Re: Mind's Eye Selfishness, greed and morality

It seems we have rigs. One can argue our assumptions on private
property are responsible - this is the argument on economic rents most
people remain clueless about. The biggest component in our lives
seems to be hideous gossip of one kind or another (most films are now
really dire, most tv scripted or 'reality' soap operas). I've had
news on the South African disabled athlete trial on whilst typing some
admin today - hours of interminable dross leading to release of bail
of a man who poses no flight risk (despite great wealth abroad) and
without a record of violence (three bullets in dead girlfriend, shot a
gun under a table in a restaurant) - ho, ho! I think we've lost the
plot on obligation. I'd hoped to spend the next few years 'giving
back' with some voluntary service overseas - but find myself
protecting my own welfare - I see big inflation building up that will
screw any pensions we thought we'd earned. I see some form of job
guarantee and national/international service as the only way out of
structural economic and social problems - but how to do this without
big government? I think we have the technology to move on this, but
no politics worth the name.
It's just been announced the UK is about to lose 10% of its
electricity supply (actually this is about closing down highly
polluting and otherwise inefficient power stations we've known about
for 20 years). The answer is not more power supply but demand
reduction. No politician, let alone a government one, has come
forward with a work-plan (ideal for enterprise solutions) to remodel
our house and infrastructure to reduce demand and generate for the
National Grid through solar and other sources that could also reduce
household and firm bills. The closest from the establishment appears
to be a 'plan' to build a railway we don't need at vast cost that
won't be ready for 20 years!

On Feb 22, 1:59 pm, rigs <rigs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Those closed systems get pretty stuffy. Have we run out of real work
> and service?//We all have dumb spots, Archy. :-)
>
> On Feb 21, 11:29 am, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > I meet very few really intelligent people and know how dumb I can be.
> > I don't go for any idea that genuinely clever decisions are being made
> > on much.  I once tried to convince academic staff in a dull college
> > that our Tory government would just make all our polytechnics into
> > universities.  They were all appalled at any such suggestion.  No one
> > could possibly apply such a broad brush solution.  Every case would be
> > properly evaluated on its merits.  I was right of course.  Politicians
> > like simple solutions - I doubt they can understand much more than
> > simple arithmetic and a few PR tricks.  None of the college staff
> > understood the reason underlying the expansion of UK higher education
> > in any case - that too was simple and solely concerned with expanding
> > higher education as a business on an international basis.
> > My guess is the reasoning for atomic bombing, war revenge and the rest
> > was no more complicated - if it was how could an old duffer like
> > Churchill have understood?  Our current prime minister, Cameron, is a
> > clone of Blair, himself Thatcher in drag - I suspect your US
> > politicians are very similar.  I have a general theory that the scum
> > we elect are drawn from a small pool - a modern equivalent of the old
> > British Oxbridge set - and remembering the Cambridge spies - I suspect
> > this pool must be highly manipulable by the politburo of the powerful
> > (think how much easier it must be for them as opposed to a bunch of
> > Soviet duffers).  I've seen structuralist analysis of the people I
> > taught in my time in more prestigious business schools and the
> > connections and networking leave little room for any of the system
> > being based on "equal opportunities".  I hardly remember more than a
> > few students not already on he make rather than genuinely curious
> > about the world.  The conspiracy is not clever and doesn't have to
> > be.  My sense of it is that most people will act badly once in
> > leadership positions - maybe even me (and I know I have sometimes).
> > I'm too old now, but in rigs' terms of decisions that 'sweep' I would
> > take up arms against a lot of my principles and knowing it likely even
> > my own side was conning me into action.  I think pacifists are
> > generally free-riders unless they run towards the bullets.
>
> > On Feb 21, 2:04 pm, rigs <rigs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Yes- revenge was a factor- that's part of motive. Films I have watched
> > > attribute Hitler's bombing of London and the Brit's stiff resolve.
> > > Yes- killing to save lives is a messy thought, isn't it? (Really like
> > > some social arguments of equal this and that and the use of shame as a
> > > tactic.)//Wars may be murky as to causes despite those outlines in
> > > history classes. A good deal is economic- some theft- envy- a way to
> > > unite a fragmented population- meglomania/hubris, etc. Maybe
> > > (some)humans have a destructive tendency as they certainly seem ready
> > > to tear countries, companies, reputations apart- let's not blame
> > > mother and early childhood frustrations. The decision winds up having
> > > an energy that sweeps all in its path.
>
> > > On Feb 20, 8:13 pm, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > The firebombings weren't really justified on account of eliminating
> > > > war production rigs - I'm sure you know.  Indeed, a lot of Anglo-US
> > > > funded production in Germany was spared.  No doubt we were well into
> > > > 'revenge' by then.  Even the Dambuster raids were failures in terms of
> > > > stopping production.  It's very doubtful we really needed to use the
> > > > atomic weapons and firebombing in Japan.  There's been a lot of
> > > > philosophical discussion of such since Machiavelli - more recently
> > > > thus 'Should political leaders violate the deepest constraints of
> > > > morality in order to achieve great goods or avoid disasters for their
> > > > communities? This question poses what has become known amongst
> > > > philosophers as the problem of dirty hands.'
>
> > > > Hard to stand in judgement once one realises the horror of the world
> > > > wars - but this said I'm not sure we really know how they started.
> > > > People in the Middle East hardly think any current war started on
> > > > 9/11.  Even Clinton fired 68 cruise missiles around the time Monica
> > > > blew him off (reminding me a bit of the old joke that 68 is better
> > > > than 69 - you leave owing one).  I have no time for moral philosophy
> > > > because its finest words (virtue ethics, some religion) come from
> > > > people oblivious to slavery as just wrong - making John Brown more of
> > > > a 'hero' in his religious lunacy than Socrates.
>
> > > > I believe the 9/11 strategy probably started in the divide and rule
> > > > aspect of the British Empire - the one Hitler thought a good model.
> > > > One can find the concentration camps, slavery and lust after
> > > > commodities (gold, silver, sugar, drugs, oil, gas, water) and the
> > > > involvement of rentier finance from the Crusades (and Jihad) and
> > > > Conquistadors onwards.  I think we have an enemy within (mostly
> > > > financial) and the war is largely phony.  None of this stops me
> > > > knowing which way to point my rifle (there is much vile on the other
> > > > side), by I'm not having the 'war on terror' claptrap.  Few 'jihadis'
> > > > I met knew much ideology.  I used to think they lacked education -
> > > > until I turned my eye back on my peers and realised they were as
> > > > duped.  We might once have stood back to back fighting off hostiles
> > > > rigs - but self-preservation is enough motivation in such for me - the
> > > > hatred and stereotyping of 9/11 propaganda is both everywhere and a
> > > > farce.  Protecting your face might launch my boat but crooks like the
> > > > Bush family never will.
>
> > > > On Feb 20, 1:43 pm, rigs <rigs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > Wars undertaken need to be won or lost. You can't justify any actions-
> > > > > consider our use of firebombings in WWII over civilian areas- the
> > > > > excuse being eliminating war production and transport. At any rate, we
> > > > > are in a new era with hits to the underbelly instead of direct
> > > > > confrontation.
>
> > > > > On Feb 19, 1:21 am, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > I am not a fan of war..  killing is not right..   I have said in the
> > > > > > past that I think surgical strikes like the  that was brought against
> > > > > > Ben Lauden (how ever it is spelled) and drone strikes might be a
> > > > > > preferred way rather than murdering masses of soldiers.
>
> > > > > > You cannot support wars that are for the ego of Presidents, that are
> > > > > > producing false evidence  to justify it..  and the killing of non
> > > > > > combatants by mass bombing..  all those people should be imprisoned
> > > > > > for life because of the murders the order others to commit..
>
> > > > > > Actually that does not matter they will no longer be able to hide or
> > > > > > justify their actions..  sadly it is a price their souls will pay but
> > > > > > their souls knew the effect before they took the actions
>
> > > > > > On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 11:17 PM, rigs <rigs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > Me too! :-) What was I thinking?//Okay- we support the politics that
> > > > > > > serves our interest is what I guess I meant. But we might support
> > > > > > > politics contrary to our beliefs in time of war or other disasters
> > > > > > > requiring unity and sacrifice. As for suffrage, the votes were dished
> > > > > > > out to garner support from individuals or groups to thereby get
> > > > > > > elected and weld power.//It is also like church shopping.
>
> > > > > > > On Feb 18, 5:54 am, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >> I'd need that explained rigs.
>
> > > > > > >> On Feb 17, 10:59 am, rigs <rigs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > >> > The same could be said of political power/universal suffrage.
>
> > > > > > >> > On Feb 16, 3:51 pm, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > >> > > The turning of greed to the essential element of our economic
> > > > > > >> > > salvation is very significant, making economics itself libidinal.
> > > > > > >> > > With this admission, the pretence that economics could be an aggregate
> > > > > > >> > > of individual choice by rational people should be very difficult to
> > > > > > >> > > maintain.
>
> > > > > > >> > > On Feb 16, 7:50 pm, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > >> > > > The emotion of fear is the big detractor...
>
> > > > > > >> > > > On Feb 15, 11:33 pm, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > >> > > > > In almost all computer simulations I've seen selfishness only works in
> > > > > > >> > > > > 'new markets' and after that cooperation wins.  Stephen Pinker has a
> > > > > > >> > > > > book out summarizing why modern societies are more peaceful (despite
> > > > > > >> > > > > wars) than primitive ones as does Jared Diamond.  What's gone wrong is
> > > > > > >> > > > > out institutions have not developed to full democracy.  In many senses
> > > > > > >> > > > > we are not modern at all.  My suspicion is that we haven't worked out
> > > > > > >> > > > > how to be modern in a way that combines science and religion.  Science
> > > > > > >> > > > > a la Dawkins is just another religion with vested interests vying with
> > > > > > >> > > > > those of churches, mosques and temples.  What I know of physics,
> > > > > > >> > > > > chemistry, biology and maths in no way gives me much clue why we cling
> > > > > > >> > > > > to this rock as opposed to giving up to gnostic nothingness. I don't
> > > > > > >> > > > > do religion because I can't stand the lack of  intellectual honesty,
> > > > > > >> > > > > but this
>
> ...
>
> read more »

--

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to minds-eye+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.