"If man were a unity instead of being a multiplicity, he would have true individuality. He would be one and so would have true individuality. He would be one and so would have one will. The illusion, therefore, that a man has about himself that he is one refers to a possibility. Man can attain unity of being. He can reach his true individuality. But it is precisely this illusion that stands first of all in the way of man's attainment of this possibility. For as long as a man imagines he has something, he will not seek for it. Why should a man strive for something that he has never doubted for a moment that he possesses already? This is one of the effects of the imagination, which fills up, as it were, what is lacking or makes it appear that we are like this, or like that, when actually we are the reverse."
this post was for one quote alone, but I am having to park this unrelated text here below
Jeremey was the runt, the runt of the litter. Then too, he inherited a life with two dudes who felt a dearth...each felt a lack. His life where it intersected with Virginia's, though, was a matter of experiencing someone who had made peace with dearths. She put up easily with her son's dearth and her step father's. I'm the son. Grandaddy Bill had lost his wife. He had returned to smoking, much to my shock (maybe not so much to mom's). He made big rich breakfasts, possibly every day. Had a stroke, then mom suggested he move in with us. He used his money to build-on. One room with windows looking out to a backyard with, given the plight of many, a pretty good glimpse of "nature" at ground level. He bought a book (or was given a book) about birds with a blue jay on the cover. It was a pretty contemplative move, I mean his attention to it, on the part of someone who had dealt with matters so gruffly.
So, that's the hint about the great presence in our family of the gracious element. The presence of grace. First with my grandmother, and then with her daughter. My grandfather was indeed experiencing the loss of a soul who had known joy and love, and who had pushed aside her bad breaks eventually via real Faith. My dad's mom might have had graciousness in her own way, but the sternness of Grandfather H and the isolation of the upper-middle (and mostly the challenge of her only child, my father) might have alienated that soul a bit. Her husband, my grandfather, wasn't stern in the sense of a drill sergeant. He was simply removed somewhat from any extroversion. Mom spoke of him as gentlemanly. He wasn't rough hewn like Grandaddy Bill. I don't remember him as particularly warm, though there must have been some peace about him which I respected. I'm sure he had worries about dad, but when dad took us over grandfather and grandmother H must have been in a state of hope due to mom's presence in their son's life. I don't remember Grandmother H as particularly warm either. I remember her as seeming frail and genteel.
Around 5th and 6th grade the unique boarding school had pumped it into me, enlightenment and discipline. The discipline came about as gradually and mildly as I could have obtained it anywhere given the amount. So, I'm thankful for that. Something merely like a different housemother, however, made things different for my brother. So the school's great "vision," I had to see in just three years, had fallen through for him. I caught the whole meaning of it luckily
5/27 As long as one holds that the sensory input is travelling along with an end point in whichever brain lobes that create consciousness (an epiphenomenalist point of view), then what keeps one from a notion of "neurally encoded" images that actually have to have the equivalent of pixels...to save the complete image? Well, what chemical apparatus is there in nerve cells that'll keep a record (or a value assigned) at each of their pixel-equivalents associated with the encoding germane to whatever image (that is the shading or color for each pixel-equivalent)? An even better question is WHAT ARE the pixel equivalents??
Sort of ashamed to say I don't have a copy of "I See Satan Fall Like Lightening." I feel like some hard working pauper in China or India using spare minutes to look at my cell phone and discover what's hip among those with time to think. In my case the cell phone's a laptop, and some of the heaviest things I've come across have been via searching phrases whereby I'm led to pages Google Books has access to.
My personal take on why American progressives find it hard to join together and oppose corrupt politics...you might find a bit convoluted. Right now I'll mention just one factor that strikes me. We've been hit by a lot of propaganda: There's training if your specialized job's been subsumed by other slots; There's training if your job's been off-shored; If you can't make it here you can't make it anywhere; Some library hours needed to be sliced off but THE INTERNET CAN KEEP YOU INFORMED; The more portable your internet platform (and the faster) the better you can know EVERYTHING a responsible citizen should know, or experience everything an entertained citizen should experience. We've heard all this, and consequently because we think the net can deliver all this WE BELIEVE IT IS DELIVERING ALL THIS, AND THAT WE ARE DISCOVERING EVERYDAY EVERYTHING WORTH KNOWING. For example, if someone else can't plainly see that Hillary is the best bet for getting "dark money" out of politics, that's their problem. There are infinite like permutations germane to entertainment, humor, etc.
I could say that sociologically, psychologically, demographically, politically, and ideology-wise...there is sort of a "war of all against all" going down in America...all Americans versus all Americans (or amidst the set of the lower 99%). This is sort of phase of a [mimetic crisis] described by Rene Girard. To prove it you could, say, draw from observations from folks who understand political "science" AND who also understand economics [actually it might be a good thing we can't point to a handfull of geniuses who meet these qualifications best]. You'd have to demonstrate that the only Americans who are in solidarity with one another are the top 1% [maybe some outliers like Warren Buffett]. That is, if you resorted to the numbers and those numbers indicated the bottom 99 were getting royally screwed...and meanwhile said bottom-99 weren't paying attention to "how" or didn't really care that much...then one might conjecture that the bottom 99 were distracted by trivial items and/or myriad single-issue-items magnified by media controlled by the 1%.
We were supposed to have been informed, but most of us have let many issues go unexamined. No, the net in general didn't scream many warnings. So, we're all compromised. We thought we knew (and cared) more than the next guy, but we didn't. Events and developments proved this over and over. So, we endeavored to squeeze in even more knowledge. We mimicked those who KNEW. But to handle all this knowledge we had to have fulfilled drives, so mimesis there too...mimicking the models of fulfillment and accepting we just hadn't yet found the readily available keys [this is not my beautiful wife; this is not my beautiful house].
"The condensation of all the separated scandals is the paroxysm of a process that begins with mimetic desire and its rivalries. These rivalries as they multiply, create a mimetic crisis, the war of ALL AGAINST ALL. The resulting violence of all against all would annihilate the community if it were not transformed, in the end, into a war of ALL AGAINST ONE, thanks to which the unity of the community is reestablished." René Girard
and parking this
The great blind spot is economics. Everyone's tried to defend Obama's approach, and I can understand the feelings behind such attempts. Scott Walker's program would wind us up in the third world status ash can in no time flat. Ever since Reagan the press has had to do this: Look at how Clinton paid down the debt! Yeah, but look at what he did to welfare and food stamps.
Fact is we are exporting nothing but war tech, raw materials, and refined raw materials (fracked oil)...AND the Wall Street hegemony has to pretend that the greatest economy on Earth is still bringing in enough dough to justify INCREASING their salaries. And to make their pretend world come to life, they have to bring in mo money from somewhere. And, to bring in mo money, they're taking it from the folks on the bottom. Canabalism? Call it what you like.
How will we teach economics to our fellow and sister Americans and the talking heads? I'd recommend begin reading or listening to: Mark Weisbrot, Michael-Hudson dot com, and Robert Kuttner (American Prospect).
If you talk to people about a "full employment economy," you know what they're thinking: at least start with affirmative action. But affirmative action won't do it; just promotes brain drain. If you put folks ahead in a decrepit system they're just getting more money for a "better" spot in...a decrepit system. Have mercy, if it was only that simple.
and parking this...
Dave Atch Yes, I hear about China's bubbles. But I remember reading Jacques Ellul's claim that today actual technology = the capital. http://www.zerohedge.com/.../china-mocks-g7-gathering...
China Mocks G7 As "Gathering Of Debtors", Warns "Confrontation Will Be...
Like · Reply · Remove Preview · 18 mins
Douglas L. Saunders Sure you want to rely on zerohedge for anything?
Zero Hedge - RationalWiki
Zero Hedge is a batshit insane Austrian economics-based finance blog run by a pseudonymous founder...
Like · Reply · 16 mins
Dave Atch Sorry, guess I meant to go here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_Hedge
Zero Hedge - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Zero Hedge is a financial blog that aggregates news and presents editorial opinions from original and outside sources. It reports on economics, Wall Street, and the financial sector and is credited with bringing the controversial practice of flash trading to public attention in 2009 via a series of…
Like · Remove Preview · 11 mins · Edited
Douglas L. Saunders I guess you do. Pity.
Like · 13 mins
Douglas L. Saunders Please don't post this garbage on my wall any more. You're free to post it on your own wall.
Like · 12 mins
Dave Atch It's only garbage if China did not in fact refer to the meeting as a "gathering of debtors." What's specious is to claim China & Greece share economic woes equally, or to infer Rational Wiki's more credible than Wikipedia.
Like · 1 · 4 mins
Douglas L. Saunders Troll it is. Bye bye. Why do you not think it incredibly rude to 1) post drivel on the wall of a stranger, 2) and repeat the rudeness after you'd been asked not to do it? Carey Stallings - explain to your friend Dave Atch my rules on trolls.