"Oracles": 2010 (.Pdf)
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Oracles Previous postings from the William Thomas Sherman Info Page 2010. By William Thomas Sherman 1604 NW 70th St. Seattle, WA 98117 206-784-1132 [email protected] http://www.gunjones.com ~~~~~~*~~~~~~ TENETS *If we ever experienced a problem anywhere, it came about, in some degree, due to certain wrong assumptions, either co-present with, or just prior to the given problem’s actually taking place. * Unless you believe in God, the One, and or the infinite, every assumption is contingent. * PROCESS (or if you prefer spirit, or activity) PRECEDES IMAGE. Image may, to some extent, (and sometimes almost perfectly) represent process. But process is always superior to and always more real than image. If process precedes image this might suggest also that mind precedes matter and energy. * Everything we believe, or say we know, is based on a factual or value judgment. Both kinds of judgment always entail the other to some extent, and nothing can be known or exists for us without them. * No fact or purported fact is true or false without someone to assert and believe it to be such. If an assertion or claim is deemed true or false then, and we are thorough, we should ask who is it that says so (or has said so), and what criteria are (were) they using? There is no such thing as "faceless" truth or reality -- at least none we are capable of knowing. * You can't escape reason. If you aren't rational yourself, someone else will be rational for you; nor do their intentions toward you need to be friendly or benevolent. * Every point of view and opinion has its truth to it -- even the most abhorrent and unacceptable to us. This said, we are naturally inclined to assume that some opinions have much greater truth to them than others. Even so, what little truth there is in any point of view must, at least at some juncture, and certainly with respect to issues of heated controversy, be justly and reasonably respected. Why? Because we would not be honest (and therefore not truthful) if we didn't. *Ultimately, and when all is said and done, thought without heart is nothing. * Most, if not all, of society's very worst problems arise from (certain) spirit people and those who listen to them -- whether the former comes in the shape of "God," angel, devil or what have you. It is these people who are most the source and cause of real unhappiness. If then you chance to have contact with such, while having (one assumes) overcome their lures, deceptions, and pretenses of benevolence and higher knowledge, I recommend that this (i.e. "unhappiness" or "unhappiness itself") is what you call them. Blame them for (most) everything wrong; for it is it is they who have been and are the ruin of everyone and everything (that is, if anyone is or could be said to be so.) Mottos: "When you can face me, I'll consider taking you seriously." "Millions for defense; not one cent for tribute!" "The whole of the city is at the mercy of a gang of criminals, led by a man who calls himself the Kid. And I'm the only one who can find him for you." 1 Note. The “oracles” are given, top to the bottom of the text, in order from the most recent to the very earliest entry (just as originally presented at gunjones.com); the very first you see below then is the last entered at the website, while the very first entered for the year is given as the last item in this text. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [or256.html] Below is another (albeit far briefer) excerpt from The Cambridge History of American Literature; in this instance from the chapter "Later [1850-1920] Philosophy" by Morris R. Cohen. The italics and bracketed parenthetical notes are mine: "In the history of philosophy naturalism has been associated with the study of physics (generally atomic), with emphasis on the way our thoughts are controlled by our bodies or by the physical environment. Dewey has no physical theories. He is a psychologist, primarily interested in how and why men think and how their thoughts modify their experience. He is a professed realist in his belief that our thoughts alone do not constitute the nature of things but that there is a pre-existing world of which thought is an outgrowth and on which it reacts. But the continual emphasis on thought as efficient in transforming our world gives him the appearance of having remained an idealist in spite of his conversion. Like the Hegelian idealists, he distrusts abstractions and prefers the 'organic' point of view to that which views things as composed of distinct elements. He differs from the Hegelians in this respect only in his contention that everything acquires its meaning by reference to a changing 'situation' instead of by reference to an all inclusive totality. [A changing situation in relation to what?] Like the ethical idealists, also, Dewey insists with Puritanic austerity on the serious responsibility of philosophy. It must not be a merely aesthetic contemplation of the world, nor a satisfaction of idle curiosity or wonder. It must be a means for reforming or improving. Just what constitutes an improvement of man's estate we are not clearly told. In his theory of education which forms the chief impetus and application of his theoretic views the plasticity of human nature is fully recognized; and he argues that intelligence not only makes us more efficient in attaining given ends, but liberalizes our ends. In the main, however, he emphasizes improved control over external nature rather than improved control over our own passions and desires. "Judged by the ever-increasing number and contagious zeal of his disciples, Dewey has proved to be the most influential philosopher that America has as yet produced. This is all the more remarkable when we remember that all his writings are fragmentary, highly technical, and without any extraneous graces of style to relieve the close-knitting of the arguments. Clearly this triumph is due not only to rare personal qualities as a teacher but also to the extent that his thought corresponds to the prevailing American temper of the time. Dewey appeals powerfully to the prevailing distrust of other-worldliness, a distrust which permeates even our theology with its emphasis on the social mission of the Church. The doctrine that all ideas are and ought to be instruments for reforming the world and making it a better place to live in, appeals at once to popular utilitarianism, to the worship of immediate practical results of which Theodore Roosevelt was such a conspicuous representative. In a country where so many great deeds in the conquest of nature are still to be performed, the practical man's contempt for the contemplative and the visionary is re-enforced by the Puritanic horror of idle play and of things which are purely ornamental. A philosophy which views nature as material to be transformed by our intelligence appeals to the prevailing light-hearted optimism which sees success [????] as the constant reward of intelligent effort and finds no inherent obstacles to the establishment of a heaven on earth. Certainly Dewey nowhere calls to our attention the existence of incurable evil— the evil against which our only remedy is some form of wisely cultivated resignation. "In his zeal for making philosophy useful and responsible, a good deal of the traditional glory of philosophy is ignored, if not denied. The intellectual activity which we call theoretic science is subordinated to its practical application. In eliminating the personal consolations of philosophy, he also eliminates the great saving experience which it affords us in making us spectators of a great cosmic drama in which solar systems are born and destroyed, a drama in which our part as actors is of infinitesimal significance. Yet historically the most significant feature of Dewey's thought is undoubtedly the fact that in an age of waning faith in human reason—witness the rapid spread of the romantic mysticism of Bergson—he has rallied those who still believe in the cause of liberalism based on faith in the value of intellectual enlightenment." 2 Now where are all those sincere, disinterested, objective scientific investigators willing to examine into my currently decade old claims respecting spirit people? (At least the latter will have proven themselves of pragmatic help to "somebody" -- inasmuch as such beneficiaries, as a result, do not either have to do his job or compete against rivals.) ~~~~~~*~~~~~~ Under the circumstances, their cheating and robbing me I can stand. But that they can, will, or are in a position to compensate or justify themselves to me (short of their being hanged or deported irrevocably?) At this, Lord have mercy, my rage exceeeds no bounds. ~~~~~~*~~~~~~ If I may, let me try to explain to you the fundamental flaw of the demonistic position. Basically, the demonistic idea centers around the notion that you murder your rival, and then collect and take home what he possess for purposes of your own enrichment; while in the process revealing how clever you are to act so. Leaving aside obvious moral reservations one might harbor toward such an overtly criminal approach, in practice (otherwise) it doesn't work, and for a number of reasons. For one thing, an individual who adopts such a method invariably becomes a vassal to the king of all murderers; whose province they invade by taking up his ways. Secondly, people who think little of murder make poor lovers (regardless of what sort of loving you care to speak of.) And yet it is most typical of such who seek to aggrandize themselves in order to secure love in one form of another -- not fear; despite their highly prizing the power intimidation, as they do or might, otherwise.