Like physical terrorism, psychological terrorism can do long-lasting damage to our lives. Someone may set us up, planting something bad in our life and waiting 4 it to explode in the future. They may also back-stab or oppress us 4 their self-interests, 4 their social network/country or 4 our error/action/interaction in the past (in your age of rebellious, for instance). There r other risks for us to bear 2. Accidence happens, we all know. That's why ppl buy insurance.
They may not be human. Those blood-sucking/poisonous insects can terrorize just anybody 4 their a priori survivalism. Pet of our neighbor may turn fierce suddenly and send us to the hospital. In these incidence, we r not just physically terrorized.
Nightmare may terrorize us with/out obvious reason, like depression/sickness.
Psychologically speaking, for terrorists, the game rule is simple: If we let them have permanent -ve effects on our life, we losed.
Actually, the risks in global village have not much changes after September 11 incident. Then, y is the big fuss ppl make about terrorism?
3/15/08
Culture--A Post-structuristic Perspective
Post-structuristic perspective of culture rejects totalities, e.g. total exclusiveness, total aggressiveness against other cultures etc. When hegemonic elements r gone it preserves only those of natural, inevitable & properly unique 4 itself, & turns itself into something of environmentally conscious & refreshable. Its subtle &/ ("de-demonized"/post-quantum-theory) chaotic reconstruction & deconstruction, in which concurrence of drastic changes & peace r possible , in its own rhetorics, semiotics & patterns while reexamining its presuppositions constantly. The semiotics have more emphasis on pragmatics than other fields. And, virtualness can be a testing ground 4 possible changes.
Neonaturalism
As indicated in my previous threads, my version of neonaturalism, like my neopragmatism, with which it is integrated, is of something inevitable & de-ontologistic. Words with hegemonic tendency like "the only way", "all", "totally", "entities" etc. r sorta taboos for its narratives. No matter how 1 tried to "unnaturalistized" his/her belief, the ghost of human nature is there waiting for him/her to deal with throughout his/her whole life & likewise, the pragmatism 4 dealing with it. Things r neutral & can bring about spectra that range within extremely good to extremely bad. & the results r unstable in accordance with context. When things turned problematic, the proper way is not resorting to belief that canceled their natural aspects but 1 that dare to face &/ try to resolve them in nature-prone manners.
Zero-waste Systems & Their Open Documentations
(Near)zero-waste philosophy & systems existed in days of yore. "The usefulness of uselessness" of Taoism/Daoism is 1 of the good examples. Indeed, it is an interesting topic for further explorations. Just wonder y they don't get enough publicity and encouragements nowadays. I'd like to suggest here a diversified awarding and marketing systems for their open documentations and public educations of the cost-effective systems, especially those that integrated with zero-emission systems. These should have the following common features:
1. Reliable & fair appraisal process/es and systems for individual &/ groups in accordance with spectra of contributed results &/ possible implications, especially the initial sparks for further developments.
2. Properly managed trust funds & awards.
3. Result-oriented web-based open-source marketings, human resource managements & appraisals systems.
4. Multiple public education channels.
1. Reliable & fair appraisal process/es and systems for individual &/ groups in accordance with spectra of contributed results &/ possible implications, especially the initial sparks for further developments.
2. Properly managed trust funds & awards.
3. Result-oriented web-based open-source marketings, human resource managements & appraisals systems.
4. Multiple public education channels.
2/23/08
Mine-r-better-than-yours & Self-righteousness
From kiddie rows to the grandest scale warfares, from kindergarten crayon sketches to great cultures, from personal beliefs to institutionalized religions, from enmity to the highest intimacy and from individuals to the biggest nation, mine-r-better/bigger-than-yours psychology, or interpretation of it, is so common that we may treat it like the air we inhale and exhale. As we compare and contrast (or refer and defer) in our conscious moments, it goes beyond passive mode of complacency toward self-righteousness &/ self-justification. More often than not, they r emotional rather than rational.
How does this kinda "mineness" come about? Is it a priori or posteriori? The selfish gene theory doesn't seem suffice for the explanations. It is intermingled also with entrenchment of relevant meanings in our mind and will to power.
While we know it can be overcome, it doesn't follow that we have to do away with each and every diversities we have now. The rogue competitions as well as total distrust effected should be our main concerns.
How does this kinda "mineness" come about? Is it a priori or posteriori? The selfish gene theory doesn't seem suffice for the explanations. It is intermingled also with entrenchment of relevant meanings in our mind and will to power.
While we know it can be overcome, it doesn't follow that we have to do away with each and every diversities we have now. The rogue competitions as well as total distrust effected should be our main concerns.
2/19/08
Sex
No matter how one idealizes, romanticizes or moralizes sex, it is, per se, can't escape from its fetish, raw, natural and even pragmatic parts. The desire is there; the need is there; the sensation is there; the use is there; so as the supply and demand, be it legal or illegal, orgasmic or not. To avoid bombardments from moralists &/ goody-goodies, please take note that these r just pure factual statements.
In a forum thread I asked: "As one of the most common activities of homo sapien, why is it still so controversial after millennia of civilisations?" What's the complexity really working behind the moral scene?
One of the keyword I found out is: "Control", as in contrast with the stronger word of Michel Foucault--"repression"--in his multi-volume The History of Sexuality. We don't like others to c us losing composure, thus self-control and act and speak morally in public. Composure is one of the rituals society wants us to perform so as to appear normal. Some ancient rulers might utilize sex morality in their attempt to improve production rather than procreation, control violent crime, or control the population so as to control competition of limited resources etc. Will to power played a crucial role here. The morality usually passed on and further accumulated after temporal-spatial changes. Often, the codes were integrated into law.
Parents want control over their kids in order to protect them and of various degree, exert their power. It's still quite common to c people try to control their (prospect) partners with morality, not just over male side as in propositions of Foucault. In our efforts to control STD, AIDS especially, many people have insisted on stricter sex morality, which imho has worsen the situation.
"Order is good; chaos is bad." kinda presuppositions also create urge in us to control social "discipline", be it just in appearance only. Pre-quantum-theory ontological world views requires certain kinda totality and thus it was logical to c, what I'd like to called, severe conflicts of totalities, when they crashed into one another.
Finally, in a process of attaining control of powers, one may resort to moral competitions, thus reinforcements or even new creations and further accumulations. Whether these urges of control are freaky or not is for psychiatries to decide on case by case basis.
These r not exhaustive narratives, ofc. And, I'm not against any "proper" value.
In a forum thread I asked: "As one of the most common activities of homo sapien, why is it still so controversial after millennia of civilisations?" What's the complexity really working behind the moral scene?
One of the keyword I found out is: "Control", as in contrast with the stronger word of Michel Foucault--"repression"--in his multi-volume The History of Sexuality. We don't like others to c us losing composure, thus self-control and act and speak morally in public. Composure is one of the rituals society wants us to perform so as to appear normal. Some ancient rulers might utilize sex morality in their attempt to improve production rather than procreation, control violent crime, or control the population so as to control competition of limited resources etc. Will to power played a crucial role here. The morality usually passed on and further accumulated after temporal-spatial changes. Often, the codes were integrated into law.
Parents want control over their kids in order to protect them and of various degree, exert their power. It's still quite common to c people try to control their (prospect) partners with morality, not just over male side as in propositions of Foucault. In our efforts to control STD, AIDS especially, many people have insisted on stricter sex morality, which imho has worsen the situation.
"Order is good; chaos is bad." kinda presuppositions also create urge in us to control social "discipline", be it just in appearance only. Pre-quantum-theory ontological world views requires certain kinda totality and thus it was logical to c, what I'd like to called, severe conflicts of totalities, when they crashed into one another.
Finally, in a process of attaining control of powers, one may resort to moral competitions, thus reinforcements or even new creations and further accumulations. Whether these urges of control are freaky or not is for psychiatries to decide on case by case basis.
These r not exhaustive narratives, ofc. And, I'm not against any "proper" value.
2/14/08
De-ontological Coherence
De-ontological coherence is not just a convenient tools when facing criticisms from certain theologians and/or metaphysicists who try to frame your statements as something total in situation where you have made certain positive assertions about certain word, such as "rationality". It is somehow bionic, of valid facts, of proper alternative leeways and flexibility, of limitations of both presentation and representation, of forensics &/ real statistically correctness and of neopragmatic survivalism and de-ontological wholism. Neopragmatism would be exalted to the same status as Bible and Qur'an to fundamentalists or Also sprach Zarathustra to Nazi, if it is not de-ontologized. The latter was a clear instance of misinterpreting a literature.
Those expect totality rather than partial validity r more often than not fall short of perfectionism they required from the others. Thus de-ontological coherence is situational and complex. Just like one neopragmatism can be different from the others. And, the ultimate criteria r of sustainability, of justice, of fuzzy logic, of neo-naturalistic freedom, of antitrust and of "wholistic"(process, application, protecting the weak etc.) systems and results.
De-ontologism, which is distinguished from deontology, itself is not total. It rejects only universal metaphysics. Those field metaphysics like foundations of mathematics r still viable.
Those expect totality rather than partial validity r more often than not fall short of perfectionism they required from the others. Thus de-ontological coherence is situational and complex. Just like one neopragmatism can be different from the others. And, the ultimate criteria r of sustainability, of justice, of fuzzy logic, of neo-naturalistic freedom, of antitrust and of "wholistic"(process, application, protecting the weak etc.) systems and results.
De-ontologism, which is distinguished from deontology, itself is not total. It rejects only universal metaphysics. Those field metaphysics like foundations of mathematics r still viable.
2/9/08
Triumph of Rationality
In the triumph of rationality we allow women's suffrage.
In the triumph of rationality we abolish slavery.
In the triumph of rationality we release foot-bindings.
In the triumph of rationality we abandon feudalism.
In the triumph of rationality we choose secularism.
In the triumph of rationality we want proper democracy.
In the triumph of rationality we fight for our freedom.
In the triumph of rationality we need only minimum standard value.
In the triumph of rationality we reject accident-proof jails.
In the triumph of rationality we prefer proper working systems than heroism.
In the triumph of rationality we antitrust.
In the triumph of rationality we long for better environment.
In the triumph of rationality we foresee that our endless greed will destroy us one day.
In the triumph of rationality we distinguish public and private properly.
In the triumph of rationality we let rationality overcomes emotion.
In the triumph of rationality we abolish slavery.
In the triumph of rationality we release foot-bindings.
In the triumph of rationality we abandon feudalism.
In the triumph of rationality we choose secularism.
In the triumph of rationality we want proper democracy.
In the triumph of rationality we fight for our freedom.
In the triumph of rationality we need only minimum standard value.
In the triumph of rationality we reject accident-proof jails.
In the triumph of rationality we prefer proper working systems than heroism.
In the triumph of rationality we antitrust.
In the triumph of rationality we long for better environment.
In the triumph of rationality we foresee that our endless greed will destroy us one day.
In the triumph of rationality we distinguish public and private properly.
In the triumph of rationality we let rationality overcomes emotion.
1/6/08
Neo-neologism
In late philosophy, neologism is a sarcasm rather than metaphysics or even an entity. "New"-ing just for the sack of "new"-ing yet it may not be something new; being creative just for the sack of creativism; critical just for the sack of criticism. Psychological issues other than the related jargon do take part. While it can be unavoidable sometimes, cyclical and going no where it can be. Thus, neo-neologism has to be something wholistically pragmatic to break the deadlock. It must result in question like:"When the momentum of the keep on double-folding world economy IRL going to end?", "Why some pseudo-democratic regimes seem 'sustainable' in the name of 'pragmatism'?" And, these r not something of much new.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)