Re: Chekhov!

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: Your Beast of Burden

Postby Harvey » Wed Jun 17, 2020 9:58 am

JackRiddler » Wed Jun 17, 2020 1:49 pm wrote:My comments were that these works are anti-humanist in their ideology...


I think I might be anti-humanist. After all these years I'm still not clear what humanism is. I know what some people say it is and I know what some of those people do. If you could help me to understand the concept in theory and practice I'd be much obliged.
And while we spoke of many things, fools and kings
This he said to me
"The greatest thing
You'll ever learn
Is just to love
And be loved
In return"


Eden Ahbez
User avatar
Harvey
 
Posts: 4165
Joined: Mon May 09, 2011 4:49 am
Blog: View Blog (20)

Re: Chekhov!

Postby Sounder » Wed Jun 17, 2020 10:17 am

Jack wrote...
Finally, according to sounder, my comments are (further) evidence of my moral depravity, insufficient humanity and enlightenment, general meanness, etc. etc.


No, that is not 'according to sounder'. Get a grip Jack, or remain too chickenshit to deal with the content of what was actually said. Fuck, now I have to deal with whimpering alpha dogs, what has the world come to. Alpha dog don't like being told that the intellectual 10% class are the protectors of the 1%. Alpha dog don't like a lot of what I say, and that is fine with me.


I love and enjoy much content that rational Jack produces, and there is no bother to me if I disagree with certain assumptions or conclusions. On the other hand, rancid Jack comes across as some petulant adolescent that doesn't like how his friends are playing with his toys. Some call it Whitemans Disease,(not Tyson though, as he tends to not violate decorum.) (Unfortunately we all got herd immunity so the disease is buried deep.) Refer to Tyson Yunkaporta's book, Sand Talk, that I mentioned on the What are you Reading thread. He and indigenous thinking provide modes for interacting, and thereby creating, that depend on respect to insure and advance the quality of connections and relations. Tyson says; spirit, head, heart, hand. Mumma Doris says; respect, connect, reflect, and direct. Then she adds and illustrates how the western mind treats things backwards.

I have been treated poorly at RI for many years for saying essentially the same thing. If people are serious about advancing the cause, greater well being for all, they will learn more about the value of respect.
All these things will continue as long as coercion remains a central element of our mentality.
Sounder
 
Posts: 4054
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 8:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Re: Chekhov!

Postby cptmarginal » Wed Jun 17, 2020 10:18 am

If people are serious about advancing the cause, greater well being for all, they will learn more about the value of respect.


...which is exactly what I would expect as a response to brekin's post about the protests featuring Robert Downey Jr. in blackface. It's not rocket surgery.

Anyone reading this right now should scroll further down the front page of the forum and make it a point to read lesser-noticed new threads, or maybe take it upon themselves to bump something they haven't seen around in a while. If you start going back a few pages on the forum there are dozens of posts worth paying attention to that have fallen out of sight, and that may have garnered more response at a different time.
cptmarginal
 
Posts: 2741
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 8:32 pm
Location: Gordita Beach
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Your Beast of Burden

Postby JackRiddler » Wed Jun 17, 2020 10:27 am

Harvey » Wed Jun 17, 2020 8:58 am wrote:
JackRiddler » Wed Jun 17, 2020 1:49 pm wrote:My comments were that these works are anti-humanist in their ideology...


I think I might be anti-humanist. After all these years I'm still not clear what humanism is. I know what some people say it is and I know what some of those people do. If you could help me to understand the concept in theory and practice I'd be much obliged.


In this case, I used the term specifically, as in, against the philosophy or ideology usually referred to as humanism. It is thought of historically as originating in the early modern Italian city states (the "Renaissance"). Its essence (partly a retrospective understanding?) is to center the individual human being (arguably only a particular image thereof) as possessing agency (will) and validity and beauty, above the strictures of religion and nature and tradition the humanists thought until then had been prevalent.

Lauro Martines, The Renaissance (1976?), the best treatment I've read recently on this historical humanism (not that I'm an expert), treats it as the ideology of an incipient early modern bourgeoisie. Taking a Marxian approach, he sees them wanting an ideology to go along with and valorize that which they were already doing. So they patronized arts and work in that vein, but as these things go the artists and the thinkers and the time generally expressed something more expansive and open-ended.

So I didn't mean "anti-human." And like you I've certainly debated to what degree I am anti-humanist in this sense. On the other hand, explicit rejection of humanism (like illiberalism) is freighted with a lot of extra baggage that need not automatically come along, but usually does.

And I think brekin's works in the other thread (which are linked in the bottom post of page 1 of this one) are an example of the rejection of humanism, but that's only one aspect. The term is pretty much the least mean thing I said about his works. I meant my comments on his works as my honest replies, not as a trial or a personal vendetta. He felt otherwise, and thus this fight. This is the thread I made to keep the flamewar from derailing the other, much longer-running thread.

Would you like more discussion about humanism and anti-humanism, perhaps in a new thread? How do you define it? What text or work might you choose as exemplary of it?

I hope in a new thread, because I have to agree with this:

cptmarginal wrote:Anyone reading this right now should scroll further down the front page of the forum and make it a point to read lesser-noticed new threads, or maybe take it upon themselves to bump something they haven't seen around in a while. If you start going back a few pages on the forum there are dozens of posts worth paying attention to that have fallen out of sight, and that may have garnered more response at a different time.


(Sort of a similar idea to the new "Greatest" boards, if they take off. cpt and harvey especially and anyone else are invited to contribute proposals to those.)

.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15983
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Chekhov!

Postby Elvis » Wed Jun 17, 2020 10:46 am

I didn't read Brekin's recent creations after the first one, I'm more bored than bothered. But Sounder, in the contentious aftermath let's not resort to malicious, inflammatory personal characterizations.
“The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.” ― Joan Robinson
User avatar
Elvis
 
Posts: 7413
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:24 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Chekhov!

Postby 0_0 » Wed Jun 17, 2020 12:34 pm

Sounder was giving a reasoned point of view on this open topic and on top of that relatively fair in his assessment. You have to have a crooked balance sheet of "malicious, inflammatory personal characterizations" to single him out. The fact that the two moderators gang up doesn't paint a pretty picture either - all imo.
playmobil of the gods
0_0
 
Posts: 615
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 9:13 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Chekhov!

Postby Sounder » Wed Jun 17, 2020 1:09 pm

But Sounder, in the contentious aftermath let's not resort to malicious, inflammatory personal characterizations.


Sorry, I will do better. Thing is, I read a sub-header that said Flame War and Resolution Thread, and I have something I would like to see resolved.

To Jacks credit, fifteen years or so ago when first posting here, Jack was the first to understand what I was getting at, well cuda also. Anyway Jack is threatened by this style of thinking and can only respond by ignoring, defaming in many creative ways and now enforcing through social intimidation a fairly narrow span of narrative promotion.

It is not an appropriate path for small communities or large communities.

I want to start a thread called Saving the World and this will be difficult given the nature of this space which seems to pretty much match the bigger world.

But I have been inspired by thrulookingglass, RocketMan, brekin and Tyson Yunkaporta to pursue my art.
All these things will continue as long as coercion remains a central element of our mentality.
Sounder
 
Posts: 4054
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 8:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Chekhov!

Postby JackRiddler » Wed Jun 17, 2020 2:46 pm

Sounder » Wed Jun 17, 2020 12:09 pm wrote:Anyway Jack is threatened by this style of thinking


That, sir, is your defamatory slant on my aversion to the material you regularly reproduce here. ("Thinking" is an interesting spin on mystified cud.)

now enforcing through social intimidation


Every non-congratulatory review of your output is now what you call "intimidation." Which is an abuse of the language. You usually follow up with a psychogram of the user who dared to think your "thinking" is poor.

The basic problem seems to be, as with brekin, the message board discussion format itself. Or, at least, this particular message board. There are so many places where you need not face what you are saying is abuse.

a fairly narrow span of narrative promotion.


No place can be all things to all people. There are literally millions and millions of subjects that aren't being discussed here or are being discussed here in ways unrelated to how they are discussed elsewhere. It's a big wide Internet.

Maybe RI isn't the club for you.

It is not an appropriate path for small communities or large communities.


"Communities" is another one of your vague terms, certainly in this context.

This is an Internet board with a modest defined mission, an owner, a history, a manager, and an ethos, but if it is a "community" then that is a way of saying that being polite is one of the desirable criteria, if not always primary, and that it would be great if collaborative projects and real-world friendships ensue from here --- as they have! I hope that's been so for you, too.

I'd say you're making the mistake of expecting too much, thinking that this is supposed to be the model of a complete society, with an online social contract.

I'd say that, but I don't think you really believe your own talk. One could also see what you are doing as gumming up the board, and wasting the time and testing the patience of the unpaid management with bad-faith litigation using nice-sounding terms.

Good news! It's okay if we don't share the same vision.

I want to start a thread called Saving the World and this will be difficult given the nature of this space which seems to pretty much match the bigger world.


I love it that now we're being preemptively accused of disliking your future project, no doubt in a totally repressive way.

There's good news, however. Try it.

You won't be exposed to non-communitarian replies, you'll be the boss of your own thread, you can turn off comments, the works.

0_0 wrote:Sounder was giving a reasoned point of view on this open topic and on top of that relatively fair in his assessment. You have to have a crooked balance sheet of "malicious, inflammatory personal characterizations" to single him out. The fact that the two moderators gang up doesn't paint a pretty picture either - all imo.


I love that you too have dropped in. I'd have never guessed. /s

The fact that the two moderators actually agree suggests a place with its own character and not necessarily anything else.

Some may like our policy, others may not.

Luckily, contrary to the strange ideas suggested by some, we are not the state. We are not a "community" in some all-encompassing sense. We are a moderated discussion board on a set of issues that are evident from the thread and forum titles -- indeed within certain bounds that have been specified, and are suggested even in the name.

If it's not the right place for you, luckily it's a huge Internet! There are so many options where you don't have to tolerate responses that you find so abusive.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15983
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Chekhov!

Postby 0_0 » Wed Jun 17, 2020 4:07 pm

JackRiddler » Wed Jun 17, 2020 2:46 pm wrote:
Sounder » Wed Jun 17, 2020 12:09 pm wrote:Anyway Jack is threatened by this style of thinking

0_0 wrote:Sounder was giving a reasoned point of view on this open topic and on top of that relatively fair in his assessment. You have to have a crooked balance sheet of "malicious, inflammatory personal characterizations" to single him out. The fact that the two moderators gang up doesn't paint a pretty picture either - all imo.


I love that you too have dropped in. I'd have never guessed. /s

The fact that the two moderators actually agree suggests a place with its own character and not necessarily anything else.

Some may like our policy, others may not.

Luckily, contrary to the strange ideas suggested by some, we are not the state. We are not a "community" in some all-encompassing sense. We are a moderated discussion board on a set of issues that are evident from the thread and forum titles -- indeed within certain bounds that have been specified, and are suggested even in the name.

If it's not the right place for you, luckily it's a huge Internet! There are so many options where you don't have to tolerate responses that you find so abusive.


Just as one example, only a few days ago you characterized posters whose opinion you don't care for as - i'm paraphrasing - Trump supporters who would like to see protesters murdered. Now your co-moderator warns (strongly advises?) Sounder to cease his "malicious, inflammatory personal characterizations" for saying you sometimes come across as a "petulant adolescent that doesn't like how his friends are playing with his toys". For offering my opinion that to me this seems out of balance i get told to take a hike if i don't like it, an argument not that far removed from: "if you don't like it here, why don't you move to another country". Seems kind of weird to me but hey you're the boss, so duly noted and thanks for explaining the policy!
playmobil of the gods
0_0
 
Posts: 615
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 9:13 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Chekhov!

Postby JackRiddler » Wed Jun 17, 2020 4:31 pm

0_0 wrote:Just as one example, only a few days ago you characterized posters whose opinion you don't care for as - i'm paraphrasing - Trump supporters who would like to see protesters murdered.


So liberal a paraphrase that it's okay if I have no fucking idea what you're on about. Possibly the opinion I didn't care for was that protesters should be murdered? No idea. People who fit that description do exist. But I don't recall any obvious ones here.

In return, just as one example, you do shit like this.

For offering my opinion that to me this seems out of balance i get told to take a hike if i don't like it, an argument not that far removed from: "if you don't like it here, why don't you move to another country". Seems kind of weird to me but hey you're the boss, so duly noted and thanks for explaining the policy!


Actually, it could not be more far-removed from that. The comparison is insane.

You are not a citizen here. Neither am I. This is not a state. This is not a country. I am not your government. Neither of us were born in, grew up in, or immigrated to, or arrived as migrants or travelers or diplomats to this site. Nobody lives here. Nobody's stuck here. Nobody makes a living here -- notwithstanding possible disinfo agents dispatched to cause chaos or add FUD or associate reasonable deep politics research with intentionally crazy fantasy-magic shit.

It's just an Internet site. If you want a more realistic comparison, this is like one of thousands of bars or places to hang out in one town of a vast country in a vast world. This place has a particular clientele, an owner, an appointed management, and a zero-money business model, except that the owner pays a web-host so that we can have the discussions. Not everyone has to be welcome, and if you are asked to leave, it is not a violation of the universal rights of man.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15983
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Chekhov!

Postby 0_0 » Wed Jun 17, 2020 5:23 pm

To clear up any possible misunderstanding: i want to make it absolutely clear that in no way did i say, meant to say or even imply that i -or anyone else- has been violated in their universal rights of man! Not by anything that transpired on this discussion board, no sir! I said that the argument you used (to wit: if you don't like it here take a hike) is analogous to "if you don't like it here, why don't you move to another country". But now that you have explained it to me i understand that this place is not like a country, it's like a bar, okay got it. And it's a progressive bar with a zero-money business model, which is great! Imo it would be even greater if the bar management was a little less quick to tell people to take a hike when they raise some quibbles, but i certainly wouldn't wanna drone on about it.

Anyway, to refresh your memory:

JackRiddler » Mon Jun 08, 2020 9:30 am wrote:I'd rather see Whitmer look hypocritical than sanction the police and National Guard to murder protesters, as Trump and I bet a few of his supporters here would like.


See, i thought that could also qualify as a "malicious, inflammatory characterization" especially when calling someone a petulant adolescent already qualifies, but i was still thinking country, not knowing that it was a bar instead! So that's how i mistakenly thought that was a bit unfair!
playmobil of the gods
0_0
 
Posts: 615
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 9:13 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Chekhov!

Postby brekin » Wed Jun 17, 2020 5:57 pm

JackRiddler wrote:My transgression, according to brekin, and the reason for the flamewar that was exported to this thread, was that I commented negatively on a set of works he posted in the 2020 "Dem VP"/"Riots" thread.
According to brekin, my comments on his works constitute censorship, bullying, mischaracterization, and an attack on "artistic freedom." Further, I am also charged with failing to sufficiently cite and quote from these works, which brekin has maintained are Chekhovian in their complexity and ambiguity. (To lay this charge to rest, I provide the links to the brekinian works in question, below. Confession: I do not appreciate being the one who does this work for you.) Finally, according to sounder, my comments are (further) evidence of my moral depravity, insufficient humanity and enlightenment, general meanness, etc. etc.
My comments were that these works are anti-humanist in their ideology, unsubtle, unfunny, brick-in-the-face misanthropic, hateful of crowds and young people, contemptuous of individual agency and expression, entirely lacking for empirical basis, propagating radically false claims about the protests and their motivations, and thus extremely defamatory toward their targeted subjects, who actually exist and have voices that brekin is not interested in representing. In short, nasty, hateful mythmaking about people brekin doesn't care to know or listen to. These comments may sound harsh, but they are genuinely my view, that others may judge as accurate or otherwise.
As, of course, the works are still exactly where brekin posted them, let readers who may have any interest in these matters judge for themselves:

Jonestown
http://rigorousintuition.ca/board2/view ... 40#p688140

Tropical Heat
http://rigorousintuition.ca/board2/view ... 70#p688255

Rebel Alliance
http://rigorousintuition.ca/board2/view ... 85#p688310

Manson
http://rigorousintuition.ca/board2/view ... 00#p688361

Legend
http://rigorousintuition.ca/board2/view ... 00#p688451


See now that is mod work I can get behind.
For the record, after googling Humanism for a refresher, and talking with my family physician, I am definitely not anti-humanism.
I guess I am (Surprise!) pro-enlightenment and NOT pro-medievalist (at least not in a hobbyist sense, which seems like an allowable diversion) which my posts regarding the mass delusions of crowds based on recent medieval living/information/isolation conditions which preceded the collaging.
I won't even go into having to defend myself as pro-crowd, pro-youth, pro-other voices, etc. As that is bananas.
My results for Meyers Briggs will also be forthcoming.
If I knew all mysteries and all knowledge, and have not charity, I am nothing. St. Paul
I hang onto my prejudices, they are the testicles of my mind. Eric Hoffer
User avatar
brekin
 
Posts: 3229
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 5:21 pm
Blog: View Blog (1)

Re: Chekhov!

Postby JackRiddler » Wed Jun 17, 2020 6:11 pm

brekin » Wed Jun 17, 2020 4:57 pm wrote:See now that is mod work I can get behind.


JackRiddler wrote:I do not appreciate being the one who does this work for you.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15983
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Chekhov!

Postby brekin » Wed Jun 17, 2020 6:23 pm

JackRiddler wrote:
brekin » Wed Jun 17, 2020 4:57 pm wrote:See now that is mod work I can get behind.

JackRiddler wrote:I do not appreciate being the one who does this work for you.


No requests from me to create separate extra-judicial threads.
Keep it in the original thread and Jack has more time to study his Humanism tomes.

Image
If I knew all mysteries and all knowledge, and have not charity, I am nothing. St. Paul
I hang onto my prejudices, they are the testicles of my mind. Eric Hoffer
User avatar
brekin
 
Posts: 3229
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 5:21 pm
Blog: View Blog (1)

Re: Chekhov!

Postby JackRiddler » Wed Jun 17, 2020 6:26 pm

brekin » Wed Jun 17, 2020 5:23 pm wrote:No requests from me to create separate extra-judicial threads.
Keep it in the original thread and Jack has more time to study his Humanism tomes.


Nope, you were so sensitive to negative reviews of your grand idea of presenting men in black face and pictures of hundreds of corpses as an "artistic" analysis of the BLM protests that you started a personal fight in that thread. And you can't stop.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15983
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to FIRE PIT

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests