Today's discussion question

[Lemuel Underwing]

If I recall correctly there are more slaves today than there were two
hundred years ago, and I'm not talkin' bout Industrial Slaves either


On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:25 AM, Bekah <bekah0176 at sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> But today we are horrified by slavery anywhere.  Today we abhor many
> things that centuries ago,  or decades for that matter,  were taken as a
> matter of course -  lynchings for example,  but also direct warfare between
> major powers,  capital punishment (in most of the western world, anyway),
>  the abuse of women, children, ethnic minorities, gays,  - even of animals.
>
> Steven Pinker's book,  The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has
> Declined [2011],  is flawed in many respects,  but he makes some
> interesting points.
>
> That said,   I'm not taking a side here because I think capitalism and
> elements of fascism play into the equation.  Otoh,  the devastation of
> Hiroshima and the atrocities of the Holocaust had an impact.
>
> Bekah
>
>
> On Aug 22, 2013, at 8:59 AM, Joseph Tracy <brook7 at sover.net> wrote:
>
> > Yes . Very reasonable points about our collective abilities. But my
> argument is that we often ascribe to ourselves as individuals what we only
> have as part of a system. The gap between the wisdom of moderns and the
> wisdom of the ancients still seems more self congratulatory than
> substantive.  The young girls that make shirts in nasty and dangerous
> factories in Pakistan seem little different than slaves. As far as the
> status of women, this freedom has not been extended to other cultures
> colonized by the Euro and patriarchal powers in the same way as to the
> wives and daughters and mothers of the democracies. The link between "our"
> purportedly enlightened and technically advanced system and crude forms of
> exploitation that rival any in history is shown in the factory conditions
> of people making parts for Apple products.
> >
> > I am not saying people used to be wiser. I am arguing for realistic
> humility in claims to advancement, because so much of the history of that
> advancement has been directly at the expense of  militarily and culturally
> vulnerable cultures. In these kinds of advancements there is as much injury
> and loss as advance.
> >
> > We inherit through the written word and technology a tremendous
> inheritance of potential wisdom and possibility, but we also inherit some
> really destructive habits and colonialist historic patterns that are built
> around treating the biosphere and its inhabitants as a can of materials to
> be mined, used and discarded.  What I see is more of a runaway train than a
> wise, sustainable  and advanced modern culture. We are generating powerful
> warnings and solutions but so far they are not really slowing the
> destructive juggernaut. I hope I am wrong and that what we are going
> through now will as you also hope enable and compel the changes that are
> needed.  I am just really saying that some humility is in order and is part
> of the needed change.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Aug 21, 2013, at 12:05 PM, Ian Livingston wrote:
> >
> >> I am loathe to take issue with you Joseph, I agree in so many ways, but
> there are a couple of points I want to add to color your choler with.
> First, the "we" thing. As regards your examples of things we can and cannot
> do, "we" can build computers and cell phones and such. I can't make the
> entire product, you can't, and neither can he or she, but they can, and we
> can do things they cannot. I've worked making the batteries for tech
> devices in the past, for example, which is something Bill Gates couldn't
> do. Among the things we can't do are making an axe from chert and wood;
> using the entire carcass of an animal we have killed with a bow and arrow,
> or atlatl, or snare we likewise could not have made; we couldn't build a
> castle of stone that can stand for a year, much less for 500 or a 1000
> years. We no longer have the skills to live in the ways that the people
> among whom the wisdom traditions evolved did; still, as you say, we could
> certainly learn skills from them. Could we learn to keep slaves as they
> did? To demean and disempower women as they did? To leave the weak to
> suffer and die as they did? Well, obviously "we" can, but could you? Could
> I?
> >>
> >> Permaculture, peak oil communities, intentional communities, etc., are
> all good starts toward building the sort of post-industrial, neo-tribal
> communities that might have a chance at replacing the contemporary
> disaster, but they have yet to find the middle ground that still allows the
> scientific advancement, and the development of fabrication skills that can
> help us live lightly, usefully, and harmoniously in an unarmed paradise.
> Those communities are cutting the way that might lead to the development of
> the intellectual and intentional bases necessary to advances we can hope
> might lead us toward living on the land in a realistic way. It is probable
> that population counts will have to come down a bit to make such meaningful
> living viable on the large scale, but it could happen.
> >>
> >> It just couldn't happen in our time or without going through what we
> are going through now.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 7:14 AM, Joseph Tracy <brook7 at sover.net> wrote:
> >> Even the most technically advanced modern cultures still sacrifice the
> young for idiotic lies. The humanity of the high priests of culture has
> always been a crapshoot.  Your idea that anyone who has a different frame
> of technological reference has nothing they could teach you was shared by
> the crew of the Franklin polar expedition who refused the maps and aid of
> Inuit people and perished.
> >> Currently we are faced with a global ecological crisis founded in our
> own technologies and habitual addictions and some pretty stupid
> presumptions. One of the most intriguing alternative paths is permaculture
> which is largely drawn from tribal patterns of survival through the
> knowledge and cultivation of local resources,  combined with science and
> technology. That seems a legitimate example of mutual respectful
> interaction.
> >>
> >> As far as "we" knowing so much, I'm not so sure.  How many of 'us'
> could design/build an ac power plant, a computer, a cell phone, an electric
> motor or refrigerator. Most people, probably 90 to 99 percent really don't
> know enough to do so, though many have some small subset of such knowledge.
>  There is something slightly false about crediting ourselves with the
> cumulative benefits of scientific qnd technological inquiry.
> >> On Aug 20, 2013, at 5:43 PM, MalignD at aol.com wrote:
> >>
> >>> "Proud vaunting"?  "False pride"?  Please.  We know a thousand times
> more now than we did a thousand years ago.  That's simply true.  Certainly
> people weren't stupider, but the idea that their ignorance provided a
> shortcut to some deeper truth is romantic silliness.  They sacrificed
> animals, virgins, children as a result of their "knowledge."  Later, they
> leeched the humors from people, racked and burned people for superstitious
> heresies.  Etc., etc.
> >>>
> >>> It was a stunning achievement, once, to lash a sharp stone to a tree
> limb and make a spear.  But you think the person who did that has lessons
> to teach us.  I don't.
> >>>
> >>> "Halliburton of the holy house of halitosis."
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I'm still laughing over that ...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> This proud vaunting of ones culture, knowledge and modernness as
> displaying a
> >>> superior mentality is something I see as false pride.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: Joseph Tracy <brook7 at sover.net>
> >>> To: P-list List <pynchon-l at waste.org>
> >>> Sent: Tue, Aug 20, 2013 1:13 pm
> >>> Subject: Re: Today's discussion question
> >>>
> >>> This proud vaunting of ones culture, knowledge and modernness as
> displaying a
> >>> superior mentality is something I see as false pride. No matter how
> far back in
> >>> any culture one goes there are stunning technical achievements,
> beautiful,
> >>> subtle and relevant poetry and a fulsome array of all that is human and
> >>> delightful along with what is dark and cruel. I see little evidence
> that our
> >>> technical abilities have freed us from cruel military empires, idiotic
> lies etc.
> >>> Long life? What is the glory of vast numbers of fat TV watchers
> waiting for
> >>> death.
> >>>
> >>> As far as moderns wanting experience and reliable information over
> dogmatic
> >>> constructs, come again? Facts like evil Iraqis with weapons of mass
> destruction,
> >>> weapons of mass destruction , weapons of mass destruction, weapons of
> mass
> >>> destruction.  Facts like a world suddenly filled with terrorists and
> requiring
> >>> the imperial suspension of civil rights.  Facts like Fracking is
> perfectly safe,
> >>> here, have a drink. The invisible hand of the marketplace is even now
> ending
> >>> hunger and making the world better every minute; that isn't dogma,
> thats true as
> >>> even now Democracy spreads throughout the middle east with her friendly
> >>> handmaidens dronella, starvation sanctionlalla, and Halliburton of the
> holy
> >>> house of halitosis. I too am proud to be a modern man. Have a high
> powered
> >>> semi-automatic my child. It is your precious birthright and the
> solidest of
> >>> facts. It comes with a credit card backed by Ben Bernanke's personal
> >>> endorsement. Spend freely and kill with pride for thou art blessed
> with stars
> >>> and stripes up every fucking orifice.
> >>>
> >>> On Aug 19, 2013, at 6:05 PM,
> >>> MalignD at aol.com
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> It always strikes me that, when people speak of the ancient wisdom
> they
> >>> picture elders and sages, wise and wizened men possessed of some deep,
> now lost,
> >>> knowledge.
> >>>>
> >>>> These were bronze age people with little but superstition to direct
> them past
> >>> their ignorance and fear and most of them were dead before they were
> fifty.
> >>>> no ancient or
> >>>> childlike trust in the elders or the prophets or whatever the sages of
> >>>> old handed down, what the scibes writ will do.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: David Morris <
> >>> fqmorris at gmail.com
> >>>>
> >>>> To: alice wellintown <
> >>> alicewellintown at gmail.com
> >>>>
> >>>> Cc: pynchon -l <
> >>> pynchon-l at waste.org
> >>>>
> >>>> Sent: Fri, Aug 16, 2013 10:01 pm
> >>>> Subject: Re: Today's discussion question
> >>>>
> >>>> Well said, Alice.  AND so succinct!  Huzzah!
> >>>>
> >>>> On Friday, August 16, 2013, alice wellintown wrote:
> >>>> He will never encounter anything that will persuade you, MalignD, but
> >>>> he may have an experience that will, as it has others, persuade him.
> >>>> Of course, such experiences are the foundation of modern adaptatons of
> >>>> traditional religions. In other words, an immediate awareness of
> >>>> relation with a decine presense or mysticism.
> >>>>
> >>>> Because modern peoples are weary of ancient traditions, and because
> >>>> modern peoples have built and discovered modern ways, no ancient or
> >>>> childlike trust in the elders or the prophets or whatever the sages of
> >>>> old handed down, what the scibes writ will do. We want facts. We don't
> >>>> want authority. We want experience not dogmatic constructs. So the
> >>>> mystical religion, that is, religion grounded in experience. So, if
> >>>> one looks for evidence of reincarnation or resurrection or grace, one
> >>>> may find it in experience.
> >>>>
> >>>> Will it ever happen for for YOU?
> >>>>
> >>>> Not even MalignD can can say.
> >>>>
> >>>> 8/16/13,
> >>> malignd at aol.com <malignd at aol.com
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>> Nor will you.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I've never encountered anything like persuasive evidence of
> reincarnation.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>>> From: Ian Livingston <
> >>> igrlivingston at gmail.com
> >>>>
> >>>>> To: David Morris <
> >>> fqmorris at gmail.com
> >>>>
> >>>>> Cc: Bekah <
> >>> bekah0176 at sbcglobal.net>; malignd <malignd at aol.com
> >>>> ; pynchon-l
> >>>>> <
> >>> pynchon-l at waste.org
> >>>>
> >>>>> Sent: Thu, Aug 15, 2013 9:44 pm
> >>>>> Subject: Re: Today's discussion question
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Well, the (Tibetan Mahayana) Buddhist model is not limited to this
> world.
> >>>>> There are myriad other worlds in Samsara. We're only passing through
> this
> >>>>> one, en route to eventual enlightenment.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I've never encountered anything like persuasive evidence of
> reincarnation.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 6:33 PM, David Morris <
> >>> fqmorris at gmail.com
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I would like to see a math model of just the human accounting on how
> the
> >>>>> present exploding population works with retreaded souls as a ratio
> of new to
> >>>>> old.  There must be a huge source of new human souls yet to go
> spinning on
> >>>>> this Merry-Go-Round.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Thursday, August 15, 2013, Bekah  wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> If reincarnation is true there are a whole lot of dead people
> waiting for
> >>>>> another shot at life - either that or they've come back as
> cockroaches -  in
> >>>>> which case I suspect we have extra lives coming from somewhere.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I just don't see how the accounting works out.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>
> http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=fact-or-fiction-living-outnumber-dead
> >>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Bek
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Aug 15, 2013, at 3:53 PM, David Morris <
> >>> fqmorris at gmail.com
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> The concept of reincarnation long predates the advent of Buddhism in
> >>>>>> India.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I don't find it useful, since access to lessons learned in a
> previous
> >>>>>> lives isn't common nor plausible when through hypnosis people
> recall being
> >>>>>> Napoleon or Cleopatra. If there is a kernel of truth in the concept
> of
> >>>>>> reincarnation it seems to me useful as a way to understand inherent
> >>>>>> knowledge, instincts, in every living being, passed on via eons of
> >>>>>> evolution. Collective Conciousness?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> David Morris
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Thursday, August 15, 2013, wrote:
> >>>>>> It's not remotely plausible.  Where would you suggest this
> "knowledge"
> >>>>>> comes from?
> >>>>>> The idea that the Tibetans
> >>>>>> know something in regard to reincarnation that we don't seems
> perfectly
> >>>>>> plausible.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>>>> From: Joseph Tracy <
> >>> brook7 at sover.net
> >>>>
> >>>>>> To: P-list List <
> >>> pynchon-l at waste.org
> >>>>
> >>>>>> Sent: Thu, Aug 15, 2013 11:16 am
> >>>>>> Subject: Re: Today's discussion question
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Unless it is true. This idea has been around for a long time and
> has had
> >>>>>> some
> >>>>>> non bubble headed proponents who may perceive things unseen by a
> certain
> >>>>>> kind of
> >>>>>> logic. I am agnostic on all questions that seek to definitively
> describe
> >>>>>> other
> >>>>>> dimensions of experience, but some of my own experiences have kept
> me
> >>>>>> from
> >>>>>> closing the door on this and I do not find that leaving the
> question open
> >>>>>> induces any more bubble headedness than watching TV. The idea that
> the
> >>>>>> Tibetans
> >>>>>> know something in regard to reincarnation
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20130822/962293c7/attachment.html>