[MD] woods

Thu Jan 15 12:06:27 PST 2009

--------------------------------------------------
From: <moq_discuss-request at lists.moqtalk.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2009 8:48 PM
To: <moq_discuss at lists.moqtalk.org>
Subject: Moq_Discuss Digest, Vol 38, Issue 75

> Send Moq_Discuss mailing list submissions to
> moq_discuss at lists.moqtalk.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> moq_discuss-request at lists.moqtalk.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> moq_discuss-owner at lists.moqtalk.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Moq_Discuss digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>   1. Re: socialism (Woods Woods)
>   2. Re: David Hildebrand's Dewey (Steven Peterson)
>   3. Re: Sundance - Wounded Knee (Woods Woods)
>   4. Re: socialism (Krimel)
>   5. Re: socialism (Woods Woods)
>   6. woods (Christoffer Ivarsson)
>   7. Re: socialism (Krimel)
>   8. Re: woods (MarshaV)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 10:57:00 -0800 (PST)
> From: Woods Woods <woodswoods8 at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [MD] socialism
> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> Message-ID: <641377.89126.qm at web59708.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
>
>
> [Arlo]
> Hehe. I don't know which is worse, the paranoia, the Messianic complex 
> (he's actually comparing himself to "Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, 
> Abraham Lincoln, and John Kennedy"), or the empty sloganeering (don't we 
> get enough of that from our other resident talk-radio parrots?)
>
>
> woods:
> That's all i've talked about since i came here.  I've only
> talked about Jefferson and such... that's it.  All.  Oh, and
> some Congressional Hearings, Public Law, and Senate Reports,
> but hey... that's all tin-foil to you.  Here do you want the
> electrode pads for Pirsig.  Your a joke.
>
>
> Arlo:
> As I said, Krimel, he has lapsed into a haze of incoherence, paranoia and 
> megalomania such that arguing with the bearded lunatic on the streetcorner 
> chanting about Doomsday would be easier. And he is feeding on this, using 
> it to fuel his vision that he is Woods to Lone Free Thinker awash in a sea 
> of blind, statist sheep, and pointing out differently only reaffirms your 
> blind, statist, sheepist mindset.
>
> woods:
> exactly Arlo.  I am an individual, maybe your learning.
>
> Arlo:
> You watch, even this post will simply reaffirm in his mind how much of a 
> "free-thinker" he is, poor persecuted Woods, beaten on by the sheep who 
> are too stupid to share his prophetic vision. That's all he sees. And 
> apparently can see.
>
> woods:
> I don't need to be a prophet, when all i've mentioned
> has come to past.  Sorry to give you the news...hehe
>
>
> it is so easy,
> woods
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 13:58:15 -0500
> From: "Steven Peterson" <peterson.steve at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [MD] David Hildebrand's Dewey
> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> Message-ID:
> <3c56281c0901151058t6cd427cdgfc792ce7655b7cc3 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252
>
> Hi All,
>
> Here is an interesting article on Richard Rorty's take on the my
> question about the pragmatists response to religious dogmatism:
> http://newhumanist.simple501.com/1440
>
> I found it very consistent with Matt's and DMB's take.
>
> Some quotes:
>
> "The Enlightenment dethroned the divine?and Rorty was plenty glad for
> it?but replaced it, as Rorty saw it, with new, secular gods like
> Nature, Reason, Truth, Reality, and Human Nature. (He uppercased these
> terms to emphasise what he viewed as their exaltation or
> fetishization.) We are just as badly in need of eschewing God's
> surrogates as of God?in fact even more so, Rorty argued, because of
> the loosening of religion's grip on us over the last century.
> Religion, he remarked in 1997, "is not as much of an issue as it was
> in 1900." (At least not in Western Europe, he might have thought to
> add.)
>
> While religion in the secularised West may no longer possess the power
> it once did, Rorty held that we remain firmly under the spell of a
> foundationalism every bit as fantastic as its supernatural
> predecessor: we think of our beliefs and truth-claims, however
> secular, as corresponding to and grounded upon a reality existing
> beyond the language games we've invented to get on in the world. (For
> Rorty, they do no such thing.)
> ...
> "Scientific realism and religious fundamentalism," he argued, "are
> products of the same urge." Both, he said, "are private projects which
> have got out of hand. They are attempts to make one's own private way
> of giving meaning to one's own life?a way which romanticises one's
> relation to something starkly and magnificently nonhuman, something
> Ultimately True and Real?obligatory for the general public."
>
> "Whereas the philosophers who claim that atheism, unlike theism, is
> backed up by evidence would say that religious belief is irrational,"
> he wrote in 2002, "contemporary secularists like myself are content to
> say that it is politically dangerous. On our view, religion is
> unobjectionable as long as it is privatised."
>
> Even in one of Rorty's most passionately secularist essays (the
> felicitously titled "Religion as Conversation-stopper"), he challenged
> his fellow atheists: there is hypocrisy, he insisted, "in saying that
> believers somehow have no right to base their political views on their
> religious faith, whereas we atheists have every right to base ours on
> Enlightenment philosophy. The claim that in doing so we are appealing
> to reason, whereas the religious are being irrational, is hokum."
>
> Rorty thus urged a shifting of the ground in arguments for secularism
> away from the question of religion's Objective Truth?a concept he
> regarded as fictional and one we'd be better off if we dropped. Thus
> the "principal concern" of secularists, he argued, "must be the extent
> to which the actions of religious believers frustrate the needs of
> other human beings, rather than the extent to which religion gets
> something right" (or wrong)."
>
>
> So it seems to me that the concern for atheist pragmatists is not so
> much about correcting people's private beliefs but keeping religious
> beliefs out of the public square. How is that accomplished? Whatever
> the defenses that have been tried, the religious right seems to have
> mounted a counter-attack on the wall of separation with dubious
> arguments about the Christianity of the Founding Fathers.
>
> Regards,
> Steve
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 11:04:10 -0800 (PST)
> From: Woods Woods <woodswoods8 at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [MD] Sundance - Wounded Knee
> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> Message-ID: <462169.5651.qm at web59707.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> those injines are just tin-foiled hat people around here
> that's what i hear
>
>
> woods
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: MarshaV <marshalz at charter.net>
> To: MD Forum <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
> Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2009 1:38:18 PM
> Subject: [MD] Sundance - Wounded Knee
>
>
>
> The 2009 Sundance Film Festival gets underway today, and we begin our 
> coverage with award-winning producer Stanley Nelson. His latest 
> documentary premieres Friday in the festival's Spectrum Category. It's 
> called "Wounded Knee" and it explores the 1973 stand-off at the Pine Ridge 
> Indian Reservation in South Dakota. Nelson joins Doug to talk about the 
> American Indian Movement - and what the 71-day siege means in American 
> history.
>
> If you're interested, you should be able to get a podcast of this show in 
> a day or so.
>
> http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/kuer/news.newsmain?action=article&ARTICLE_ID=1457806
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ..
> ..
> The Universe is uncaused, like a net of jewels in which each is a 
> reflection of all the others in a fantastic, interrelated harmony without 
> end.
> ..
> ..
>
>
> 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.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 14:08:24 -0500
> From: "Krimel" <Krimel at Krimel.com>
> Subject: Re: [MD] socialism
> To: <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
> Message-ID: <0A36274733A645858BA2FB8F265E3D79 at HPLaptop>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> [woods]
> ... that's all tin-foil to you.
>
> [Krimel]
> Sounds more like a lack of tin foil is the problem. Maybe using two layers
> would help.
>
> [woods]
> Here do you want the electrode pads for Pirsig.
>
> [Krimel]
> ECT is still an effect treatment for people with severe depression,
> catatonia, mania or schizophrenia. It really is painless and no longer
> involves the kind of violent seizures shown in "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's
> Nest." Just a little FYI for you. You know, something to think about if 
> you
> decide to get help.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 11:23:24 -0800 (PST)
> From: Woods Woods <woodswoods8 at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [MD] socialism
> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> Message-ID: <938941.92838.qm at web59713.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
>
>
>
> [woods previously]
> .... that's all tin-foil to you.
>
> [Krimel]
> Sounds more like a lack of tin foil is the problem. Maybe using two layers
> would help.
>
>
>
> woods:
> yeah, doesn't surprise around here that you would put a
> tin-foil hat and double it on Thomas Jefferson.
>
> [woods previously]
> Here do you want the electrode pads for Pirsig.
>
> [Krimel]
> ECT is still an effect treatment for people with severe depression,
> catatonia, mania or schizophrenia. It really is painless and no longer
> involves the kind of violent seizures shown in "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's
> Nest." Just a little FYI for you. You know, something to think about if 
> you
> decide to get help.
>
>
> woods:
> yeah, with liberty lost in this forum you keep on socially engineering
> them into shape Krimel... it might just work someday for ya...
>
>
> hehe
> woods
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 20:38:19 +0100
> From: "Christoffer Ivarsson" <IvarssonChristoffer at hotmail.com>
> Subject: [MD] woods
> To: <moq_discuss at lists.moqtalk.org>
> Message-ID: <COL109-DS1436AD7C5150C2AF58B220ADD70 at phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=original
>
> Quick one: WHO IS THIS GUY?
>
> And why are we even talking to this troll?
>
> The rest of us are thinking individuals. Anyone can see how stupid it is.
> I don't care about the guy with the sign on the street saying people are
> trying to assassinate him because he is a descendant of the old kings, and
> now I know to react to this guy woods the same way.
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 14:01:34 -0500
> From: "Krimel" <Krimel at Krimel.com>
> Subject: Re: [MD] socialism
> To: <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
> Message-ID: <34584BFB65ED429EA5F6014D173CB0CA at HPLaptop>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Arlo Bensinger [mailto:ajb102 at psu.edu]
> Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2009 1:32 PM
> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> Subject: Re: [MD] socialism
>
> [Krimel]
> Tune in and join millions of free thinkers whose thought process are
> unconstrained by anything; not reality, not common sense, not reason,
> not physical evidence. Their minds are totally open and all manner of
> crap wanders through the door and litters the floor.
>
> [Arlo]
> Hehe. I don't know which is worse, the paranoia, the Messianic
> complex (he's actually comparing himself to "Thomas Jefferson, Andrew
> Jackson, Abraham Lincoln, and John Kennedy"), or the empty
> sloganeering (don't we get enough of that from our other resident
> talk-radio parrots?)
>
> As I said, Krimel, he has lapsed into a haze of incoherence, paranoia
> and megalomania such that arguing with the bearded lunatic on the
> streetcorner chanting about Doomsday would be easier. And he is
> feeding on this, using it to fuel his vision that he is Woods to Lone
> Free Thinker awash in a sea of blind, statist sheep, and pointing out
> differently only reaffirms your blind, statist, sheepist mindset.
>
> You watch, even this post will simply reaffirm in his mind how much
> of a "free-thinker" he is, poor persecuted Woods, beaten on by the
> sheep who are too stupid to share his prophetic vision. That's all he
> sees. And apparently can see.
>
> [Krimel]
> Yeah, in his previous incarnation as SA, his posts where kind of artsy in 
> a
> Thoreau, "Pilgrim at Tinker Creek" kind of way. Not always readable but at
> least benign.
>
> I guess the good news is we only have three years to go until 2012 and 
> then
> everything will pass away.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 14:48:51 -0500
> From: MarshaV <marshalz at charter.net>
> Subject: Re: [MD] woods
> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> Message-ID:
> <20090115194852.KCWR128.aarprv06.charter.net at Marsha-PC.charter.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed
>
> At 02:38 PM 1/15/2009, you wrote:
>>Quick one: WHO IS THIS GUY?
>
> "In a society that thoroughly distrusts authority
> of any sort, he had native personal magnetism
> that singled him out in any group. In a society
> that exalts moderation and the easiest way, he
> was turbulent and could act violently upon
> occasion. In a society that praises a pliant
> personality that 'talks lots' ? that is, that
> chatters in a friendly fashion ? he was scornful
> and aloof. Zuni's only reaction to such
> personalities is to brand them as witches. He was
> said to have been peering through a window from
> outside, and this is a sure mark of a witch. At
> any rate he got drunk one day and boasted that
> they could not kill him. He was taken before the
> war priests who hung him by his thumbs from the
> rafters till he should confess to his witchcraft.
> This is the usual procedure in a charge of
> witchcraft. However he dispatched a messenger to
> the government troops. When they came his
> shoulders were already crippled for life, and the
> officer of the law was left with no recourse but
> to imprison the war priests who had been
> responsible for the enormity. One of these war
> priests was probably the most respected and
> important in recent Zuni history and when he
> returned after imprisonment in the state
> penitentiary he never resumed his priestly
> offices. He regarded his power as broken. It was
> a revenge that is probably unique in Zuni
> history. It involved, of course, a challenge to
> the priesthoods, against whom the witch by his act openly aligned himself.
>
> The course of his life in the forty years that
> followed this defiance was not, however, what we
> might easily predict. A witch is not barred from
> his membership in cult groups because he has been
> condemned, and the way to recognition lay through
> such activity. He possessed a remarkable verbal
> memory and a sweet singing voice. He learned
> unbelievable stores of mythology, of esoteric
> ritual, of cult songs. Many hundreds of pages of
> stories and ritual poetry were taken down from
> his dictation before he died, and he regarded his
> songs as much more extensive. He became
> indispensable in ceremonial life and before he
> died was the governor of Zuni. The congenital
> bent of his personality threw him into
> irreconcilable conflict with his society, and he
> solved his dilemma by turning an incidental
> talent to account. As we might well expect, he
> was not a happy man. As governor of Zuni and high
> in his cult groups, a marked man in his
> community, he was obsessed by death. He was a
> cheated man in the midst of a mildly happy populace.
>
> It is easy to imagine the life he might have
> lived among the Plains Indians where every
> institution favoured the traits that were native
> to him. The personal authority, the turbulence,
> the scorn, would all have been honoured in the
> career he could have made his own. The
> unhappiness that was inseparable from his
> temperament as a successful priest and governor
> of Zuni would have had no place as a war chief of
> the Cheyenne; it was not a function of the traits
> of his native endowment but of the standards of
> the culture in which he found no outlet for his native responses.
>
> When Phaedrus first read this passage he felt a
> kind of eerie feeling - a feeling he might have
> had if he had passed in front of a strange mirror
> and suddenly seen a reflection of someone he'd
> never expected to see. It was the same feeling he
> got at the peyote meeting. This Zuni Indian was
> not exactly someone else. "
>
>        (LILA, Chapter 10)

No. It doesn't apply. Just like you can't justify it with DQ. We can just 
look at the patterns of thought and judge them for what they are. In this 
case: crap.

Kindly
Chris 