Daddy v. Buddha: Candy Drilled

[Lycidas at worldnet.att.net]

jporter wrote:
> 
> Terrence:
> 
> > As for the GR characters, work or working it out is a death
> >trap, a suicide rap, you gotta get out while your young
> 
> So why should we let them die in vain? We must work to make their
> pseudo-deaths meaningful.


OK, I shifted the discussion to the GR characters and your
shifting it back to we. So we can drop this one. 


> 
> >cause the infection moves all around you, even in your fairy
> >tales and lullabies. In terms of interpreting history,
> >another trap, a death trap. Enzian is the courageous one
> >here and characters can't lay back and enjoy it, but the
> >mindlessly pleasured ones, like the courageous Bodine or the
> >Geli's Tripping can actively enjoy it.
> 
> I've become slitely bored with politically correct interpretations of
> Enzian and his band of rocket gypsies. Likewise, I'd never allow my
> Porsche, if I had one, to be liberated for "the cause." If I did have one,
> however, I'd nick it "the schwarz car" not Bruno. (Pointy, of course, would
> prefer a shag)

I don't have a Rexian or politically correct reading of
Enzian or of GR or of anything else for that matter. I
didn't say anything about the rocket gypsies or  political
correctness. In fact I have never used the term and I don't
like it. Implying that I am some sort of guilty white-boy
(REX) is funny, but colored with reductionisms of your
own.    

> 
> >Don't believe you're
> >a witch?
> 
> Not me, ace. Give me war or lock me up.
> 
> >Can't live a Pig's life?
> 
> Not without wings.
> 
> >Have the courage of
> >Enzian.
> 
> You forgot the question mark on that one, so I'll assume it to be either a
> declaration, or, a rhetorical question. Either way, I'm white, so I guess
> not.

Enzian's courage is not a black man's courage. 


> 
> >
> >What's "Greek reductionism" ??
> 
> First, a question for you. You have read Terry Southern's _Candy_ and know
> how it ends, right? If not, please check out:
> http://www.terrysouthern.com/   And consider reading _Candy_. If you have
> read it, then:
> 
> >From "The Theory of Everything," R.B. Laughlin, et. al. PNAS, 1/04/200,
> vol. 97, no. 1., pp 28-31:
> 
> "The theory of everything is a term for the ultimate theory of the
> universe- a set of equations capable of describing all phenomenon that have
> been observed, or that ever will be observed. It is the modern incarnation
> of the reductionist ideal of the ancient Greeks, an approach to the natural
> world that has been fabulously successful in bettering the lot of mankind
> and continues in many people's minds to be the central paradigm of
> physics."

Still my question is, what is "the reductionist ideal of the
Ancient Greeks"? The question I am asking here is a simple
one. What ancient greeks? What form of reductionism and in
what science? Physics? BTW, is the "ruductionist ideal of
the ancient greeks" the same as the greek reductionism of
your claim-- "Greek Reductionism is duly "chastained" and
emergence is enshrined."




> 
> But later...
> 
> "So the triumph of the reductionism of the Greeks is a pyrrhic victory: We
> have succeded in reducing all of ordinary physical behavior to a simple,
> correct Theory of Everything only to discover that it has revealed exactly
> nothing about many things of great importance."

Again, this makes not sense. What ancient greek(s) triumphed
by reductionism? 


> 
> I used the term Greek Reductionism in that context.
> 
> jody