[FRIAM] Biden beats Trump

[Eric Charles]

Nick asked if anyone could translate Glen's email... in an effort to do
that... larding below

Eric C


On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 1:20 PM uǝlƃ ↙↙↙ <gepropella at gmail.com> wrote:

> There's so much that's so wrong I can't let it go uncommented. <Boy have
> you set me off!> Everything you say (in almost every post) seems to
> factor out *time*. When you say "As commands to the self, [anger, hate,
> contempt, etc.] make no sense what so ever", you're speaking as if the Nick
> of 20 years ago is the exact identical Nick as the present Nick, which is
> so wrong as to be laughable. <Even if you convinced me that it was silly
> to talk about the things you do in this moment as commanded by you,
> certainly you can issue commands to future you. ---- They guy hitting who
> said something awkward and lost his chance at the girl hits himself on the
> head a few times saying "Stupid, stupid, why did you say that?" What is he
> doing? He is trying to control his future self, not his past self. ----
> Across long swaths of time whatever "command" is, you can probably do it
> yourself as effectively as anyone else can command you.>
>
> Your ill-expressed point is that the empathy/sympathy emotions for Trump
> supporters are not under your intentional control. <Let's grant that you
> are correct that you, personally, cannot stop yourself from attempting
> empathy/sympathy under these conditions> And you seem to be saying that
> those of us who claim we shouldn't "spare" any empathy/sympathy are either
> in denial or self-blinding or somesuch. <Your generalization of that to
> me and everyone else is suspect, and the way you phrase it is presumptous
> and pretentious> Again, that ignores *time*. Sure, I feel empathy for
> some of them, someTIMES. But I don't for others of them, at other times. <I'm
> not saying that I will literally never be empathetic to any person who
> happens to be a Trump supporter, at any time, ever. I am saying that I am
> not going to be empathetic to them as a group, and certainly not empathetic
> to any of them at all times. I've got a lot to do besides sitting around
> being empathetic with 60 million strangers. And I'm not in denial or in a
> soulless trap when I point that out.>
>
> If you've ever extracted yourself from an abusive relationship, you should
> understand this episodic concept. <Your relationship with Trump
> Supporters, as a group, is equivalent to an abusive relationships in
> important ways> If you have never had such a relationship, then you are
> the luckiest person I've ever met. The longer the idiocy goes on, the less
> empathy I feel, the fewer episodes of empathy I experience. <Empathy is
> one of the things an abuser can use to trap you. The way out of that trap
> is to be less empathetic the longer the abuse goes on.> The abuser only
> has so much time to change his ways before I explode and murder him in his
> sleep, my tears of sympathy mixing with his blood. <If it's bad enough,
> long enough, it's time to end things one way or another, and any empathy
> you have left is more time spent crying while you do whatever else you need
> to do to sever the relationship.>
>
> Maybe the additional premise is that there is such a thing as time and
> evolution? It's weird that someone who talks about things like MOTH would
> fail to understand that, though. <Seriously man.... How can someone who
> trumpets the virtues of unconditional altruism with conditional association
> not be willing to walk the hell away from a group of people who are
> continuously defecting against you?!? It is a winning strategy.>



>
> <Glen, how did I do?>



---------------------------------------------------------------------


> On 11/12/20 9:57 AM, thompnickson2 at gmail.com wrote:
> > Ok,  but, let’s look at that impulse. Is it the impulse to sympathize?
> Why is that so scary?  Sympathy is informative, not paralyzing.  Can one
> not feel sympathy for the rabid dog just exactly at the moment one kills
> it? Somebody ran over a cat in our yard, once, crushed it’s hindquarters.
> I felt tremendous sympathy for the cat, /and so I killed it. / For sympathy
> to be paralyzing, there has to be one more premise, and I cannot identify
> that additional premise.  Anger, hate, contempt, etc., are assertions of an
> ought.  Oughts only work in the context of trying to incite others to a
> common action.  As commands to the self, they make no sense what so ever.
> So, unless you are standing in front of crowd, trying to get them to lynch
> somebody, these emotions are self-blinding.  Now, I suppose, self-blinding
> is useful, when you just don’t want to fuck with subtleties of life, but
> nothing about them can be claimed as rational.  Right?  What is the
> additional premise that turns my
> > empathy into something I should not feel.
>
> --
> ↙↙↙ uǝlƃ
> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC <http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/FRIAM-COMIC>
> http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20201112/e7124cf2/attachment.html>