[FRIAM] capitalism vs. individualism

[Prof David West]

Nick - "all this relativist talk" ?? Not sure what you are referring to.
Also, what parts of the responsibility in digital space conversation do you find harrowing and why?

While waiting for your response, a reflection on your questions:

1) If you value "a liberal democracy" and perceive it to be at risk, you are called on to defend it in direct proportion to its degree of value up to and including life, fortune, and sacred honor.

2) Whether the time has come, is your question to decide and act upon, for yourself. If you are wondering if a cohort of individuals with similar perceptions and values exists and if that cohort might benefit from overt association and collective action, that is quite a different issue and question.

4) Personal sacrifices up to and including the last phrase of response 1), plus the quite important sacrifice of accepting that you might be fundamentally wrong; i.e. you might have to sacrifice your values, your "truths."

3) Tools? Ah, there's the rub. In a very real sense, there are no tools. Whatever tool you use, whatever act you take; by definition, will change the very thing you are "defending" — just as the act of observation determines wave or particle. You might create a spectrum of harm; tools that will destroy the "liberal democracy" (the AK-47, the arrogance of the "woke," the absurdity of the "cancel culture") to those tools that interfere the least (mild persuasion, shining example) and choose among them as suits you.

Reading between the lines of your comment and question set, in the context of the Trump-Brexit-Nationalism-Fundamentalism-Planet-Melting conversation at large — my diagnosis is the the world (and our liberal democracy) is suffering from an extreme overdose of "Truth." (You might remember my screed, of a year ago, about the Evil Truth and the terrorism of 'rational discussion'.)

Two possible cures: teach everyone to speak and think-in a language that does not include a copula; or, have everyone experience a threshold dose of LSD or DMT.

davew




On Wed, Nov 13, 2019, at 2:21 AM, Nick Thompson wrote:
> All,

> 

> But doesn’t all this relativist talk beg the fundamental issue:

> 

> This conversation goes on, can go on only within the framework of a liberal (broadest sense, please) democracy.

> 

> **Under what circumstances, under a liberal democracy, am I called to defend it?**

> **Has that time come?**

> **What tools, under a liberal democracy, are available to me to defend it? **

> **What personal sacrifices must I make in its defense**.

> 

> I suppose, if the answer to all these questions is never, no, none, and none, then we can go on talking in this relativistic way forever. But somehow it feels a bit like we’re whistling by the graveyard. Or continuing to play croquet on the deck of a rocking ship whose cannons have come loose. 

> 

> For instance, the current international conversation on “responsibility” in the “digital space” is harrowing. I have no idea how to handle it, **yet it will get handled, and we will live with the consequences***. *

> 

> Nick

> Nicholas S. Thompson

> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

> Clark University

> http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

> 

> *From:* Friam [mailto:friam-bounces at redfish.com] *On Behalf Of *Marcus Daniels
> *Sent:* Tuesday, November 12, 2019 1:33 AM
> *To:* Prof David West <profwest at fastmail.fm>; friam at redfish.com
> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] capitalism vs. individualism

> 

> Dave writes: 

> 

> < Perhaps it is my training as a cultural anthropologist and ethnographer, but I have no trouble productively engaging is "ismists" of all persuasions, often in the same day. >

> 

> My test is whether someone will play the nihilist game with me. If someone will put aside all of their values one-by-one, then there may be a mind worth engaging. But that means identifying the values, coming to agree on definitions, and that sort of thing. When that doesn't work, like because someone insists that the whole-is-more-than-the-sum-of-its-parts, then the debate can alternatively shift to the costs and benefits of that set of norms relative to another set of norms. Sometimes what happens is that the other person feels their Very Important Value System is being minimized, and they make a call for a fatwa (or similar) to be issuer or they put on their MAGA hat. Whatever. If you are interested in ethnography, be an ethnographer. 

> 

> Marcus

> 

> 

> 
> *From:* Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> on behalf of Prof David West <profwest at fastmail.fm>
> *Sent:* Monday, November 11, 2019 11:37 PM
> *To:* friam at redfish.com <friam at redfish.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] capitalism vs. individualism

> 

> Glen writes:
> 
> "And I've heard people talk about *engaging* with Trumpists and trying to tease apart whatever good or bad the ecology associated with Trump has done or not done. But I fail every time I try. How do you crack open that layered chitin an Ismist accretes around their self without killing them?"
> 
> Perhaps it is my training as a cultural anthropologist and ethnographer, but I have no trouble productively engaging is "ismists" of all persuasions, often in the same day. As an anthropologist I am pretty much an absolute cultural relativist and abhor ethnocentrism. Also, I would not presume to attempt to "crack open that layered chitin" of another until and unless I had shattered my own shell.
> 
> davew
> 
> 
> On Mon, Nov 11, 2019, at 8:00 PM, uǝlƃ ☣ wrote:
> > On 11/11/19 10:40 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> > > Stopping behaviors that are counterproductive is different from promulgating a prescriptive ideology. The point is to open up space for what might work, and that which has yet to be falsified. The Trumpism behaviors are not drawn from a complex data set.
> > 
> > Maybe not. But *how* do we open up that space for people who are dead 
> > set for Trump, against someone like Bill Weld or Joe Walsh? By the same 
> > token, how could we have opened things up for the Bernie Bros who were 
> > so against Clinton? Or the coming nastiness between whichever D's make 
> > it to the primaries?
> > 
> > I mean, if ranked choice were more widespread, that alone would help a 
> > lot. The tendency to -isms is canalized by over-zealous reduction. My 
> > self-ascribed Christian neighbor (who doesn't seem to be a follower of 
> > Christ, but whatever) once gave me a book with a title like "Jesus: 
> > Insane, Liar, or God." The idea being that the 3 ideas were mutually 
> > exclusive. When Dave points out that membership in his set of 
> > disgruntled people isn't crisp, he's only reiterating the thread topic: 
> > how to integrate -isms. I made my lame attempt to talk to my neighbor 
> > about the Axiom of Choice, modal logics, etc. ... and of course failed 
> > utterly. And I've heard people talk about *engaging* with Trumpists and 
> > trying to tease apart whatever good or bad the ecology associated with 
> > Trump has done or not done. But I fail every time I try. How do you 
> > crack open that layered chitin an Ismist accretes around their self 
> > without killing them?
> > 
> > -- 
> > ☣ uǝlƃ
> > 
> > ============================================================
> > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> > to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> > archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
> >
> 
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20191113/4e55c7cd/attachment-0001.html>