Re: Mind's Eye Re: deep thought

We are never the finished article I guess James. I don't go directly
for RP's past lives - but imagine we were both once on opposite sides
of the Anglo (and others) - Spanish War (1458 and all that) as able
seamen. Our chances of survival would have been mutually low. The
lousy conditions (literally) for crew were actually the real enemy.
Our heroism would likely have led us both to death from disease. The
Spaniards at least paid their survivors off. Many of the English died
of starvation because they were not paid. Our chances of getting
together, saying '**** this for a game of soldiers', and forming a
sensible society without war were very limited. General recall of
such 'past lives' print the heroic legend rather than reveal the real
history.

There are often no riddles, just chronic and obvious deception. My
dad (who was in WW2) warned me about marching bands, but did little to
disabuse me on patriotism. The indication was always I'd know when I
grew up, but in his own way he filled my head with twaddle, making me
feel I was a disappointment. I think the riddles occur for many
reasons, not least that we find dealing with the powerful a matter of
supplication - a matter of deep biology. There may be some inner
light - but I don't experience any other than as distraction from the
world that will be there next time I walk into it. The ginger cat has
no 'reason' to be scared of me - but I do wonder if such trauma casts
a shadow through our generations.

An old friend once told me she wished she had been 'born good' and I
suspect the morality available to us is very confusing. A current
interest of mine - why clever people are so stupid - is based in my
dissatisfaction with moral theories. The topic starts with a simple
question doing the rounds. We could put it this way.

James is married and looking at Gabby, but Gabby is looking at Neil
who isn't married'. From this information, which of the following
options is correct in terms of whether a married person is looking at
an unmarried one:
1. Yes
2. No
3.Not enough information to decide.

Most people conclude there is not enough information to decide. The
'reason' is we don't know whether Gabby is married or not. The idea
of the question is to get at our general intolerance of ambiguity.
Scores out of ten on questions like this are typically 0 -2.

To cut the game short here the real answer is 'yes'. In a teaching
situation one leaves a class to ponder. Quite a few suggest stuff
like scouring the group logs to see if Gabby has ever told us whether
she is married or not, but in fact we don't need to know. The answer
is this:
If Gabby isn't married then married James is looking a an unmarried
person.
If Gabby is married a married person is looking at unmarried Neil.
So whether Gabby is married or not, someone married is looking at an
unmarried person. Simples, but 9 out of 10 get stuff like this wrong
unless they have been given the answer.

The research continues in many directions - neuroscience being the
main one, the establishment of RQ another and the behaviour of
intelligent people gambling in banking another. In the UK we have
discovered that Hillsborough (a soccer tragedy involving many deaths
23 years back) led to a massive cover-up by all the relevant
authorities - nearly all officials lied or were forced to lie - 160
police statements were changed, the victims were vilified as 'drunk'
and so on. I guess most members f this group would hope to have acted
morally and told the truth in such a situation - but statistical
evidence is against us. I find myself less concerned with the 3000
year failure of virtue ethics and peering into the subjective - and
more with how honesty is not much a policy at all.

Much subjectivity involves ambiguity and as we get to k now much more
about brain states deception may become more difficult whether one
introspects or speaks amongst others. If James and I had met some
years after the Armada would this have been as enemies or people who
knew they had both been duped by a greater enemy who threw their arms
around each other? Circles in the spirals of the windmills
notwithstanding, much could be made simple without being rendered
facile.


On May 14, 3:27 pm, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I've found reading and writing more or less impossible for about 10
> years now - this may seem odd as I do a lot of both.  More or less
> nothing comes without baggage I don't want and, of course, nothing
> survives the deconstruction of science or serious history.  I know I
> don't really want much more than a few friends and security - but e
> this is to want a radically different society.  Words are so
> difficult.  Religion is a very difficult example.  I'm not against
> what Molly or Gabby or Don do with it in their different ways - but it
> remains a control fraud in my world-view.  Old stories in academe have
> the congregation as undergraduates, the sermon deliverers as masters
> and PhDs and researchers as the content and truth producers.
> Hierarchy is a religious term in origin.  I'm revolted, less by the
> thought of this fiction, than the ease with which many swallow it.
>
> There is a spiral dynamic at work - we used to consider such in terms
> of RSVP cycles or an orchestra practising - you sort of (mostly) are
> never starting at the beginning but join in the cycle.  A colleague
> did a PhD on the children's writer Enid Blyton - fair enough - one can
> investigate anything.  I have no problem with this in-itself.  The
> model sadly extends to
>  a great deal of teaching in which the fictional nature of text-made-
> basic is elided.  I doubt you know more management and economics after
> spending time with business school books, than you would after reading
> a few decent novels.  A contradiction in all non-science learning
> concerns making texts into Idols to worship.
>
> Science only takes us so far and at heart is not very philosophical.
> I favour gardening and cooking analogies - the 'theory' has been
> called tropical fish realism.  I follow advice from science books much
> as I follow gardening and cooking books - and think here, given
> equality of kitchen materials and food - whether we'd choose to eat my
> cooking or rigs'!  Skill factors not always in the books and
> experiential learning are important.  I spend time reading really
> complex stuff on the history of science - mostly German work of late
> and I'm not at all sure I understand better without the translation.
> My story of science starts in approximation by creatures of gravity in
> co-evolution - but gravity remains a label.  This is some way from
> growing plants with recommended amounts of fertiliser, nematode
> biological warfare against slugs and strict instruction against
> digging in my raised beds to the cats and dog.
>
> Our cats all strayed in at some time and we have a male ginger that
> still doesn't trust me (one wonders on the poor thing's past trauma).
>
> On May 13, 11:46 pm, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Not quite sure of your focus James.  In terns of models, I like Spiral
> > Dynamics.  It allows the recognition and inclusion of everyone in
> > their own terms.
>
> > On May 12, 11:19 pm, James <ashkas...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > You have a rapt audience Molly, I have many questions. I would be very
> > > interested in information regarding child developmental psychology and
> > > any individuals who have a story of their experiences and reflections
> > > written. I understand there are many types of people out there and I
> > > didn't think there was a word for it at all other than 'freak'. If you
> > > have knowledge on this I can't express how valuable some would find it.
>
> > > Do any of them feel like a 'pool of reflection'? Sensitivity to lying
> > > and deceit? Is there any norm, parallels with autism, can they freely
> > > dissociate (as in the complex, but the book is useless in this
> > > instance)? Any statistical research out there, or terms I can use to
> > > find more? Spare nothing please, I will cripple google with the fury of
> > > my searches on your every word.
>
> > > On 5/12/2013 9:30 AM, Allan H wrote:
>
> > > > I agree with you Molly
>
> > > > On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 2:53 PM, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com
> > > > <mailto:mollyb...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> > > >     " I seem to learn in reverse starting with an
> > > >     intuitive bond but I'm no genius just weird"
>
> > > >     IMHO being in-tune with the unseen (or infinite) is a particularly
> > > >     sensitive and rare form of perception.  I am always surprised and
> > > >     delighted to find such a person.  Listening to our instincts and
> > > >     intuitions first, and allowing the material world to validate
> > > >     naturally is living life inside out.
>
> > > >     On May 11, 11:59 pm, James <ashkas...@gmail.com
> > > >     <mailto:ashkas...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > > >     > Glad you said it Allan, my enthusiasm told me to leave the box
> > > >     alone. I
> > > >     > think the term 'unknown commodity' fits, and there are some strange
> > > >     > varieties out there as I've known at least one, others are
> > > >     suspect but
> > > >     > as I can see how they would be driven nuts I won't be out there
> > > >     > interviewing. The curiosity crosses my mind at times on the rare
> > > >     > occasion that I catch the news of whether someone was just
> > > >     another dumb
> > > >     > nut or did we just lose another potential major asset to
> > > >     civilization.
> > > >     > Yes, if we worked to meet the needs of all without exception, I said
> > > >     > this exact thing to someone regarding cultural integration the
> > > >     other day
> > > >     > in regards to our cultural isolation. An ounce of prevention.. a
> > > >     pound
> > > >     > of agression. It isn't even in the common vernacular I'm afraid.
>
> > > >     > I am at a loss for meaning to your last sentence my instincts
> > > >     throw up
> > > >     > red flags on the subject. A few times I've been able to approach the
> > > >     > subject by reassociating an external self to see things as a
> > > >     story that
> > > >     > I was free to speak the truth of and pursue compassion and say
> > > >     'Im so
> > > >     > sorry that...', as an older person would say to a child. It's still
> > > >     > blank though, push some more and blank to freeze (it's good to
> > > >     know the
> > > >     > physiological effects of stress disorders there), push more and
> > > >     it's  .
> > > >     > morning shits and shakes for a few plus temporary immune system
> > > >     > shutdown. There are a variety of mental disciplines, meditative
> > > >     > techniques, insights into my nature, and preventive disciplines
> > > >     that can
> > > >     > be derived from experiences but I can't tell him 'you deserve
> > > >     better'
> > > >     > because it's relevance ends as a gesture. The process is
> > > >     intuitive with
> > > >     > others, a born talent, I seem to learn in reverse starting with an
> > > >     > intuitive bond but I'm no genius just weird. ;-) My sense of
> > > >     humor is
> > > >     > improving though, not being understood is so damn BORING, it's
> > > >     enough to
> > > >     > make a person develop ADHD.
>
> > > >     > On 5/11/2013 8:11 AM, Allan H wrote:
>
> > > >     > > there is great value in systematic enlightenment,,,  I also think
> > > >     > > though that in needs to be a attachment to those out of the
> > > >     box and
> > > >     > > not dismissing them..  knowledge and access to it is spread
> > > >     through
> > > >     > > out humanity.   the problems comes when someone starts saying I
> > > >     > > deserve more.
>
> > > >     > > On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 3:23 AM, James <ashkas...@gmail.com
> > > >     <mailto:ashkas...@gmail.com>
> > > >     > > <mailto:ashkas...@gmail.com <mailto:ashkas...@gmail.com>>> wrote:
>
> > > >     > >     I agree that learning is self taught on the condition that
> > > >     most of
> > > >     > >     the means and content is circumstantial and not chosen,
> > > >     > >     'systematique' is an abstraction and so for most I think
> > > >     it has
> > > >     > >     referential truth (as a resource) but not process modeling
> > > >     truth
> > > >     > >     until the mind has worked out components, inner systems and
> > > >     > >     interactions.
>
> > > >     > >     An aim for building problem solving intelligence, developing
> > > >     > >     experience with the tools of learning and skill in adapting
> > > >     > >     skills/knowledge to solve novel (relatively) problems
> > > >     seems a good
> > > >     > >     rough-draft purpose. The building blocks are important,
> > > >     they don't
> > > >     > >     fall into arrangement the same for everyone though and
> > > >     that makes
> > > >     > >     it challenging. I've had a few days where the teachers
> > > >     instruction
> > > >     > >     seemed a variation on 'first world problems' and many of my
> > > >     > >     schoolmates were hardened in that way, this is a known
> > > >     unknown,
> > > >     > >     the challenge is an opportunity I think.
>
> > > >     > >     Gabby I was pulling a Marvin the Martian earlier, my
> > > >     general usage
> > > >     > >     of enlightenment seems to be similar to Allan's, or as a
> > > >     'piercing
> > > >     > >     a veil of ignorance'. I hoped to get a view from Konara,
> > > >     but your
> > > >     > >     tips were, hmm 'enlightening' nonetheless. ;-)
>
> > > >     > >     On 5/9/2013 9:27 PM, rigs wrote:
>
> > > >     > >         You need basic skills to begin with, however, and
> > > >     these are
> > > >     > >         only as
> > > >     > >         successful as certain other qualities/opportunities
> > > >     are present or
> > > >     > >         attainable. Morality is generally picked up from
> > > >     family, tribe,
> > > >     > >         nation, religion, political theory. There are plenty of
> > > >     > >
>
> ...
>
> 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.