[MD] Transhumanism

[John Carl]

Ian,

I'm interested in a new phenomena taking over games, wherein video replay
shows the audience and the refs what REALLY happened.  Was his toe on the
line?  Who last touched the ball?  There seems to be a fascinating tendency
to get more and more of our reality from technological imagery - the image
is becoming the final word, and the players mere actors.  Objectification
marches on.  A strange loop in the making.

John

On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 3:09 AM, Ian Glendinning
<ian.glendinning at gmail.com>wrote:

> Hi Matt, (and Krim et al)
>
> More that that,
>
> When you stop discussing the what and start discussing the how, the
> how becomes the what (the subject).
> Meta. This is the essence of level shifting strange loops. The essence
> of evolution, loops that do more than go round in circles.
>
> (A hobby of mine is to apply this thinking to rules in sports - which
> is why I jumped on the original quote of yours - my main interest if
> football though. Rules that get introduced into the way the game is
> managed - by the referee - but bring about changes in the way the game
> is played - by the players - and therefore demand new rules in the way
> the game is refereed, etc .... metaphor for evolution in all forms of
> governance.)
>
> Example http://www.psybertron.org/?p=1757
>
> Ian
>
> On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 8:14 PM, Matt Kundert
> <pirsigaffliction at hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hey Ian,
> >
> >> First joining up the comment of Krim's you responded to here, with our
> >> "siding with Bush" discussion in the other thread.
> >> Krim made the distinction here : "the differences between not what but
> >> how liberals think".
> >> The "what" is the specific immediate tactical situation, the "how" is
> >> the strategic rhetorical process.
> >
> > I think you're right to see the parallel, but I think wrong to
> > strictly assimilate them in this way.  The distinctions of
> > tactics/strategy and what/how are definitely parallel, but
> > the what/how I was discussing with Krimel, I think, is at a
> > different level some of the time.  For instance, wondering
> > about what we should talk to with other people, "the what"
> > or "the how"?  That's a tactical curiosity, which makes the
> > what/how subsumed underneath the tactics half of the
> > tactics/strategy.
> >
> > We can alter the relationships between the two distinctions
> > to generate different questions, but to just assimilate
> > "tactics" to "what" is blur away the possibility of wondering
> > (in a confusion of levels to make my point) tactically useful
> > to talk about tactics.
> >
> > Matt
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > The New Busy is not the too busy. Combine all your e-mail accounts with
> Hotmail.
> >
> http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?tile=multiaccount&ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_4
> > Moq_Discuss mailing list
> > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> > Archives:
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> > http://moq.org/md/archives.html
> >
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>