[MD] Problems with Intellectual control of Society

[markhsmit at aol.com]

Hey John,



I think I see where you are getting to, and that it has equal value

or maybe more than the dogmatic side.  It leaves the mind

flexible and open and full of possibilities.  So it may be a 

balance between the two.  I think that is the way I try to 

approach this world, maybe not.



So, what is my issue?  It is with the second part of my

observation of Wikipedia.  That is, it appears to be used

for purposes of coercion, in rather nefarious ways.

But I don't want to belabor this point and start another

political dialogue, I could be wrong.



Willblake2


-----Original Message-----
From: John Carl <ridgecoyote at gmail.com>
To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
Sent: Mon, Oct 19, 2009 9:37 am
Subject: Re: [MD] Problems with Intellectual control of Society




Will, thanks for that link to the interview with the founder of Wikipedia.
Most informative.
 will posit a solution that will help expose your intellectualism
onundrum:
Wikipedia is better than an encyclopedia BECAUSE of its orientation toward
Q.
An encyclopedia seems better to you because of its higher intellectual
alue, but it is the very static nature of reliance upon single-source,
uthoritative expertise that makes it less good from an MoQ perspective.
A questing young mind that comes to a body of information with the attitude,
I'll see what the experts say and trust in that." will find more happiness
n the most expert publication.  And then this mind will latch and attach
he information obtained in a very rigid and dogmatic way.
But a mind that approaches the text with doubt and openess will absorb the
nowledge provisionally and dynamically, using it but not attaching dogmatic
ixitude will in the long run be the better informed individual.
Of course, I guess you could take this to an extreme and say, "well why not
ead something completely ridiculously wrong.  You'll even be less likely to
ttach dogmatically."
If you say that, then I'll say,  "well..., ummm...., errrrr...."
Sometimes Quality is more difficult to define than others, but I KNOW good
and bad) when I experience it.



On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 5:36 PM, markhsmit <markhsmit at aol.com> wrote:
> Hey John,
 Don't get me wrong, I like to read Wikipedia as well.  It is yet another
 source
 for knowledge.  I feel that I need to cross-reference much of what I read,
 but
 often it is a good starting point.  And, no, not all expertise belongs to
 the
 encyclopedia, and often unsupported claims are made even in those
 Halls of Knowledge.  What surprises me is how Wikipedia has become
 a source for reference for the younger generation.  We don't even know
 who wrote the articles.  Otherwise, it's all good.

 I don't think we are in an anti-intellectual crisis, and I appreciate you
 putting the Mao purging into context.  It would appear that
 anti-intellectualism
 is just another word (like PC) which really has no meaning except as
 a tool to insult someone or to get one's way.

 Cheers,
 Willblake2

 On Oct 18, 2009, at 11:25:02 AM, "John Carl" <ridgecoyote at gmail.com>
 wrote:
 From:   "John Carl" <ridgecoyote at gmail.com>
 Subject:    Re: [MD] Problems with Intellectual control of Society
 Date:   October 18, 2009 11:25:02 AM PDT
 To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
 I like Wikipedia because not all expertise belongs to the encyclopedia
 companies. The more you care about any given topic, the more you're likely
 to know about it and wish to comment or inform your fellows.
 Keeping the whole thing dynamic and open and evolving gives us the
 opportunity to keep it sharp and accurate, if "we the people" want it so.

 If you really think that there is anti-intellectualism going on
 > in the US at this time, by all means, convince others, and rage
 > against it. Unless of course you think it is good thing. Take sides
 > create a movement, what's happening now with anti-intellectualism
 > could result in another purging like in China after the second world war.
 >


 I got a different perspective on China last week. There's this guy I know,
 known him a long time from the SDA church. We were working together
 trimming the leaves off my brother's crop, a communal activity with lots of
 time for gab, and I got to know stuff about him I never knew before. He
 speaks fluent Mandarin. He used to teach Formosan villagers english and
 he's an enthusiast of Mao's Red Book.

 All stuff that I never knew. People can be so much more rich and
 complicated than you observe on the surface.

 Anyway, he made a point about Mao's massacre of intellectuals that it
 wasn't
 "anti-intellectual" per se, rather it was following in the tradition of
 thousands of years of Chinese history when one dynasty wipes out the
 intellectual classes of the former so that it's own new intellectual
 evolution takes over. Thus it wasn't society wiping out the intellectuals
 so much as one intellectual pattern dominating society by wiping out
 competing intellectual patterns.


 How did we let our society get so anti-intellectual, where did we go
 > wrong, where will it lead?


 I think the anti-intellectualism you and Arlo see is born of a good
 instinct, a collective, albeit ill-informed rejection of a value-free
 metaphysical outlook which society blames upon intellectualism. But without
 a more comprehensive metaphysical outlook to guide it, is in great danger
 of
 making the mistakes of any reactionary, tossing babies all over the place
 in
 its effort to get some clean bath water in the tub.
 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/


 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/

oq_Discuss mailing list
istinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
ttp://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
rchives:
ttp://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
ttp://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/