Session 9 June 2018
- Thread starter Laura
- Start date
Corvus
Dagobah Resident
Machievelli said to always apply to people s self interest if you want to get things done, the higher society ladder is it is easier to do, and top molds the bottom, but I would disagree with Plutarch because for something to grow it has to fell on fertile ground also which Plutarch implied himself not directly, so we are also part of a problem.
SMM
The Living Force
Thank you for sharing this new session; a very interesting session! And the sense of humour throughout is wonderful 
After reading it yesterday, what stood out were the questions on Jung and postmodernism, the Tower of Babel, the sun's changing effects, Ark's question about connections, the goose who lays golden eggs / Queen Bee and worker bees and the remark about Being catching up with Doing.
The K variations on the names are also curious.
After reading it yesterday, what stood out were the questions on Jung and postmodernism, the Tower of Babel, the sun's changing effects, Ark's question about connections, the goose who lays golden eggs / Queen Bee and worker bees and the remark about Being catching up with Doing.
The K variations on the names are also curious.
duyunne
Jedi Council Member
Thank you for sharing this new session; a very interesting session! And the sense of humour throughout is wonderful
After reading it yesterday, what stood out were the questions on Jung and postmodernism, the Tower of Babel, the sun's changing effects, Ark's question about connections, the goose who lays golden eggs / Queen Bee and worker bees and the remark about Being catching up with Doing.
The K variations on the names are also curious.
I think that had to do with sound resonance. C doesn’t always make a hard ‘kah’ sound. K expounds on such a sound or at least enforces it. Cs also expressed importance on how vocal sounds or words can have an impact on our reality or consciousness.
DianaRose
Jedi Master
I spent a lot of time online on social media and reading website like Quillette. And I see a much greater radicalisation on that side. This isn't helped by the fact that people can be quite hypocritical and often lacks an understanding of geopolitics. The thing is, you would be hard-pressed to find someone who truly and genuinely believes all that postmodernism nonsense in real life. You know things like gender fluidity, non binary, oppression and other topics of that kind are products of the internet. Only, if you attended a very liberal university, or a very liberal place of work (generally found in media/ entertainment industry) would you individuals that may believe this and even then, those would be few in comparison to the rest of the population. Also, note that this very liberal university or very liberal place of work would be an elite institution. This means that essentially, postmodernism is an elite game which involve a tiny elite of the population. Like sure every place of work has equality laws and if you work in the public sector being accused of not following these laws can cause you lots of trouble. But how many people at work genuinely believe in gender fluidity or wouldn't feel offended by the notion that we live in a white supremacist country? How many believe that black people are oppressed? Like you think these are conversation you could have without most people thinking you're a nutter?
I think in this movement, you have the TRUE believer and then you have what have those that have been converted. Those one believe postmodernism truism only because it is trendy to do so. Deep down, they may laugh at it or think it all nonsense, but for now because it is trendy, they "believe" it.
However, on the other side of the ideological aisle, you have people who truly believe that they are at war. Those though they don't ascribe to relative truth, can display equal tendency as those in the left. Many display signs of nationalism as defined by George Orwell (also applies to the left to be honest). And then you have many whose thinking lack sophistication (if it isn't black then it must be white) or are simply hypocritical/biased. Regardless of the quality of what most of them think, it doesn't change the fact that they are the majority and very angry. Recently, they was a rally in London who pretended to be for free speech and for the freedom of Tommy Robinson. The whole turned violent. Online, though a few condemned the violence, they were many who praised it, shrugged at it or claimed that it was to be expected. They felt that revolution was in the air/ inevitable or at least would be eager for such a thing to happen. They have no sense of what revolution or anarchy means and include. It would be very easy to co-op their anger.
My fear is for good, reasonable folk being outnumbered, full stop. There is an extreme polarisation going on. Though I understand that many would disagree with me, as I've said elsewhere, I don't see much of a difference between the people who are pro-left and those anti-left, for free speech or pro-right. You can't really resonate or argue with either because they believe whatever they want to believe even if proofs that they're wrong is right in front of their face. The left has more power overall because it has a bigger reach (control of media, universities, Hollywood). However, as I've tried to explain earlier, it has build a sand castle that is threatening to crumble.
Oh and by the way, I'm the same generation as you. At some point you wrote that you feel people didn't realise the depth of the issue with postmodernism. I will extend this view a bit further. People of our generation and older don't realise the depth of the issue with our society and our way of living. In my opinion, it's because they are too caught up by ordinary life. And you can't really blame them, can you?
In regards to JP, it doesn't necessarily have to be because "sorting oneself out" is hard work. Too much exposure is a common enough phenomenon with celebrity where when people have seen or hear about you a lot, all of a sudden, they fell you're too this or too that. Then, you also have the fact that people like newness and shock. It seems to me that JB always repeat more or less the same message(s) in and outside his speech. So, maybe people are getting "bored" in that sense. Additionally, JB's political ignorance/naivety may be frustrating to some, especially if you're into politics or if you're not a massive fan of his. It's quite something to see someone with a million follower twitting nonsense about serious political issues. And finally, so many "hit" piece has been written about him, maybe some are getting to people.
Yeah, I like him too - nice, witty, intelligent and willing to take a stand. I recently stumbled upon another catholic, theologian Dr. Peter Kreeft - very bright and interesting guy. For example, I enjoyed this talk:
For example, love his analogy that our bodies are like physical books, and our souls like the meaning of those words - you can't change one side of the equation without changing the other side as well.
It's just crazy how upside down our world has become that nowadays of all people, Catholics are becoming the voice of reason & intelligent discourse! I wouldn't be surprised if we are seeing a Christian and especially catholic revival with people like Barron and Kreeft coming out of the woodwork. Maybe this also puts a new twist on all the pedophilia scandals of the church - kind of interesting that you hear almost nothing about pedophilia in the halls of power, but the catholic church has been slaughtered in the media for decades now to the point that most people think of child abuse when they see a catholic priest... doesn't mean of course that there were/are no horrible things going on in the church, but things are shifting and changing so fast these days that we must observe very closely what's being played out here, I think.
mrtn
Dagobah Resident
Thank you for explaining. It makes sense. I have to keep my feet on the ground!
