[FRIAM] What is Wealth for?

[uǝlƃ ↙↙↙]

Bah! I thought your pushback was fantastic! My guess is none of us snowflakes are all that brittle. But it sure seems Jungian. It's like we all have a miniature Oprah bouncing around inside us like some South Park style 2D animated cutout (https://youtu.be/5WOKPgZcvTU). The more interesting avatars, though, are the miniature Cantor, Gödel, and ... damnit, I forget the other "analytical mystic" Dave mentioned.

The Panpsycast episodes on Hinduism:

https://thepanpsycast.com/panpsycast2/episode93-1
https://thepanpsycast.com/panpsycast2/episode93-2

are interesting in their discussion of the pantheon as a trifurcation between polytheism, polymonism, and pantheism. (My words, not theirs ... as if that weren't obvious.)

Celebrities are the new gods. We love to see them get into trouble, fight amongst themselves, do gloriously super-human feats, manipulate their poor servants into depravity, etc.

On 3/18/21 4:56 PM, Steve Smith wrote:
> I think it would be useful to consider all intelligentsia icons with a
> variety of moods.    An aggressive  Wittgenstein,  or a happy-go-lucky
> Nietzsche.
> 
> Which leads me to apologize to the room for my tirade about the idea of
> caricaturing the long list of billionaires like Oprah, Musk, Jobs et
> cetera.   I have been reflecting on that thread and recognize belatedly
> that nobody was caricaturing those *people* so much as using their
> public personas en-caricature as archetypes...  a pantheon of flawed
> human-esque characters who reflect our best and worst character traits
> perhaps.
> 
> I have met only Jobs but once was close enough to Oprah I could have
> asked for an autograph, a selfie or maybe just photo-bombed... so none
> of these folks are "people" to me.  I wonder if it is odd that I felt
> inclined to be protective of them as if they were?


-- 
↙↙↙ uǝlƃ