Mind)
— John G. Cottingham
Epistemology (Greek epistēmē), meaning "knowledge, science", and (Greek logos), meaning "study of", is the branch of philosophy concerned with the nature and scope (limitations) of knowledge. It addresses the questions:
What is knowledge?
How is knowledge acquired?
How do we know what we know?
Much of the debate in this field has focused on analyzing the nature of knowledge and how it relates to connected notions such as truth, belief, and justification. It also deals with the means of production of knowledge, as well as skepticism about different knowledge claims.
The term was introduced by the Scottish philosopher James Frederick Ferrier (1808–1864).
In physics, the concept of epistemology is vital in the modern interpretation of quantum mechanics, and is used by many authors to analyse the works of dominant physicists such as Werner Heisenberg, Niels Bohr, Max Born and Wolfgang Pauli.
<|>
Reason
The basis or motive for an action, decision, or conviction (See Usage Note at because, why)
A declaration made to explain or justify action, decision, or conviction: inquired about her reason for leaving
An underlying fact or cause that provides logical sense for a premise or occurrence: There is reason to believe that the accused did not commit this crime.
The capacity for logical, rational, and analytic thought; intelligence
Good judgment; sound sense.
A normal mental state; sanity: He has lost his reason.
Logic. A premise, usually the minor premise, of an argument
To use the faculty of reason; think logically
To talk or argue logically and persuasively
Obsolete. To engage in conversation or discussion
To determine or conclude by logical thinking: reasoned out a solution to the problem.
To persuade or dissuade (someone) with reasons
Idioms:
by reason of
because of
in reason
in reason
With good sense or justification; reasonably
within reason
Within the bounds of good sense or practicality
with reason
with reason
With good cause; justifiably
[Middle English, from Old French raison, from Latin ratiō, ratiōn-, from ratus, past participle of rērī, to consider, think.]
For many in the sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries, reason was understood as "right reason." It was a human faculty, divinely founded, that uncovered the world by revealing it, because it was part of the world. Reason was an ontological property of a divinely ordered cosmos, an innate virtue that directed right behavior and served as the source for civil and social law and order. It was not an introspective activity separate from, and thus searching for, certain laws and principles about the world. This it was to become over the next two centuries as epistemology became separated from ontology, as knowing became separated from the world to be known. During this process, the history of the idea of reason became the history of a search for certainty and authority about the natural and, increasingly, also the cultural world. From being a human faculty that was ontologically part of God's world, reason was reconceptualized as a methodology that was epistemologically apart from the world.
An integral feature of this methodological transformation was widespread skepticism about the power of reason, even as reason began to serve, in one fashion or another, as the foundation for authoritative knowledge about the world. Recognizing reason's limits while searching for certainty furthered the secularizing process Europe underwent during these centuries. In the realms of religion, philosophy, and science, the power and limits of reason were constantly discussed and debated.
Reason and Skepticism
Perhaps the most famous opponent of reason at the beginning of the early modern period was the instigator of the Protestant Reformation, Martin Luther (1483–1546). A mighty haranguer, Luther often referred to reason as a "harlot" and spoke of Aristotle's works as either a scourge of God let loose upon humankind, as punishment for its sins, or as the cunning ploy of the devil, meant to confound humans and steer them away from Scripture. Bombast aside, Luther built upon a tradition of thought that had been developing since the late Middle Ages, and which was most popularly identified with the English Franciscan thinker William of Ockham (c. 1285–1347/1349), who separated reason and faith according to the respective realms to which they applied, the earthly and the heavenly. Luther, and after him the French reformer John Calvin (1509–1564), sought to highlight the inadequacy of natural reason to comprehend God, especially God's actions. God was inaccessible by reason, and those who sought to reason their way to him would fail. All natural reason could do was to recognize God's omniscience and omnipotence. While it would always stop short of understanding God, Luther did not reject reason in all cases. Indeed, he advocated the use of reason—that is, deductive logic—as a tool to understand and evaluate the things of this world.
The separation of faith and reason, of the heavenly and the earthly, inspired various strategies for negotiating life. If Luther stressed faith, others focused more attention on this world. Skepticism about the ability of reason to attain certain knowledge characterized both approaches. At the end of the sixteenth century the French writer Michel de Montaigne (1533–1592), in a series of autobiographical essays (Essais, 1580–1588), promoted a cautious skepticism. Neither God nor the natural world could be known with certainty. With regard to each, Montaigne believed, reason teaches us humility and shows us its own limitations.
Montaigne was one of the first to see reason as a process of reasoning, and he also linked it to experience. It was still part of the given, natural world, but now both the world and reason were seen to be in flux, rather than displaying a static, divine order. Reason could not provide definitive conclusions; it could only guide us to assess our experiences and govern our natural passions. This, for Montaigne, was virtue. Montaigne sensed the psychological burden of negotiating an ontologically destabilized world. Faith provided security for some; the rest, he noted, were driven by a desire for knowledge. Yet given its nature, reason failed to offer fixed truths. Montaigne recognized that in such a world habit accustoms people to change and variety, and that routine is practically reasonable.
Reason and Methodology
The seventeenth and eighteenth centuries debated means for instrumentalizing reason and instituting it authoritatively in order to do just what Montaigne knew it could not: to discover definitive and fixed truths about the world. Such debates were primarily methodological and led to the establishment of reason as the foundation for knowledge. The important question was whether one should follow René Descartes (1596–1650) and reason to truth intuitively and deductively, or whether one should proceed inductively, as Francis Bacon (1561–1626) would have it, moving from "facts" gleaned about the natural world to general principles in order to come up with certain truths or natural laws. In either case, the world was epistemologically dualistic, with objective and subjective and external and internal realities that could only be reasoned about and known dialectically.
Descartes separated matter from mind, or what he called extension from thought, and based certainty upon the reasoning (that is, the doubting) self. Authority as rationalism was thus subjective; it moved from within to without. But even as this means of achieving certain knowledge deified reason and the power of the human mind, knowledge rested upon doubt and skepticism. Like Descartes, Bacon recommended starting out by doubting all previous knowledge, but he sought a more stable support structure than rationalism for building new truths. His goal was to connect human reason to accurate information about nature, to marry the rational and the experimental. As he opined in his essay "Of Truth," "The first creature of God, in the works of the days, was the light of the sense; the last was the light of reason." Ultimately, Bacon aimed at nothing less than the reformation of knowledge.
For Bacon, reason was not the traditional "right reason" that revealed and participated in the natural order. But neither was it fully a methodological intervention into a neutral, objective world. Bacon's reason was, rather, a construction supported by observations about the natural world, and he believed that it could help reform the relation between mind and nature, between knowing and being, and consequently improve human life. Reason, then, was becoming materialistic, becoming what mattered, so that if properly exercised, it could generate useful knowledge about nature.
The accomplishments of the seventeenth-century scientific revolution owed much to the combination of Descartes's deductive, mathematical rationalism with Bacon's inductive empiricism. The eighteenth-century Enlightenment, which popularized these accomplishments and applied their underlying premises to efforts at social and political reform, emphasized the Baconian tradition, especially as refined by John Locke (1632–1704). Locke's epistemological arguments in fact made it plausible and useful to link Cartesian and Baconian methods. In his Essay concerning Human Understanding (1690), Locke established his sensory epistemology and his famous concept of the tabula rasa, the clean slate. Humans were born empty, so to speak, and objects from the natural world impressed themselves on their senses. Subsequently, the mind reasoned about these sensory impressions and through its reasoning established the probability or certainty of propositions deduced from them. Knowledge according to Locke was built upon such sensory impressions, and there were no innate ideas. Reasoning was concerned with a limited number of things and limited to objective reality.
Even though Locke referred to reason as "natural revelation" and concluded that it should be the "last judge and guide in everything," he acknowledged its limits to a greater extent than did Descartes. By linking reason to mind and nature, Locke in effect built certainty upon reason's very limits. Even as it doubts and criticizes, reason can only work upon received sensory impressions; in doing so it also recognizes, reflexively and self-evidently, its own methodological structure and truth. Locke rescued reason from uncontainable skepticism and thus provided the impetus for the Enlightenment's methodological revolt against rationalism, a revolt waged in the name of reason.
Reason and the Enlightenment
The Enlightenment was critical in furthering the process, begun three centuries earlier, that altered the understanding of reason and, by empirically connecting it to nature, established reason as the alternative authority to both Christian revelation and speculative, metaphysical theory. The so-called Age of Reason may thus be described as a methodological revolution that, in effect, redeemed reason's authority by countering rationalism. Reason was set apart from the natural world so that it might observe and know it, and the method of knowing, in turn, was itself key in shaping the world one knew. More completely than before, Enlightenment thinkers separated the natural world, which they could observe, reason about, and know authoritatively, from the supernatural world, of which humans could have no certain knowledge. Authority, based on experience and a reason guided by the senses, was limited—or even, as some claimed, arbitrary—but it had thereby become less susceptible to skepticism.
As this new view of reason and knowledge developed, the modern sciences and social sciences began to establish themselves as sources of authority about physical, social, and even emotional reality and as means of furthering human progress. By practically combining British empiricism and French rationalism, Enlightenment thinkers sought to ascertain universal truths about human, social, political, and economic nature, cautiously expecting that they could then be used to ameliorate society. Reason would lead to truth, to natural laws that would serve as the foundation for a new political and social morality.
Used appropriately, reason was seen as an instrument of virtuous action, and it was thus linked to developing concepts of freedom and responsibility. As Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) argued in his essay Was ist Aufklärung? (1784; What is enlightenment?), the free and courageous use of reason was a sign of humanity's moral maturation. A free individual was a rational one, and in fact humans were obliged to exercise their reason in order to ensure their own freedom. The modern Western concept of rights rests upon this articulation of reason's ability to uncover natural laws. Voltaire (1694–1778) claimed in his Traité sur la tolérance (1763; Treatise on toleration) that reason builds virtue and motivates freedoms. Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712–1778) maintained that rational principles provide the only proper foundation for social and political order. Denis Diderot's (1713–1784) essay "Natural Law," written for the Encyclopédie (1755), contained perhaps the clearest statement of this position. According to Diderot, reason could uncover natural rights, and in fact humans had a moral obligation to use it to uncover such truths and then to help society conform to them.
Reason and Progress
Awaiting his death by decapitation during the French Revolution's Reign of Terror (shortly after the celebration in Paris of the Festival of Reason, 10 November 1793), Marie-Jean Caritat, the marquis de Condorcet (1743–1794) completed his multi-part Esquisse d'un tableau historique des progrès de l'esprit humain (1795; Sketch of a historical picture of the progress of the human spirit). Condorcet divided human history into ten stages, identifying the future—stage ten—as the age of the "liberated mind." In boldly reductive fashion he summed up his century's flirtation with reason as the instrument of human perfectibility and progress. Intoxicated with optimism, Condorcet imagined the future as a "heaven created by reason."
Earlier in the century, Rousseau had more soberly investigated the relationship between human reason and progress. In so doing he highlighted the complicated character of each and provided a framework for critical reflection on the emerging new concept of reason. For Rousseau, the more arts and sciences advanced, the more humans became corrupted. By corruption Rousseau meant the alienation or estrangement of humans from what characteristically makes them human. For Rousseau, what made humans human was their sociable and sentient nature, not their rationality. Reflection, Rousseau argued, was in fact antithetical to nature. It led one self-consciously to differentiate self from other, forming a false sense of identity premised upon individuality. Yet humans inherently sought improvement and perfectibility, as individuals and as a species. Thus Rousseau's argument incorporated a paradox. Rationalization led to specialization, which simultaneously marked indefinite progress and estrangement from nature.
Rousseau's criticism of reason and reflection needs to be considered in the context of the long and rich historical discussion about the power and limits of reason and its relationship to nature. As this discussion proceeded during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, it increasingly became a methodological discussion, a debate about what humans could know with any certainty, how they could best go about knowing, and ultimately, how such
knowledge could be used to improve society. Rousseau's claims attacked the very reason that, separated from the natural world, was increasingly advanced as the authoritative source of knowledge.
At the same time a related critique emerged, which opposed reason's increasingly instrumental character. Building directly or indirectly on Rousseau's assertions, thinkers from Kant to the English Romantic poet William Blake (1757–1827) sought to resurrect humanity's sense of creative freedom and moral authority against the prevalent vision of a mechanistic universe running on rationalized, causal, and deterministic laws. The Scotsman David Hume (1711–1776) had challenged the confidence in reason by ascertaining that while empiricism was indeed the only method for gaining knowledge about nature, it was custom and habit rather than reason that made this method successful. Truth was wholly experiential and thus wholly arbitrary. For Kant, empiricism was an insufficient guide to either knowledge or morality. In his Kritik der reinen Vernunft (1781; Critique of pure reason) he began to establish his sense that a priori knowledge (knowledge that precedes experience of the world) existed in humans, and that without such knowledge empiricism would in fact be impossible.
By the end of the eighteenth century, reason's future was fairly well laid out. The Enlightenment had methodologically focused seventeenth-century attempts to gain knowledge about the world. Reason replaced revelation and tradition as the primary authority. In the process, it became disembodied and disengaged from the objective world, which it could now authoritatively know. As rational doubt increasingly undermined ontological security, instrumental reason was increasingly used in an epistemological attempt to establish control over the world. And at the same time, a tradition took root that highlighted the alienating consequences of using instrumental reason to negotiate social and emotional reality and criticized the reductive linking of morality and freedom with reason.
<|>
Deductive Reasoning
Observance of an event occurring on a repeated basis that leads one to believe that a certain probability is attached to the occurrence of that event. For example, if there are a red ball and a blue ball in a bag, and each color ball is drawn one-half of the time, we come to believe that each color ball has a one-half probability of being drawn at any one time.
[From: Barron’s Insurance Dictionary]
<|>
Inductive Reasoning
Adjusting a course of action based upon a limited amount of information gathered. It is a process where one starts from a specific experience and draws inferences (generalizations) from it. For example, a salesperson, by observing a potential customer’s reaction to the sales presentation, may induce what the customer’s needs and personality are and what should be said to obtain the sale.
[From: Barron’s Business Dictionary]
<|>
Logic
The study of the principles of reasoning, especially of the structure of propositions as distinguished from their content and of method and validity in deductive reasoning
A system of reasoning: Aristotle's logic.
A mode of reasoning: By that logic, we should sell the company tomorrow.
The formal, guiding principles of a discipline, school, or science
Valid reasoning: Your paper lacks the logic to prove your thesis.
The relationship between elements and between an element and the whole in a set of objects, individuals, principles, or events: There's a certain logic to the motion of rush-hour traffic.
Computer Science
The nonarithmetic operations performed by a computer, such as sorting, comparing, and matching, that involve yes-no decisions.
Computer circuitry
Graphic representation of computer circuitry
[Middle English, from Old French logique, from Latin logica, from Greek logikē (tekhnē), (art) of reasoning, logic, feminine of logikos, of reasoning, from logos, reason]
<|>
Political Correctness
• Of, relating to, or supporting broad social, political, and educational change, especially to redress historical injustices in matters such as race, class, gender, and sexual orientation.
• Being or perceived as being over concerned with such change, often to the exclusion of other matters.
Originally used by old-guard communists to mean toeing the party line, the term "politically correct" was resurrected in the 1970s and early 1980s by rightist writers and activists, who used it in an ironic sense to mock the Left's tendency toward dogmatic adherence to "progressive" behavior and speech.
The term entered general use in the late 1980s, when neoconservatives adopted "political correctness" as a disparaging name for what they believed was rigid adherence to multicultural ideals on college campuses. Allan Bloom's The Closing of the American Mind (1987) and Dinesh D'Souza's Illiberal Education (1992) became best-sellers indicting academic political correctness. They argued that academic extremists had corrupted higher education through, among other things, affirmative action in admissions, speech codes, and the substitution in the undergraduate curriculum of recent literature by women and minorities for the classics of Western civilization. Proponents of multiculturalism defended expansion of the curriculum and greater diversity within the undergraduate student body as a means of strengthening democracy. They also argued that conservatives often distorted the views of academic liberals, invented widespread oppression from isolated incidents, and used charges of political correctness to silence their opponents.
In the 1990s the use and meaning of the term continued to expand. "Politically correct" appeared on T-shirts and sports pages and in television show names, newspaper headlines, book titles, comic strips, and ordinary conversations. "P.C." became a label attached to a wide range of liberal positions, including environmentalism, feminism, and, in particular, use of inclusive, inoffensive terminology related to various groups. Rooted in dissatisfaction with university policies and fear of cultural change, charges of political correctness became a popular way to attack liberal activists and their causes.
Quotes:
"It is silly to call fat people gravitationally challenged -- a self-righteous fetishism of language which is no more than a symptom of political frustration." - Terry Eagleton
"We have needed to define ourselves by reclaiming the words that define us. They have used language as weapons. When we open ourselves to what they say and how they say it, our narrow prejudices evaporate and we are nourished and armed." - Selma James
"Political correctness is the natural continuum from the party line. What we are seeing once again is a self-appointed group of vigilantes imposing their views on others. It is a heritage of communism, but they don't seem to see this." - Doris Lessing
"If you do not regard feminism with an uplifting sense of the gloriousness of woman's industrial destiny, or in the way, in short, that it is prescribed, by the rules of the political publicist, that you should, that will be interpreted by your opponents as an attack on woman." - Wyndham Lewis
"All forms of consensus about great books and perennial problems, once stabilized, tend to deteriorate eventually into something philistine. The real life of the mind is always at the frontiers of what is already known. Those great books don't only need custodians and transmitters. To stay alive, they also need adversaries. The most interesting ideas are heresies." - Susan Sontag
"It seems our fate to be incorrect (look where we live, for example), and in our incorrectness stand." - Alice Walker
See more famous quotes about Political Correctness
<|>
http://www.answers.com/topic/obscurantism
Obscurantism
The principles or practice of obscurants.
A policy of withholding information from the public.
Obscurantism
A style in art and literature characterized by deliberate vagueness or obliqueness.
An example or instance of this style.
Obscurantism (French: obscurantisme, from the Latin obscurans, “darkening”) is the practice of deliberately preventing the facts or the full details of some matter from becoming known. There are two, common, historical and intellectual, denotations: 1) restricting knowledge—opposition to the spread of knowledge, a policy of withholding knowledge from the public, and, 2) deliberate obscurity—an abstruse style (as in literature and art) characterized by deliberate vagueness.
The term obscurantism derives from the title of the 16th-century satire Epistolæ Obscurorum Virorum (Letters of Obscure Men), based upon the intellectual dispute between the German humanist Johann Reuchlin and Dominican monks, such as Johannes Pfefferkorn, about whether or not all Jewish books should be burned as un-Christian. Earlier, in 1509, the monk Pfefferkorn had obtained permission from Maximilian I (1486–1519), the Holy Roman Emperor, to incinerate all copies of the Talmud (Jewish law and Jewish ethics) known to be in the Holy Roman Empire; the Letters of Obscure Men satirized the Dominican monks' arguments for burning “un-Christian” works.
In the 18th century, Enlightenment philosophers used the term "obscurantism" to denote the enemies of the Enlightenment and its concept of the liberal diffusion of knowledge. Moreover, in the 19th century, in distinguishing the varieties of obscurantism found in metaphysics and theology from the “more subtle” obscurantism of Immanuel Kant's critical philosophy, and of modern philosophical skepticism, Friedrich Nietzsche said: “The essential element in the black art of obscurantism is not that it wants to darken individual understanding, but that it wants to blacken our picture of the world, and darken our idea of existence.”
Restricting knowledge
In restricting knowledge to an élite ruling class of “the few”, obscurantism is fundamentally anti-democratic, because its component anti-intellectualism and elitism exclude the people as intellectually unworthy of knowing the facts and truth about the government of their City-State. In 18th-century monarchic France, the Marquis de Condorcet, as a political scientist, documented the aristocracy’s obscurantism about the social problems that provoked the French Revolution (1789–99) that deposed them and their King, Louis XVI of France.
In the 19th century, the mathematician William Kingdon Clifford, an early proponent of Darwinism, devoted some writings to uprooting obscurantism in England, after hearing clerics — who privately agreed with him about evolution — publicly denounce evolution as un–Christian. Moreover, in the realm of organized religion, obscurantism usually is associated with religious fundamentalism, but is a distinct strain of thought independent of theologic allegiance. The distinction is that fundamentalism presupposes sincere religious belief, whereas obscurantism is based upon minority manipulation of the popular faith as political praxis, (cf. Censorship).
The obscurantist can be personally a scientist,a philosopher, a truly faithful person, a naturalist, or just agnostic, but, as one member of the society, believes that religion among the populace serves the aim of social control. To that effect, the obscurant limits the publication, extension, and dissemination of knowledge, of evidence countering the common-belief status quo with which the nation are ruled — the local variety of the necessary Noble Lie, introduced to political discourse by the Classical Greek philosopher Plato in 380 BC. Hence the “stable-status quo restriction of knowledge” denotation of obscurantism applied by pro-science reformers within religious movements, and by contemporary skeptics, such as H.L. Mencken, in critiquing religion.
Plato
The obscurant favors restricting knowledge (publication, extension, dissemination) among the populace, for the “greater good” of the nation and the City-State. Classical Greece (6–4 c. BC) provides an original and powerful source of obscurantism in The Republic (ca. 380 BC), wherein Plato proposes government via the Noble Lie — the necessary mythical justification for the status quo that guides the philosopher king in ruling society. To maintaining political stability, the Noble Lie naturally classifies people, determining their places in life and society, per the proportions of gold, silver, and iron, that each man and woman contained when formed in the earth; those meant to rule contained gold, whilst those meant to serve (soldiers, farmers, craftsmen et al.) respectively contained silver and iron.
It is noteworthy that Politeía (“City-State Governance”), i.e. "governing," not "government," is the original title of The Republic. From this philosophic source then derived Neo-Platonism, Christian mysticism, negative theology, and hermeticism, philosophies which use linguistic and logical strategies that indirectly speak about the ineffable — a concept inexpressible as thought, and only expressible as emotion. Historically, the idea that rulers and leaders know best is inherent to every form of totalitarianism. In the Skeptical Inquirer magazine (September–October 2004), the article “Obscurantism, Tyranny, and the Fallacy of Either Black or White” quotes Prof. Bergen Evans: “Obscurantism and tyranny go together.”
Leo Strauss
Political philosophy
In the 20th century, the American conservative political philosopher Leo Strauss, for whom philosophy and politics intertwined, and his Neo-conservative adherents adopted the notion of government by the enlightened few as political strategy. He noted that intellectuals, dating from Plato, confronted the dilemma of either an informed populace “interfering” with government, or if it were possible for good politicians to be truthful and still govern to maintain a stable society — hence the Noble Lie necessary in securing public acquiescence. In The City and Man (1964), he discusses the myths in The Republic that Plato proposes effective governing requires, among them, the belief that the country (land) ruled by the State belongs to it (despite some having been conquered from others), and that citizenship derives from more than the accident of birth in the City-State. Thus, in the New Yorker magazine article Selective Intelligence, Seymour Hersh observes that Strauss endorsed the “Noble Lie” concept: the myths politicians use in maintaining a cohesive society.
Prof. Shadia Drury criticized Strauss’s acceptance of dissembling and deception of the populace as “the peculiar justice of the wise”, whereas Plato proposed the Noble Lie as based upon moral good. In criticizing Natural Right and History (1953), she said that “Strauss thinks that the superiority of the ruling philosophers is an intellectual superiority and not a moral one . . . [he] is the only interpreter who gives a sinister reading to Plato, and then celebrates him.”
Esoteric texts
Leo Strauss also was criticized for proposing the notion of "esoteric" meanings to ancient texts, recondite knowledge inaccessible to the “ordinary” intellect. In Persecution and the Art of Writing (1952), he proposes that some philosophers write esoterically to avert persecution by the political or religious authorities, and, per his knowledge of Maimonides, Al Farabi, and Plato, proposed that an esoteric writing style is proper for the philosophic text. Rather than explicitly presenting his thoughts, the philosopher’s esoteric writing compels the reader to think independently of the text, and so learn. In the Phædrus, Socrates notes that writing does not reply to questions, but invites dialogue with the reader, thereby minimizing the problems of grasping the written word. Strauss noted that one of writing’s political dangers is students' too-readily accepting dangerous ideas — as in the trial of Socrates, wherein the relationship with Alcibiades was used to prosecute him.
For Leo Strauss, philosophers’ texts offered the reader lucid “exoteric” (salutary) and obscure “esoteric” (true) teachings, which are concealed to the reader of ordinary intellect; emphasizing that writers often left contradictions and other errors to encourage the reader’s more scrupulous (re-)reading of the text. In observing and maintaining the “exoteric – esoteric” dichotomy, Strauss was accused of obscurantism, and for writing esoterically.
Bill Joy
In the Wired magazine article, “Why the Future Doesn't Need Us” (April 2000), the computer scientist Bill Joy, then a Sun Microsystems chief scientist, in the sub-title proposed that: “Our most powerful twenty-first-century technologies — robotics, genetic engineering, and nanotech[nology] — are threatening to make humans an endangered species”; in the body, he posits that:
- The experiences of the atomic scientists clearly show the need to take personal responsibility, the danger that things will move too fast, and the way in which a process can take on a life of its own. We can, as they did, create insurmountable problems in almost no time flat. We must do more thinking up front if we are not to be similarly surprised and shocked by the consequences of our inventions.”
Joy’s proposal for limiting the dissemination of “certain” knowledge, in behalf of preserving society, was quickly likened to obscurantism. A year later, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, in the Science and Technology Policy Yearbook 2001, published the article “A Response to Bill Joy and the Doom-and-Gloom Technofuturists”, wherein the computer scientists John Seeley Brown and Paul Duguid countered his proposal as technological tunnel vision, and the predicted, technologically-derived problems as infeasible, for disregarding the influence of non-scientists upon such societal problems.
Deliberate obscurity
In the second sense, “obscurantism” denotes making knowledge abstrusely difficult to grasp.In the 19th and 20th centuries "obscurantism" became a polemical term for accusing an author of deliberately writing obscurely, to hide his or her intellectual vacuousness. Philosophers who are neither empiricists nor positivists often are accused of obscurantism in describing the abstract concepts of their disciplines. For philosophic reasons, these authors might modify, or reject, verifiability, falsifiability, or logical non-contradiction. From said perspective, obscure (clouded, vague, abstruse) writing does not necessarily signal that the writer has a poor grasp of the subject, because unintelligible writing sometimes is purposeful and philosophically considered.
[More...]
<|>
Utilitarianism
1.The belief that the value of a thing or an action is determined by its utility.
2. The ethical theory proposed by Jeremy Bentham and James Mill that all action should be directed toward achieving the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people.
3. The quality of being utilitarian: housing of bleak utilitarianism.
<|>
Jeremy Bentham
Bentham was a man of considerable irony and personal eccentricity. Given honorary citizenship by the new Republic of France in 1792, he scorned the French Revolution's "Declaration of the Rights of Man," commenting that all talk of rights was "nonsense" and talk of absolute rights was "nonsense on stilts."
"Nature has placed mankind under the governance of two sovereign masters, pain and pleasure. It is for them alone to point out what we ought to do, as well as to determine what we shall do. On the one hand the standard of right and wrong, on the other the chain of causes and effects, are fastened to their throne. They govern us in all we do, in all we say, in all we think..."
"He who thinks and thinks for himself, will always have a claim to thanks; it is no matter whether it be right or wrong, so as it be explicit. If it is right, it will serve as a guide to direct; if wrong, as a beacon to warn."
<|>
http://www.answers.com/topic/panopticon
"He who thinks and thinks for himself, will always have a claim to thanks; it is no matter whether it be right or wrong, so as it be explicit. If it is right, it will serve as a guide to direct; if wrong, as a beacon to warn."
<|>
http://www.answers.com/topic/panopticon
Panopticon
The Panopticon is a type of building designed by English philosopher and social theorist Jeremy Bentham in the late eighteenth century. The concept of the design is to allow an observer to observe (-opticon) all (pan-) inmates of an institution without them being able to tell whether or not they are being watched. The design comprises a circular structure with an "inspection house" at its centre, from which the managers or staff of the institution are able to watch the inmates, who are stationed around the perimeter. Bentham conceived the basic plan as being equally applicable to hospitals, schools, poorhouses, and madhouses, but he devoted most of his efforts to developing a design for a Panopticon prison, and it is his prison which is most widely understood by the term.
Bentham himself described the Panopticon as "a new mode of obtaining power of mind over mind, in a quantity hitherto without example."
"Morals reformed— health preserved — industry invigorated — instruction diffused — public burthens lightened — Economy seated, as it were, upon a rock — the gordian knot of the poor-law not cut, but untied — all by a simple idea in Architecture!"
<|>
<|>
Theory of Surveillance: The PANOPTICON
Source: Bentham, Jeremy The Panopticon Writings. Ed. Miran Bozovic (London: Verso, 1995). p. 29-95
PANOPTICON;
OR THE INSPECTION-HOUSE:
CONTAINING THE
IDEA OF A NEW PRINCIPLE OF CONSTRUCTION
APPLICABLE TO
ANY SORT OF ESTABLISHMENT, IN WHICH PERSONS OF
ANY DESCRIPTION ARE TO BE KEPT UNDER INSPECTION;
AND IN PARTICULAR TO
PENITENTIARY-HOUSES,
PRISONS, HOUSES OF INDUSTRY, WORK-HOUSES, POOR-HOUSES, LAZARETTOS, MANUFACTORIES, HOSPITALS, MAD-HOUSES, AND SCHOOLS:
WITH
A PLAN OF MANAGEMENT
ADAPTED TO THE PRINCIPLE:
IN A SERIES OF LETTERS,
WRITTEN IN THE YEAR 1787, FROM CRECHEFF IN WHITE
RUSSIA. TO A FRIEND IN ENGLAND
BY JEREMY BENTHAM,
OF LINCOLN'S INN, ESQUIRE
<|>
Room 5150
By Janet C. Phelan
Eric Shine is having a bad day. Scheduled to appear before a military tribunal in Long Beach, California on October 23, he discovered upon arrival that his paperwork provided the incorrect address for the hearing. He is now scrambling to get the correct address to the media. As well as an address change, there has been a room change, and Eric Shine's case will now be heard in Room 5150.
The implications of that room number are not lost on some of the recipients of his eleventh hour phone calls. "5150" is police code for an involuntary mental detainment. And in a bizarre twist of congruence, Eric Shine is being charged with..... “being depressed.” The 46-year-old former Merchant Marine and whistleblower is being hauled in front of a military tribunal and being charged with a state of mind, with no allegations of misconduct or negligence in his actions.
Some of the most horrific stories of human rights abuses in our modern times have come from political dissidents incarcerated in mental hospitals in Soviet Russia. The current regime in the United States of America has now adopted this method of targeting and removing "threats" to the regime. These stories are seldom, if ever, reported in the mainstream media.
The first such incarceration that came to my attention happened in the wake of Watergate, when Martha Mitchell, then the wife of U.S. Attorney General John Mitchell, was psychiatrically incarcerated in an effort to discredit her.
Eric Shine first caught the attention of the establishment while he was a midshipman at Kings Point, the Merchant Marine academy in Long Island, New York. Shine was editor of the student newspaper at the Academy, and published documents, which were harshly critical of the academy at a time when policies were under fire at that institution. Because of the ensuing scandal, the Admiral resigned. Shine went on to graduate with various honors, with an engineers license and a Naval Commission, and was serving on the SS COMET when he reported two events which were to soon enmesh him in a series of legal retaliatory moves now endangering his very freedom.
Lt. Eric Shine, a merchant marine officer and federal employee under the Merchant Marine Act of 1936, attempted to prevent a boiler explosion before it occurred on the SS COMET in 2000, and tried to prevent dumping of hazardous materials at Alameda, California from the same vessel. He then reported the violations to his immediate superior, the vessel’s Chief Engineer. Subsequently, he filed a grievance through his federal officers association. When he attempted to report the matter to the Coast Guard, he was fired for so doing.
Shine filed several lawsuits for tortuous breach of shipping articles and federal contracts, labor disputes, federal contracting violations and safety violations. Technically, Shine is a whistleblower and must be accorded the protections afforded in the Whistleblower Protection Act, shipping articles and other legislation.
The Coast Guard investigated the COMET and found that the explosion and the dumping had in fact, occurred. Coast Guard Lieutenant Chris Tribolet then instead turned the investigation against Eric Shine. Shine was investigated for misconduct and any possible infractions of law and was exonerated. When the Coast Guard could find no evidence of misconduct on the part of Shine, Tribolet then took back over the investigation and directed his efforts towards attacking Shine’s competence. In an email to Lcdr. Kristin Williams, Tribolet revealed his intent in the following statements:
“Misconduct is human behavior that violates some formal rule….While it is difficult to define how Shine may have violated 33 or 46 CFR, his interference with proper and safe navigation of the ships is undeniably an issue. We may have to look to tort or admiralty precedents but I’m quite sure that we can frame the issue to show that there was misconduct.”
The implications of that room number are not lost on some of the recipients of his eleventh hour phone calls. "5150" is police code for an involuntary mental detainment. And in a bizarre twist of congruence, Eric Shine is being charged with..... “being depressed.” The 46-year-old former Merchant Marine and whistleblower is being hauled in front of a military tribunal and being charged with a state of mind, with no allegations of misconduct or negligence in his actions.
Some of the most horrific stories of human rights abuses in our modern times have come from political dissidents incarcerated in mental hospitals in Soviet Russia. The current regime in the United States of America has now adopted this method of targeting and removing "threats" to the regime. These stories are seldom, if ever, reported in the mainstream media.
The first such incarceration that came to my attention happened in the wake of Watergate, when Martha Mitchell, then the wife of U.S. Attorney General John Mitchell, was psychiatrically incarcerated in an effort to discredit her.
Eric Shine first caught the attention of the establishment while he was a midshipman at Kings Point, the Merchant Marine academy in Long Island, New York. Shine was editor of the student newspaper at the Academy, and published documents, which were harshly critical of the academy at a time when policies were under fire at that institution. Because of the ensuing scandal, the Admiral resigned. Shine went on to graduate with various honors, with an engineers license and a Naval Commission, and was serving on the SS COMET when he reported two events which were to soon enmesh him in a series of legal retaliatory moves now endangering his very freedom.
Lt. Eric Shine, a merchant marine officer and federal employee under the Merchant Marine Act of 1936, attempted to prevent a boiler explosion before it occurred on the SS COMET in 2000, and tried to prevent dumping of hazardous materials at Alameda, California from the same vessel. He then reported the violations to his immediate superior, the vessel’s Chief Engineer. Subsequently, he filed a grievance through his federal officers association. When he attempted to report the matter to the Coast Guard, he was fired for so doing.
Shine filed several lawsuits for tortuous breach of shipping articles and federal contracts, labor disputes, federal contracting violations and safety violations. Technically, Shine is a whistleblower and must be accorded the protections afforded in the Whistleblower Protection Act, shipping articles and other legislation.
The Coast Guard investigated the COMET and found that the explosion and the dumping had in fact, occurred. Coast Guard Lieutenant Chris Tribolet then instead turned the investigation against Eric Shine. Shine was investigated for misconduct and any possible infractions of law and was exonerated. When the Coast Guard could find no evidence of misconduct on the part of Shine, Tribolet then took back over the investigation and directed his efforts towards attacking Shine’s competence. In an email to Lcdr. Kristin Williams, Tribolet revealed his intent in the following statements:
“Misconduct is human behavior that violates some formal rule….While it is difficult to define how Shine may have violated 33 or 46 CFR, his interference with proper and safe navigation of the ships is undeniably an issue. We may have to look to tort or admiralty precedents but I’m quite sure that we can frame the issue to show that there was misconduct.”
[More...]
<|>
Genuine Christianity Now
"Proclaim liberty throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof."
Leviticus 25:10
<|>
SOCIALISM
(1894)
By Robert Flint
THE first eight chapters of the following work are an enlarged and otherwise considerably altered form of a series of eight papers on Socialism contributed to Good Words in 1890-1.
The series itself originated in, and partly reproduced, a course of lectures delivered in Edinburgh a few winters previously before an audience chiefly of working men.
More than half of the work, however, is new; and has been written at intervals during the last two summers.
A book thus composed must necessarily have defects from which one written only with a view to publication in book form would have been free.
The author has been prevented by more urgent demands on his time from adding to it two chapters for which he had prepared notes, one on "Socialism and Art," and another on "Socialism and Science."
He trusts that, notwithstanding these and other defects, its publication may not be considered wholly unwarranted.
JOHNSTONS LODGE, CRAIQMILLAR PAEK,
EDINBURGH. December, 1894
Works by the same Author
HISTORICAL PHILOSOPHY IN FRANCE AND FRENCH BELGIUM AND SWITZERLAND
(1894)
VICO (Blackwood's Philosophical Classics)
(1884)
THEISM (Baird Lectures for 1876), 8th edition
(1893)
ANTI-THEISTIC THEORIES (Baird Lectures for 1877), 5th edition
(1894)
WILLIAM BLACKWOOD AND SONS
LONDON AND EDINBURGH
<|>
Syndic
One appointed to represent a corporation, university, or other organization in business transactions; a business agent.
A civil magistrate or similar government official in some European countries
[French, from Old French sindiz, from Late Latin syndicus, from Greek sundikos, public advocate: sun-, syn- + dikē, justice.]
The Syndics of the Drapers' Guild by Rembrandt, 1662
The Sampling Officials (Dutch: De Staalmeesters), also called Syndics of the Drapers' Guild, is an oil painting by Rembrandt. It is owned by the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam. It has been described as his "last great collective portrait". The painting appears on the packaging of Dutch Masters cigars.
Syndic (Late Latin: syndicus; Greek: sýndikos — one who helps in a court of justice, an advocate, representative), a term applied in certain countries to an officer of government with varying powers, and secondly to a representative or delegate of a university, institution or other corporation, entrusted with special functions or powers.
The meaning which underlies both applications is that of representative or delegate. Du Cange (Gloss, s.v. Syndicus), after defining the word as defensor, fair onus, advocatus, proceeds "Syndici maxime appellantur Actores universitatum, collegiorum, societatum et aliorum corporum, per quos, tanquam in republica quod communiter agi fierive oportet, agitur et fit," and gives several examples from the 13th century of the use of the term. The most familiar use of "syndic" in the first sense is that of the Italian sindaco, who is the head of the administration of a commune, comparable to a mayor, and a government official, elected by the residents of commune.
The president of Andorra's parliament is known as the sindic. Until the 1993 Constitution, the sindic was the effective head of government of Andorra.
Nearly all companies, guilds, and the University of Paris had representative bodies the members of which were termed syndici. Similarly in England, the Regent House of the University of Cambridge, which is the legislative body, delegates certain functions to special committees of its members, appointed from time to time by Grace (a proposal offered to the Regent House and confirmed by it); these committees are termed "syndicates" and are permanent or occasional, and the members are styled "the syndics" of the particular committee or of the institution which they administer; thus there are the syndics of the Fitzwilliam Museum, of the Cambridge University Press, of local examinations, etc.
One special use of the term applies to the Franciscan order of priests and brothers. The Order of Friars Minor (OFM), as opposed to the Order of Friars Minor Conventual (OFM Conv.) is forbidden by its constitutions from owning property, as part of its commitment to communal poverty. Various arrangements therefore exist whereby churches and houses of the order are owned by the Holy See itself, or the local diocese or, sometimes, by a "syndic," an independent layman who is the actual owner of the land but who loans it to the friars.
<|>
Syndicalism
A radical political movement that advocates bringing industry and government under the control of federations of labor unions [and trade associations/cartels] by the use of direct action, such as general strikes and sabotage
Movement advocating direct action by the working class to abolish the capitalist order, including the state, and to replace it with a social order based on the syndicat, a free association of self-governing producers. Developed as a doctrine by leaders of the French trade union movement at the end of the 19th century, syndicalism was strongly influenced by the traditional anarchism and antiparliamentarianism of the French working class. Syndicalists looked forward to victory in a class war, after which society would be organized around the syndicats. These bodies would coordinate their activities through a labour exchange, which would function as an employment and economic planning agency. At the peak of its influence, before World War I, the movement had in excess of one million members in Europe, Latin America, and the U.S. After the war, syndicalists tended to drift toward the Soviet model of communism or to be lured by the ostensible benefits offered by labour unions and democratic reforms. See also corporatism.
[From: Britannica Concise Encyclopedia]
(French, syndicat, trade union) The movement that seeks to transfer control of the means of production to associations of workers, rather than to the state. In 19th-century France the movement had connections with anarchism (making anarcho-syndicalism), since each movement shared a distrust both of private ownership of the means of production, and of the centralizing power of the state. See also Owen, Proudhon.
[From: Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy]
Syndicalism (sĭn'dĭkəlĭzəm), political and economic doctrine that advocates control of the means and processes of production by organized bodies of workers. Like anarchists, syndicalists believe that any form of state is an instrument of oppression and that the state should be abolished. Viewing the trade union as the essential unit of production, they believe that it should be the basic organizational unit of society. To achieve their aims, syndicalists advocate direct industrial action, e.g., the general strike, sabotage, slowdowns, and other means of disrupting the existing system of production. They eschew political action as both corruptive and self-defeating. The writings of Pierre Joseph Proudhon, with his attacks on property, and of Georges Sorel, who espoused violence, have influenced syndicalist doctrine. Syndicalism, like anarchism, has flourished largely in Latin countries, especially in France, where trade unionism was for years strongly influenced by syndicalist programs. Syndicalism began a steady decline after World War I as a result of competition from Communist unions, government suppression, and internal splits between the revolutionary anarcho-syndicalists and moderate reformers. In the United States the chief organization of the syndicalist type was the Industrial Workers of the World, which flourished early in the 20th cent. but was virtually extinguished after World War I.
[From: Columbia Encyclopedia]
<|>
THE LIBERTARIAN ENTERPRISE
Number 642, October 30, 2011
Robin Hood Defamed Again
By L. Neil Smith
"Socialism is only a lame attempt to make stealing appear respectable.
That's all it ever was, all it is now, and all it ever will be."
<|>
THE LIBERTARIAN ENTERPRISE
Number 640, October 9, 2011
The Air I Breathe
By L. Neil Smith
lneil@netzero.com
"What is Western Civilization? The undeniable triumph of the individual"
<|>
The League of Ordinary Gentlemen
Communitarianism and a Free-standing Theory of Justice
<|>
Darrell Bradford Smith Interviews John Kaminski
<|>
A culture of contempt: The selfishness of our lesser natures has taken over vast regions of the national soul
By The Rev. James Gertmenian | Friday, Nov. 4, 2011
<|>
Friday Talking Points -- Why Not Occupy the Media?
By Chris Weigant
<|>
Individuality and the American Dream
By Reverend David
<|>
Basic Human Nature: Can It Be Changed?
Wall Street Journal | Mind & Matter
By Matt Ridley
NOVEMBER 5, 2011
"You can't change human nature." The old cliché draws support from the persistence of human behavior in new circumstances. Shakespeare's plays reveal that no matter how much language, technology and mores have changed in the past 400 years, human nature is largely undisturbed. Macbeth's ambition, Hamlet's indecision, Iago's jealousy, Kate's feistiness and Juliet's love are all instantly understandable.
Recently, however, geneticists have surprised themselves by finding evidence of recent and rapid changes in human genomes in response to the pressures of civilization. For example, fair skin allows more absorption of the sun's ultraviolet rays necessary for the skin to make vitamin D. So when the northern Europeans, living in a climate with little sunshine, started to farm wheat, a food low in vitamin D,
they evolved fair skin to compensate and get more of the vitamin.
So human nature may also have genetically evolved a bit in 10,000 years. People of European and Asian descent in particular have probably adapted to living more sedentary and crowded lives. But surely not very much. Eurasians' general nature differs little from those whose ancestors were still scattered hunter-gatherers just a few generations ago: many Africans, Americans and Australians.
Besides, genetic changes can't explain short-term history. A glance at world trade statistics confirms that four decades of communist rule, designed to change human nature from individualistic to communitarian, failed to extinguish the habits needed for commerce from the Chinese personality.
So if there is a human nature it is likely to be mainly universal and ancient. Ten years ago, the evolutionary psychologist Robert Kurzban did an ingenious experiment to show what can change and what can't. Generally, three features dominate an American's description of another adult: age, sex and race. Dr. Kurzban found that the tendency to categorize by race could be changed more easily than the other two.
His subjects were asked to form an impression of individuals whom they watched in conversation. They then saw a sequence of sentences and had to recall who said what. Misattribution revealed a tendency to categorize: People confused men for men and women for women, old for old and young for young, black for black and white for white.
<|>
DARKMOON UPON AMERICA, BY ISRAEL SHAMIR: Response, Pictures and Captions
By Lasha Darkmoon
<|>
Poppy Represents Bankers' Drug Wars
Those poppies really celebrate the 350 years of satanic banking cartels who earn money from fostering wars and pushing drugs. They are laughing at us for celebrating our own destruction by wearing their opium badge, the red poppy.
[Editor's Note: These are the recollections of an elderly English patriot who was associated with British Intelligence.]
By T. Stokes (in London)
(henrymakow.com)
The English Civil War was fought when Oliver Cromwell was financed to attack King Charles 1st and his supporters by two Dutch Jewish moneylenders, Fernadez Carvajal an expert in military procurement, and Manasseh Ben Israel a large project moneylender.
They said they would make Cromwell a very wealthy man and after the war was over he could then install his favorite brand of Christianity, and then unsurprisingly, in 1643 all the Jews were duly allowed back into Britain after being expelled by King Edward 1st in 1290 under the 'Statutes of Jewry' law forbidding charging interests on loans.
In 1646, the history books tell us of King Charles was told to show a white goose feather at each round head stopping point to ensure his safe passage across enemy country. This white feather was used again 400 years later by Jewish women to accuse service-exempt young men, some just schoolboys, of cowardice in two world wars.
Contemporary accounts say Cromwell did not want to execute King Charles, and spent the night before it in anguish and prayer. Nevertheless Charles was executed in 1649.
In Ireland too Cromwell a puppet of the money-men, caused deep rifts in the differing Christian sects by his ruthless oppression of any dissent, ensuring no healing of these divisions could ever occur.
The Bank of England was established in 1694 by these foreign moneylenders and the East India Company. After Clive of India's victory at Plessey India in 1757, the East India Company had direct rule over India's richest province of Bengal. They tripled the local land tax causing a famine that killed 10 million people, or one third of the local population. British ships were soon distributing 2000 chests of opium from local poppies each year, and in 1793 Indian poppy growers were forbidden to sell to anyone else.
The company ensured that vast amounts of poppies were grown to export opium to China, and the East India Company grew very rich, and in 1773 Warren Hastings brought all opium production under British Bank of England monopoly, and while 17 million Chinese died from addiction, the Bank of England prospered.
1856 was the year that the East India Company funded the creation of the 'Opium Trust' now known as 'The Skull and Bones'.
HOW MUCH MONEY IS ENOUGH?
Rothschild who took over the entire British economy after the battle of Waterloo when he funded the war effort of both Britain and France. They are said to own half the world’s wealth, and were behind both the French revolution and the Russian revolution.
Sir Anthony Blunt said repeatedly when questioned by British Intel that Guy Burgess recruited both him and Lord Rothschild to the Communist cause, but this is a downright lie. In his later years, under the influence of a hospital anesthetic, he blurted out that Rothschild convinced them that when Rothschild's Russia ruled Britain, those that helped would be given positions of great power, and the rest of the country would be an economically destroyed wasteland.
Kim Philby on his arrival in Russia was horrified to find things very different from the high position he was promised, and taking to alcohol begged the British embassy for a reconciliation. Rothschild pulled strings to make sure none of the traitors ever came back and talked.
A hundred years ago England was the wealthiest and most powerful nation on earth, but the wars this past 100 years are said to be responsible for 35,654,000 deaths from conflict alone, bankrupting the country and making the banks filthy rich beyond belief.
USA TODAY revealed that US forces in Afghanistan now supply 90% of the world’s opium, this is blamed on the local Taliban, who say continually drugs and alcohol are not allowed and imbibing of either in their strict Muslim society has stiff penalties,
The people who own the banks control the government which is why instead of the banks bailing out the people, the people bail the banks, these moneymen manufacture boom and bust. They cause depressions and recessions by just holding money in bank vaults. This is always done throughout history before being released to fund a war.
It does not matter whether you vote Conservative or New Labour, Democrat or Republican the banking faces behind the scenes are always the same and Rothschild’s is the bankers bank, the name behind the scenes for the most despicable manufactured evil, massive suffering poverty and spent lives taken for the profit of the few.
Rupert Murdoch recently exposed for massive telephone tapping mail intercepts and postal vote rigging, is funded and controlled by Rothschild who is pushing for more wars on Iran, Syria, Lebanon etc. to give the entire Middle East to Israel under the 'Road map' fought of course not with their own but our soldiers.
So all these campaigns are bound to fail that want to bring home the troops fighting in these spurious government wars who protect and distribute the opium crops.
When you see this Remembrance Sunday all these old soldiers and others wearing their poppies, you should know they are really celebrating the 350 years of the satanic banking cartels. They are laughing at us for celebrating our own destruction and wearing the opium badge of the drug running bankers, the red poppy.
Shakespeare says in The Merchant of Venice; 'truth will come to light, murder cannot be hid for long' and people all over the world are beginning to ask questions. Those heroic young men in two world wars who joined up to defend queen and country to find they were really fighting for a corrupt government and its bankers are no doubt lying very angry in their graves.
Comments for "Poppy Represents Bankers' Drug Wars”
Cliff Shack said (November 8, 2011):
I suggest that Oliver Cromwell descended from Marranos that fled Spain during the Spanish Inquisition. In fact, the shores of England were a favorite destination of crypto-Jews. That is why Freemasonry began there as a way of mimicking the brotherhood intrinsic to openly practicing Jews.
Initially, The Marranos closed Freemasonry to Jews in response to rabbinic rejection of Marranos attempting to re-enter the fold. Years later, in 1666, when mainstream Judaism embraced the messiah ship of Shabbatai Tzvi the Marranos could only watch the excitement from the sidelines.
After Shabbatai Tzvi's apostasy, mainstream Judaism turned their back on yet another "redeemer." Though initially despondent at the unexpected turn of events, Shabbatai Tzvi would become the darling of Marrranos and crypto-Jews around the world, particularly in England. It is no wonder that the City of London is the epicenter of Shabbatai Tzvi's global kingdom.
As for the Rothschild's (who are likely Shabbatai Tzvi's direct male descendants) how can it be said that they own merely half the world's wealth. They and their network linked by "messianic" DNA, own the Global Central Banking system. Wealth as far as they are concern is a farce wherewith they control the rest of us!
To this day, the Jewish world remembers Shabbatai Tzvi as a grand but yet "false" messiah. The Sabbatean's are just fine with that time-worn moniker. The last thing they need is even a vague understanding of just what is going on. There is nothing more amusing to a Rothschild than the notion of Shabbatai Tzvi's failed messianic mission.
And while we're on the subject. The Holocaust, more than anything else was Sabbatean payback to the descendants of the Jewish infidels who dared turn their back on the messiahship of Shabbatai Tzvi. The Sabbatean Rothschilds and their network harnessed and manipulated the German people to settle an old score. Afterwards they re-established Israel's sovereignty as the messiah was meant to do. No one said it would be done in his lifetime. As Solomon completed David's temple so the children of Shabbatai Tzvi completed his global kingdom. The global central banking system replaced the treasury of the Temple of Solomon as the focal point of power on the global scale.
The truth is indeed stranger than fiction.
Krister said (November 7, 2011):
Anyone wanting to take a deeper look into the ugly drug affairs of banksters, and how Jewish masonry as B'nai B'rith and Jewish organizations as JDL, are active in shielding such criminality should read the 1978 book "Dope Inc.", by the LaRouche organization. The book can be downloaded here as a PDF (you have to change orientation to the right in your browser to have the same correct:
Also, there are more angry people than the dead soldiers of the two world wars. A certain murdered Russian Royal family is certainly having a large grudge towards a, now also dead, Jewish bankster.
<|>
Jacob Schiff Ordered the Murder of Czar and his Family
<|>
Facebook CEO Admits To Calling Users ‘Dumb Fucks’
Mark Zuckerberg admits in a New Yorker profile that he mocked early Facebook users for trusting him with their personal information. A youthful indiscretion, the Facebook founder says he's much more mature now, at the ripe age of 26.
"They trust me — dumb fucks," says Zuckerberg in one of the instant messages, first published by former Valleywag Nicholas Carlson at Silicon Alley Insider, and now confirmed by Zuckerberg himself in Jose Antonio Vargas's New Yorker piece. Zuckerberg now tells Vargas, "I think I've grown and learned a lot" since those instant messages.
And yet the old quote resounds precisely because Facebook continues to stir up privacy controversies at regular intervals. Zuckerberg justifies his privacy rollbacks by saying the social norms have changed in favor of transparency, but, as tech executive Anil Dash tells the New Yorker, that sort of change is much more appealing for a privileged, Ivy Leaguer golden boy of Silicon Valley like Zuckerberg than for his half a billion users, many of whom work for less tolerant bosses and socialize in more judgmental circles.
The dichotomy between Zuckerberg's philosophy and the lives of his users makes revelations about the Facebook CEO's own private life all the more interesting. It seems natural to figure that this forceful advocate for transparency is ready to test his own informational boundaries a bit.
And Zuckerberg does open up a little to the New Yorker, admitting that he's red-green colorblind, and explaining the Mandarin lessons he's been taking: They're for a scheduled vacation with girlfriend to Priscilla Chan to China. And Chan, it turns out, is finally moving in with Zuck.
Then there's Zuckerberg's defacto unfriending of Aaron Sorkin, the screenwriter behind Zuckerberg's least favorite Facebook movie The Social Network. The CEO had listed Sorkin's TV show The West Wing as a "favorite" on his Facebook profile, only to remove it under questioning from Vargas. Now Zuckerberg's re-favorited the West Wing. Curious. Apparently living under the new social norms can lead to old school regret. Even if you're Mark Zuckerberg.
<|>
Vatican Calls for New World Economic Order
Published October 24, 2011 | Associated Press
<|>
Vatican note urges world finance reform
for 'common good'
for 'common good'
<|>
tabula rasa
<|>
Nature versus Nurture Controversy
<|>
Cartome
Cartome, a companion site to Cryptome, is an archive of news and spatial / geographic documents on privacy, cryptography, dual-use technologies, national security and intelligence -- communicated by imagery systems: cartography, photography, photogrammetry, steganography, camouflage, maps, images, drawings, charts, diagrams, IMINT and their reverse-panopticon and counter-deception potential.
Cryptome
<|>
The World Perceived
A Theological and Phenomenological Approach to Thinking, Perceiving,
and Living In-The-World
and Living In-The-World
A. J. MacDonald, Jr.
All quotations from the Bible are taken from the Revised Standard Version, Catholic Edition; Catholic Biblical Association (Great Britain):
The Holy Bible: Revised Standard Version, Catholic Edition, Translated from the Original Tongues, Being the Version Set Forth A.D. 1611, Old and New Testament Revised A.D. 1881-1885 and A.D. 1901 (Apocrypha Revised A.D. 1894), Compared With the Most Ancient Authorities and Revised A.D. 1952 (Apocrypha Revised A.D. 1957)
. New York: National Council of Churches of Christ in the USA, 1997, c1994THE WORLD PERCEIVED,
A Theological and Phenomenological Approach to Thinking, Perceiving, and Living In-the-World
. Copyright ©2009 A. J. MacDonald, Jr., all rights reserved. Cover photo credit: NASA.
Table of Contents
Preface
Introduction
Chapter One: How We Think About the World
Chapter Two: The Prescientific (Biblical) and Modern Scientific Views of the World
Chapter Three: Three Examples of Conflicting Views of the World (Modern Science versus Religion)
Chapter Four: Phenomenology, the Bible, and Modern Science
Chapter Five: The Bible’s Human Perspective
Chapter Six: How the Theological/Phenomenological View of the World Should Affect Our Lives
Bibliography
Index
“One of the marks of identity and attraction on the part of a Christian philosophy today should be its sense of primary concern for the significance of being as it manifests itself in the human persons and things of our ordinary experience.”
--- James Collins, Crossroads in Philosophy
(Chicago: Henry Regnery Company, 1962; 1969) p. 313
How are we to make sense of the Bible in the context of the modern world? To the modern world, the Bible is a text that has been taken out of its context if there ever was one. However, the way in which the world appears to modern peoples today is no different from the way in which the world appeared to ancient peoples who lived during biblical times. In this book, I will be unpacking the importance of the way phenomena appear to us—the way in which the myriad phenomena of the world present themselves to our consciousness—and I will be at-tempting to illustrate how these phenomenal appearances can help us to place the Bible into its only proper context: the world itself. We will be examining the appearances of phenomena scientifically, theologically, and philosophically; most especially, philosophically, because I have chosen to examine the appearances of the world phenomenologically.
. Phenomenology is a particular philosophy that will allow us to reexamine the way in which the world appears to us. This, I believe, can help us to see the world from a new perspective which can enable us to recapture the importance of the biblical teachings and make them relevant to our everyday lives. Hopefully you will find the ideas and concepts set forth in this book easy to understand, although you may find the subject matter of a particular section to be intellectually challenging at times. I have at-tempted to write this book in such a way that anyone who is interested in the subjects of theology, philosophy, and science might enjoy a quick read, concerning what I believe to be a very interesting concept: that the way in which the world appears
to us is far more meaningful than most people think. Appearances are a funny thing, we see the world every day and yet we hardly ever take notice of it. We take the world—and the way the world appears to us—for granted, because we are so familiar with it. It’s my hope that, after having read this book, you, the reader, might begin to see the world in a new way; a way that will enable you to more fully appreciate the world around you.
It’s often said that appearances can be deceiving; in fact, modern science often tells us that the appearances of phenomena are deceiving. Many intelligent, educated, thinking people believe that modern science, long ago, disproved the biblical view of the world; but I don’t believe this. Modern science has never disproven the way in which the Bible describes the world to appear, nor has it ever disproven the way in which the world appears to us.
Modern science simply presents us with its own particular view of the world, derived from its own particular perspective of the world. I believe the modern scientific view of the world is valid, but I don’t believe it’s the only valid perspective of the world. I believe that the biblical view of the world and our own observations of the phenomenal world are equally valid. In short, I don’t think modern science has a lock on the truth. I am certain that God—the Creator of the world—does not deceive us. And I believe that God created the phenomena of the world to appear to us as they do because our Creator intends, through these phenomenal appearances, to communicate (to us) true knowledge of himself, of ourselves, of the world, and of how we should live our lives in-community with others.
When you have finished reading this book, it’s my hope that you will realize (if you haven’t already) that nothing in life—nothing—is more important than are the people with whom we share our lives. Our lives are very brief, and our lives are wasted if they are not spent helping others. Spending our lives helping others is a very simple concept, one that Christ himself taught us, and yet we can easily forget its importance. If we desire to gain our lives, we should be willing to lose them; and if we desire to be rich, we should be willing to become poor. We can be certain that the tighter our grasp on earthly things becomes, the easier they will slip through our fingers.
Modern science simply presents us with its own particular view of the world, derived from its own particular perspective of the world. I believe the modern scientific view of the world is valid, but I don’t believe it’s the only valid perspective of the world. I believe that the biblical view of the world and our own observations of the phenomenal world are equally valid. In short, I don’t think modern science has a lock on the truth. I am certain that God—the Creator of the world—does not deceive us. And I believe that God created the phenomena of the world to appear to us as they do because our Creator intends, through these phenomenal appearances, to communicate (to us) true knowledge of himself, of ourselves, of the world, and of how we should live our lives in-community with others.
When you have finished reading this book, it’s my hope that you will realize (if you haven’t already) that nothing in life—nothing—is more important than are the people with whom we share our lives. Our lives are very brief, and our lives are wasted if they are not spent helping others. Spending our lives helping others is a very simple concept, one that Christ himself taught us, and yet we can easily forget its importance. If we desire to gain our lives, we should be willing to lose them; and if we desire to be rich, we should be willing to become poor. We can be certain that the tighter our grasp on earthly things becomes, the easier they will slip through our fingers.
<|>
Why do people reject science? Here’s why …
Why do people distrust science? Why do some of us reject consensus on a whole range of scientific findings? As Professor Stephan Lewandowsky explains, it often comes down to the way we look at the world.
What does Albert Einstein’s theory of general relativity have to do with the human papillomavirus vaccine (HPV)?
What does acid rain have to do with the fact tobacco smoking causes lung cancer?
What does Reye’s syndrome have in common with the CFCs that caused the hole in the ozone layer?
And what do all those issues have to do with the fact our climate is rapidly changing due to human greenhouse gas emissions?
The answer is that in all those cases, solid scientific evidence was met with vociferous opposition.
The historical evidence is overwhelming that some of that opposition has been organised by vested interests, often successfully delaying political and regulatory action that posed a perceived threat to corporate profits. The peer-reviewed literature has clearly identified the subterfuge, distortion and manufacture of doubt with which vested interests delayed the control of tobacco, CFCs and sulphur emissions.
Even relatively small threats to profits can cause vested interests to spring into obfuscatory action as is revealed by the case involving the makers of aspirin. Aspirin consumption by children with viral illnesses increases the risk of Reye’s syndrome — fatal in one third of all patients — by 4,000%.
When this evidence became known, the aspirin industry geared up a counter-campaign that delayed the introduction of simple warning labels on their products about the risk of Reye’s syndrome by more than five years.
Before the warning labels became mandatory in the US, some 500 cases were reported annually; today, less than a handful of cases are reported each year.
The unnecessary death toll is readily obtained by multiplication.
The death toll from inaction on climate change, currently estimated by the World Health Organisation to be at 150,000 annually, is incomparably greater. Sadly, this is set to rise further in light of the organised manufacture of doubt by vested interests and their enablers in the media.
Much has been written about those “merchants of doubt” and the mendacious media malpractice, which has created a chimerical public “debate” about issues were long ago resolved in the scientific literature.
However, although those powerful factors must not be underestimated, they are only part of the story and two other issues must be considered.
First, organised opposition to science can arise for reasons other than a perceived threat to corporate profits.
Second, forestalling political action requires more than just organised opposition to scientific evidence — that opposition must also fall on fertile ground in the public. No disinformation campaign can succeed without a “market” of consumers willing to buy into it. So what makes average citizens receptive to such a campaign?
To illustrate the first point, examination of the opposition to Einstein’s theory of relativity reveals no obvious involvement of financial interests (which is not to minimise a political component involving nationalism and anti-semitism).
Intriguingly, a primary factor behind the opposition to Einstein within the scientific community arguably arose out of the thwarted career aspirations of physicists unable to cope with his revolutionary ideas.
Relativity threatened the “knowledge systems” of Einstein’s opponents; dearly-held ideas such as the ephemeral “ether” presumed to occupy outer space or the invariance of time were destined for the dustbin if relativity proved to be correct — as of course it has. Those threats were sufficient for Einstein’s scientific opponents to hold a rambunctious rally in Berlin’s Philharmonic Hall during which he was denounced as a fraud.
Threat is the key word here. Threats to financial interests. Threats to one’s career or to one’s ability to keep pace with rapidly-evolving revolutionary knowledge.
The notion of threat is key to understanding the rejection of evidence; whether it’s by vested interests, by mediocre scientists fearful of becoming outdated, or by the public at large when confronted by inconvenient science.
The public can feel threatened by scientific issues at many levels and for many reasons. Perhaps most relevant to present public debate are threats to people’s “worldviews” – the very fundamental beliefs people hold about how the world should be organised.
Worldviews come in many shades and forms, but one prominent distinction — popularised by Professor Dan Kahan at Yale University — is between people whose worldview is “hierarchical-individualistic” and those whose worldview is “egalitarian-communitarian”.
Hierarchical-individualistic people (HI from here on) believe rights, duties, goods, and offices should be distributed differentially and on the basis of people’s own decisions without collective interference or assistance.
Egalitarian-communitarian (EC) people, by contrast, believe rights and goods should be distributed more equally and society should bear partial responsibility for securing the conditions of individual flourishing.
Like all binary classifications, the distinction between HI and EC worldviews lacks nuance and oversimplifies the complexity of human worldviews. Nonetheless, the distinction is extremely powerful and permits prediction of people’s attitudes towards numerous scientific issues.
Perhaps not surprisingly, HI individuals are more likely to resist acceptance of climate science than EC individuals.
Why?
Because implicit in the message we get from climate science is the need to alter the way we currently do business. The spectre of regulation looms large, and so does the (imaginary) World Government or other interventions — such as multilateral agreements — that are anathema to the notion that individuals, not governments or societies, determine their own fate.
To manage that threat to an HI worldview, the fundamental laws of physics underlying climate science must be denied. The greenhouse properties of CO₂ may have been known for 150 years, but those indubitable physical facts cannot compete with the need to protect free enterprise from the threats posed by socialism, communism, Nazism, Green “watermelons”, a corrupt IPCC, Greenpeace, the all-powerful solar-energy lobby, to name but a few of the imaginary monsters and enemies that are awakened by the peer-reviewed evidence.
Lest one think it is only climate change that elicits such emotion and seemingly irrational behaviour, similar effects arise with issues such as mandatory HPV vaccinations.
Although at first glance one might think protecting young women from cervical cancer is a worthwhile goal, HPV vaccinations have turned into an emotive and highly-politicized issue.
Why?
Because mandatory vaccinations give control to the state over parental decisions. Because the protection afforded by the vaccine may encourage young women to engage in sex. The resulting perceived threat to an HI worldview outweighs, for those individuals, the threat posed by cervical cancer itself.
Worldview is crucial to understanding people’s risk perception. And it is not only HI individuals who respond to threats to their worldviews; for EC individuals there are mirror images involving nuclear power or nanotechnology.
It is revealing to analyse how far people are prepared to go when they are exposed to belief-threatening scientific evidence. In one study, people dismissed the scientific method itself when confronted with threatening information. People will rather declare that an issue cannot be resolved scientifically than accept evidence that’s in opposition to their threatened beliefs.
In light of these data it’s not surprising there can be yawning gaps between scientific knowledge and public acceptance of that knowledge. Those situations necessarily cause immense frustration to the scientific community because, after all, the scientists believe they know, whereas segments of the public seem to deny.
The historical record largely affirms that view. Relativity is true, CFCs did cause the ozone hole, HIV causes AIDS, tobacco is bad for you, and yes, greenhouse gas emissions do cause climate change.
Are there ways in which such gaps between scientific knowledge and public acceptance can be bridged?
Potentially, yes.
There is much evidence that the framing of information facilitates its acceptance when it no longer threatens people’s worldview. HI individuals are more likely to accept climate science when the proposed solution involves nuclear power than when it involves emission cuts.
Similarly, the messenger matters. HPV vaccination is more likely to be found acceptable by HI individuals if arguments in its favour are presented by someone clearly identified as hierarchical-individualistic.
Conversely, acceptance of HPV vaccination collapses if the exact same information is presented by a bearded, latte-sipping academic with long hair and short pants. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s strong support for action against climate change is thus of considerable import.
Finally, people are more likely to accept inconvenient evidence after their worldviews have been affirmed. In a nutshell, if people are given an opportunity to take pride in their embrace of free markets and unregulated enterprise, they are subsequently more likely to accept scientific evidence that would otherwise be deemed too threatening to their worldview.
Luckily – and somewhat ironically – science has some of the best tools needed to understand why people sometimes resist science.
This is the sixth part of The State of Science. To read the other installments, follow the links below.
•Part One: Does Australia care about science?
•Part Two: What’s a scientist – a poker or a puffin?
•Part Three: Science can seem like madness, but there’s always a method
•Part Four: Express yourself, scientists – speaking plainly isn’t beneath you
•Part Five: Science is imperfect – you can be certain of that
