Comments on Notes on the Invention of the World by Scott Miller

@ fuster:
Thanks, Fuster. I need all the defendething I can get.

@ CK MacLeod:
I thought you were smart-aleckily pointing out that anyone could post the frog picture by posting it again yourself. Doesn't matter because what I wrote isn't true. Some people do like smart-alecks. Actually, being one myself, I like smart-alecks.

iCK MacLeod wrote:

Only you could have posted it.

Nobody likes a smart-aleck. And no I didn't put the i before your name there on purpose. But it's perfect. iCK. Icky.

@ fuster:
Right. Although, the rigid frog photo was really funny in a particular person kind of way. Only you could have posted it.

@ Scott Miller:
Hold everything! How weird. I thought Fuster wrote the original post. Jesus. The avatar didn't come up originally, and I got it in my head that Fuster had written the post. So sorry. Wow. What a mix-up. I just noticed this. Then your computer problem probably kept you from noticing my original confusion. Oh, well. That was probably good.

@ CK MacLeod:
I surmised all that. It's why I took it easy to begin with. The "dismissiveness" you felt actually may have stemmed from that passivity. I didn't want to make a big deal out of one little quote and I liked what Fuster did with it (especially since the last time Hegel came up, he really was dismissive). So I was juggling a lot of positions at once. Plus, I have second-hand Hegelian appreciation due to Ken Wilber. He combined Hegel and Buddhism successfully, and while my pushing of the Purposefulness-Playfulness duality didn't go so well, that way of addressing reality comes from Wilber's Hegelian ideas. Hence, I have no interest in shooting you. On the contrary, I want to help you help your dead friend with his project. I think it connects with my dead friend Ken Kesey's project. Kesey didn't protest Vietnam because he thought protesting was just a counter-purpose too relatable to the original purpose. He, therefore, took up playfulness describable as merry-pranksterism.

CK MacLeod wrote:

I”m typing with a hand tied behind my back

One hand or two, I''m or no I'm, you're still the man.

bob wrote:

So even with the (valorious) motivation to save the nation, the world, the universe (more and more abstract) we increase, as abstraction and valor increase, the likelhood of annihilating the nation, the world the universe

Right.

@ bob:
Right.

@ CK MacLeod:
Okay. I'll roll and role with it. Sorry that I came off as dismissive. There is room for me being more playful and dynamic.

@ CK MacLeod:
Hegel set up the example. I find the example wildly assertive. He's doing what you accuse me of doing. The advocacy is clear. He champions purposefulness by coming up with the idea that something is being "turned into valour." He's not just calling them as he sees them. He's projecting something onto something.
CK MacLeod wrote:

you throw up a counter-purpose that you merely refrain through a trick of language to characterize as such

Again, so does Hegel, and so do you here. That's my point. Without a counterbalancing amount of playfulness, all we ever get is "counter-purpose." There's nothing wrong with purposefulness. The problem is when it isn't balanced out with playfulness. Country Joe had a purpose. He expressed the purpose, but at the same time realized a state of playfulness. Your "keg" example is also an example of what psychologists refer to as "borderline" thinking. It fails to see the middle, where dynamic dualism takes place. You don't bring a keg of beer into class and call it playfulness. Obviously, a keg is brought in as a counter-purpose to the class. There's no real playfulness to it. There's only counter-purpose. If someone brings real playfulness into the class, it balance the purposefulness and can be expressive of valor. Country Joe expressed a counter-purpose, but not just that. He expressed playfulness as well and because of the dynamic dualism of that, he managed to create an expression that became universally powerful.

Personal courage became impersonal...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBdeCxJmcAo

The main prejudice I sense has to do with purposefulness. In every way, playfulness is equal to purposefulness. You express a wonderful awareness of that with your video posts and general humor. You also certainly understand purposefulness and are equally skilled at purposeful expression. So I blame Hegel here. There's a failure where dialectics are concerned. Championing purposefulness, he lost the True. There is nothing True without playfulness. Both things can be expressed at the same time, and I think an awareness of playfulness' value might lead to an understanding of how valor can't really be valiant without both things being expressed. A soldier dying for the universal takes things too seriously. Something is missing from the mix. Country Joe and the Fish having the guts to get up and sing their famous anti-war song uses the guitar and the human voice in a way that expresses valor much more completely than the one Hegel credits to gun usage.