Commenter Archive

Comments by bob

On “GWF was the man…

Did I get this right?

All ojects are emeshed in a infinite matrix of relationships. As such they are non-existent as objects. Consciouness apprehending them rescues them from the determinate matrix and establishes them in their true existence.

Consciouness apprehending a future ideal of human relations rescuses humanity from the non-existence of the infinite matrix of relatations that would otherwise negate it.

On “Karl@HotAir throws some more smoke bombs…

@ miguel cervantes:

"A long time"? Like the Ali article you linked, or Newt's AEI speech?


@ CK MacLeod:

In Buddhist terms, History is just another term for the beginningless cycle of suffering (samsara) we are all emeshed in. So any theory of history that is at all hopeful will seem to me to be deluded.

Notice I said beginingless and not endless. The point of Buddhism is that there is a way to break the cycle. But it involves one being at a time attaining enlightenment.

Part of one's karma is to share karma with others. One could usefully think of History as ths collective karma.


@ CK MacLeod:

Theories of history tend to leave me cold in any event. What I was trying to highlight is that the right is using "Clash of Civilizations" as a justification. The man who cmae up with the theory, whatever its merits, seems to be arguing against those who use his title.

This dishonest use by the right of the Huntington thesis should be seen clearly.

In his defense of his article, Hunington says:

The presumption of Westerners that other peoples who modernize must become "like us" is a bit of Western arrogance that in itself illustrates the clash of civilizations.


@ miguel cervantes:

Huntington's article and Ali's op ed you link here are 2 different things.

The last sentences of the Huntington article:

It will also, however, require the West to develop a more profound understanding of the basic religious and philosophical assumptions underlying other civilizations and the ways in which people in those civilizations see their interests. It will require an effort to identify elements of commonality between Western and other civilizations. For the relevant future, there will be no universal civilization, but instead a world of different civilizations, each of which will have to learn to coexist with the others.

On “Either/or vs both/and (JRub strikes again)

@ CK MacLeod:

Because you're looking for evidence of the truth when self-evident truths should suffice.

btw- enjoyed the dopamine reference.

On “Too late for healing

@ CK MacLeod:


I was speaking more to the imagery. The dopamamine style prompts one to look up and into the distance, while the seratonin style prompts one to look down. Some theorize that the dopamine style is responsible for the development of religion, which abounds in imagery that is up and in the distance. (Gives a different point of analysis of SP's Alaska/Russia remarks).

Many surveys have documented the greater religiosity of conservatives compared to liberals who tend towards spirituality or agnosticism.

Again, I'm talking tendencies. Plenty of conservatives are spiritiual or agnostics and plenltuy of liberal are religious.

This stuff operates in various parts of the brain not the pre-frontal cortex, which is where the executive functions of the brain reside. Your points pertain to prefrontal functions, while mine pertain to other areas.


@ CK MacLeod:


There's a neurological explanation for that.

Conservatives tend to use dopamine as the neurotransmitter of choice while liberals favor seratonin.

Dopamine is the nt for the upper visual field, religiousity and moving mass.

AQ also is a conservative (in its culture) phenonomen. They and US conseravatives have identical nt styles.

The dopamine system also prefers clarity and dislikes ambiguity.

Looking up from streeet level, US conservatives will perceive the mosque as both replacing the WTC and towering, dominating the landscape, because of the symbolism they perceive.

I'm not saying this explains everything, or that people are powerless in the face of the nt styke they are born with. I am saying it is an important factor in how we organize and understand the world.

On ““Accessory to 9/11” – the Other(‘s) 9/11 Truth

As I argue in the "Trutherism" comments, the establishment of Israel is one of the necessary facts to consider here.

This gave the dissposessed quality of post colonial states an additionally sharp edge in the mideast. It lead directly to the 67 war, the resulting Arab humiliation and the ensuing hot/cold war in the region ever since.

Now that facts on the ground have made a 2 state solution all but impossible, the factors you cite here are becoming more explicitly important. But from 48 until recently, the vocabulary of the mideast always included and was frequently dominated by Israel/Palestine.

That said, what I take to be one of your basic points, that comprehensibility is a factor of the observer not phenonomen, is a necessary condition for understanding anything.

The phrase flung about is frequently "hate America first crowd". Sometimes that may be accurate. Sometimes its people trying to understand the situation in order to make good decsions.

On “Note on “9/11 Trutherism”

@ CK MacLeod:

No fact is suffcient to explain the current situation. This is one of the necessary ones.


@ CK MacLeod:

How can one make sense of the mideast without it?


@ CK MacLeod:

That's their calculus. I don't see a contradiction.

What I meant to say is "Talking to oneself doesn't generally increase one's understanding of things except to clarify one's own thinking."

As an absolute statement, probably not true.

Maybe it was just a poorly realized rhetorical device.


Recounting the history of the US in the Arab and or Muslim world, adding up the debits and credits according to one's own calculus, doesn't add much to ones's understanding before the exercise (although it can be useful to clarify what one's understanding is.)

If one takes on the task of trying to understanding Rauf's remark, a useful place might be to consider what he might have meant, without evaluation until the task is done.

So what might be the crime to which the Us is anaccessory be? Joe begins his history chronologically with this.

Further back in time, the United States, again acting as a sovereign nation state, was the first to recognize the nation state of Israel, extending recognition literally within seconds of Ben Gurion’s declaration of Israeli independence.

Referring to Ben Gurion might be precisily on point. From the Wiki article on Gurion:

Ben-Gurion recognized the strong attachment of Palestinian Arabs to the land but hoped that this would be overcome in time. Nahum Goldmann, president of the World Jewish Congress, wrote that in a conversation about "the Arab problem" in 1956, Ben-Gurion stated: "Why should the Arabs make peace? If I was an Arab leader I would never make terms with Israel. That is natural: we have taken their country ... There has been anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They only see one thing: we have come here and stolen their country. Why should they accept that? They may perhaps forget in one or two generations' time, but for the moment there is no chance. So it is simple: we have to stay strong and maintain a powerful army."[

Might it be that the is the crime the US is accessory to after the fact? If so, the credits in US behavior to Arabs/Mulisms may be mitigation, but do not undo the ongoing continuation of the crime of the debits starting with the recognition of Israel within moments of its declaration of existence.

After all, here we are, pretty much at or past Gurion's 2 generations and the Arabs have not forgotten.

Was it ever reasonable to expect them to?


So what we have here is a bunch of conservatives cheering on an example of 2 parties (the business owner who's wall the mural was on, and the Cinn Contemporary Arts Center) entering into a lawful contract, only to be interferred with by somebody who seems to be so cocksure he knew what was best for everyone else.

As I said above, irony makes me tired.

There oughta be a law...


@ CK MacLeod:

I see it as likely that Fairey sees the process from initial conception to final removal (by whatever means) as a singe peice of performance art. So, it is n fact impossible to deface it in the sense of negagting it.

Instead, the defacer and his actions are part of the art even though he conceives it as a negation of the art.

For Fairey to do it himself I see as dishonest.

In any event, my life has taken so many ironic turns that irony just kinda tires me out.


@ CK MacLeod:

The defacement is certainly conceptually a completion of the mural, but I, and I hope Fairey, would regard auto-defacement as a failure.

On “Andy-McCarthyism

The US legal system, from lawmakers, judges, police, prosecutors have given undue deference to "this is a family matter" reasoning of religions in the areas of domestidc and child abuse since the country has been founded.

The abuse scandals of the Catholic Church may have the silver lining of reversing this, but if you any familiarity with Family Law, you know how entrenched it is. But it is the tip of the iceberg. Child abuse and child sexual abuse by parents as well as clergy, and spousal abuse all were consided "family matters" by the church until events showed the effect of such an attitude.

Fundamentalist sects of Protenstantism also have "benefitted" from this attitude. Although I have no personal knowldge, I suspect rabbi's have used this reasoning as well.

This incident occured in an area with a loarge Muslim population. It is quite believable that the dynamic we have seen in say Boston has occured here.

That this was not even considered as a factor in the Sullivan article idicates either enough ignorance of the area so as to preclude meaningful comment, or slanting information to arrive at a argumentative point.


I'm unclear what danger Sharia Compliant Finance is supposed to represent. Now, I don' know much about it at all, but it sounds something like Catholic Charities - constituting a service according to the tenets of your faith.

From what I could gather, SCF does not function so well that it a danger to the current system. Only Iran uses it exclusively. Other Arab states seem to think it doesn't allow them to make as much money as the world system.

Maybe somebody could explain its dangers a bit more clearly.

On “East is West and West is East and Never the Met Are Twain (light posting)

@ CK MacLeod:

The rights of Zombies leaving for greener pastures may eventually be decided by the Supreme Court.

On “Bleeding Heart Conservatives

Personally, I was disappointed SP refudiated "refudiate" by taking it down in subsequent iterations. I thought the Shakespeare defense had merit.

The rest of it....

"Common moral sense" is self evidently not common, moral or sensical, nor intended to be, but rather a Declaration of Co-Dependency with the atavistic image she has re-created herself into.

On “East is West and West is East and Never the Met Are Twain (light posting)

@ CK MacLeod:

Well, OK. Rereading the original post and #15, they say kinda the same thing, but they also illustrate the quandry you describe. Very allusive, interconnected vs straightforward and logical.

I'm not sure how long I've been commenting here, but the whole time my impression has been the "open discussion, small audience" mode vs the "sectarian, large(r) audience mode". In other words, it sounds like you're kinda catching up to the reality of ZC - for better or worse. (Assuming, against all evdence that I'm any kind of judge of what reality is.)

The point of the lunganalysis is that, to pivot successfully you have to be in firm contact with the ground. The original post above, not so much. #15, more so.


@ CK MacLeod:


I recognize active neural plasticity when I see it.

The "earning a living" part I get, I mean, I've wondered "How does this guy make $ with all the intense blogging?"

But your post indicates that's just the tip of the synapse.

In Tibetan terms, your lung energy is out of whack.

The W article focuses on the esoteric aspects of it, but the exoteric remedies I've run across for out of whack lung include:

sex, scotch, red meat, chocalate.

This assumes a reasonably clean living person.

Of course all this can be overdone, the key is to view it as medicine (I'm actually serious), altho having fun is part of the treatment too.

*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.



Extraordinary Comments

CK's WP Plugins