<!DOCTYPE html><html><head><title></title><style type="text/css">
p.MsoNormal,p.MsoNoSpacing{margin:0}</style></head><body><div style="font-family:Arial;">Steve,<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;"><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">Previously, I noted: "Asserting that all is interpretation is an invitation to engage in a 
conversation about "meaning" or "reality" from a level playing field — 
i.e. absent any grant of privilege to one interpretation over another; 
and, any expectation that somewhere, somehow, even the most consensual 
and widely shared interpretation can, or will, morph into some kind of 
"fact" or "truth."<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;"><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">Both axiomatic statements and "self-evident truths" (Declaration of Independence) are consensual assumptions about an interpretation; an agreement that said statements are reasonably "correct" and sufficiently shared among ourselves, that we can use them as starting points for conversations about "reality" (e.g. constants like e, c, and i, or relationships like E= M times Csquared) or the "meaning" of something (e.g what it is to be self governing).<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;"><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">Conversations, so begun, can weave a tapestry of interpretation that can be wonderfully useful, deeply enriching, psychologically comforting, socially beneficial, technologically advancing, etc. <br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;"><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">Problems, inevitable it seems, arise when it is forgotten that both the axioms and the tapestry remain interpretations — interpretations shared only by some, not all; interpretations, not fact, not truth.<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;"><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">davew<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;"><br></div><div>On Fri, Nov 15, 2019, at 4:13 PM, Steven A Smith wrote:<br></div><blockquote type="cite" id="qt"><p>Where does our resident hermeneuticist fit in the two following
      ideas?<br></p><ol><li>Axiomatic Statements<br></li><li>The preamble of the US Constitution ("we hold these truths to
        be self-evident")<br></li></ol><p>        <br></p><p><br></p><div class="qt-moz-cite-prefix">On 11/15/19 6:53 AM, Prof David West
      wrote:<br></div><blockquote cite="mid:67a261b4-5be4-4eca-91ab-97f0eb622fe2@www.fastmail.com" type="cite"><div style="font-family:Arial;">Nick mentioned earlier a concern
        about relativist talk in this thread. and Eric is using the term
        in his post. Lest hermeneuticism — a position I have been
        advocating — be confused/conflated with relativism (perhaps an
        unfounded fear), I wish to note the following:<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;"><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">Hermeneutics (intellectual
        genealogy in previous post) asserts that all is interpretation.
        A corollary of that assertion is there are no "facts," no
        objective truths. A second corollary: there are no grounds to
        "privilege" one interpretation over another. (The point of
        deconstruction is, simply, exposure of the chain of
        interpretations and the reasons that they were adopted over
        alternatives.)<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;"><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">A hermeneuticist would <u>not</u> assert that "competence-incompetence, stupid-smart" lack
        tangible meaning. Nor would they say that "no point of view
        (interpretation) is better than another. Of course, "better" is
        a matter of interpretation.<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;"><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">Asserting that all is
        interpretation is an invitation to engage in a conversation
        about "meaning" or "reality" from a level playing field — i.e.
        absent any grant of privilege to one interpretation over
        another; and, any expectation that somewhere, somehow, even the
        most consensual and widely shared interpretation can, or will,
        morph into some kind of "fact" or "truth."<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;"><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">davew<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;"><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;"><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;"><br></div><div>On Fri, Nov 15, 2019, at 12:47 PM, Eric Charles wrote:<br></div><blockquote id="qt-qt" type="cite"><div dir="ltr"><blockquote style="margin-top:0px;margin-right:0px;margin-bottom:0px;margin-left:40px;border-top-color:currentcolor;border-top-style:none;border-top-width:medium;border-right-color:currentcolor;border-right-style:none;border-right-width:medium;border-bottom-color:currentcolor;border-bottom-style:none;border-bottom-width:medium;border-left-color:currentcolor;border-left-style:none;border-left-width:medium;border-image-outset:0;border-image-repeat:stretch;border-image-slice:100%;border-image-source:none;border-image-width:1;padding-top:0px;padding-right:0px;padding-bottom:0px;padding-left:0px;"><span style="color:rgb(61, 133, 198)" class="colour">" <span style="font-family:Calibri, sans-serif" class="font"><span style="font-size:14.6667px" class="size">A nihilist
                  might adopt a campaign slogan like Any Functioning
                  Adult 2020, because the truly objectionable things are
                  incompetence and stupidity.</span></span> "</span><br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>But there's the rub in this conversation. "Any
            Functioning Adult 2020" could be intended as a joke,
            pointing out that the current president is so incompetent
            that literally any functional adult would be better. OR, it
            could be a low-level nihilistic joke, made by someone who
            knows full well there are no functional adults in the race,
            and even if there were that person wouldn't be elected, and
            we are all going to die meaningless deaths no matter who
            wins. (I imagine that is what it sounds like translated into
            Russian, based on my deep love of Dostoevsky). BUT, neither
            of those positions is a relativist. <br></div><div><br></div><div>The relativist asserts that competence-incompetence and
            stupid-smart have no tangible meaning.  <br></div><div><br></div><div>Who is competent and who isn't? Eh, it depends on your
            point of view, and no point of view is better than another.
            The designation of "competence" is a colonialist activity
            providing illusory justification for the marginalization
            already oppressed groups, and while it has a valence, it has
            no basis in "reality" (i.e., it is bad, you should stop
            doing it, and you should deeply hate yourself for ever
            having had done it). To label the president as incompetent
            is to inappropriately invalidate his way of being in the
            world; ways of being are all equally valid. <br></div><div><br></div><div>Who is stupid and who isn't? Eh, it depends on your point
            of view, and no point of view is better than another.....<br></div><div><br></div><div>If you believe that SOME people ARE competent and/or
            smart, then you can't be a relativist. If you believe there
            is still some chance that competent and smart people can
            make a difference, you are not a nihilist. <br></div><div><br></div><div>Old Soviet Joke: A man walks into a shop and asks, "You
            wouldn't happen to have any fish, would you?". The shop
            assistant replies, "You've got it wrong – ours is a
            butcher's shop. We don't have any meat. You're looking for
            the fish shop across the road. There they don't have any
            fish!"<br></div><div><br></div><div><span style="font-family:sans-serif" class="font"><span style="font-size:14px" class="size"></span></span><br></div><div><span style="font-family:sans-serif" class="font"><span style="font-size:14px" class="size"></span></span><br></div><div><div><div dir="ltr" class="qt-qt-gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div style="font-family:Arial;">-----------<br></div><div dir="ltr"><div style="font-family:Arial;">Eric P.
                              Charles, Ph.D.<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">Department
                              of Justice - Personnel <span>Psychologist</span><br></div></div><div>American University - Adjunct Instructor<br></div><div><br></div></div><div dir="ltr"><br></div></div></div></div></div></div></div><div style="font-family:Arial;"><br></div></div></div><div style="font-family:Arial;"><br></div><div class="qt-qt-gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="qt-qt-gmail_attr">On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at
            12:13 AM Marcus Daniels <<a href="mailto:marcus@snoutfarm.com">marcus@snoutfarm.com</a>>
            wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="qt-qt-gmail_quote" style="margin-top:0px;margin-right:0px;margin-bottom:0px;margin-left:0.8ex;border-left-color:rgb(204, 204, 204);border-left-style:solid;border-left-width:1px;padding-left:1ex;"><div lang="EN-US"><div class="qt-qt-gmail-m_-1648815169288488197WordSection1"><p class="qt-qt-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri, sans-serif" class="font"><span style="font-size:11pt" class="size">Nick writes:</span></span><br></p><p class="qt-qt-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri, sans-serif" class="font"><span style="font-size:11pt" class="size"> </span></span><br></p><p class="qt-qt-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri, sans-serif" class="font"><span style="font-size:11pt" class="size">< <span style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)" class="colour">What
                        I see in much relativism is not fallibilism,
                        which I endorse, but nihilistic fatalism**,
                        which I deplore.  I am not sure I can argue
                        either  for my endorsement OR my condemnation,
                        but them’s my values.  Nihilistic fatalism is
                        endorsed opportunistically by people like Putin
                        because, while they themselves are planning for
                        the “inevitable” collapse, they are arguing that
                        there is no future in planning.  </span>></span></span><br></p><p class="qt-qt-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri, sans-serif" class="font"><span style="font-size:11pt" class="size"> </span></span><br></p><p class="qt-qt-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri, sans-serif" class="font"><span style="font-size:11pt" class="size">IThere can be
                      goals without ideology.  I think a nihilist would
                      also have to agree there is also no harm in one
                      value system stomping on another value system
                      since they are both just value systems and so
                      impoverished and arbitrary.    In that spirit, a
                      progressive can be a nihilist simply to collect a
                      partial ordering of different kinds of premises
                      that serve one defined purpose or another, without
                      taking those purposes too seriously.   A nihilist
                      might adopt a campaign slogan like Any Functioning
                      Adult 2020, because the truly objectionable things
                      are incompetence and stupidity.</span></span><br></p><p class="qt-qt-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri, sans-serif" class="font"><span style="font-size:11pt" class="size"> </span></span><br></p><p class="qt-qt-MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Calibri, sans-serif" class="font"><span style="font-size:11pt" class="size">Marcus</span></span><br></p></div></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">============================================================<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">FRIAM Applied Complexity
              Group listserv<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at
              cafe at St. John's College<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">to unsubscribe <a href="http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com" rel="noreferrer">http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com</a><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">archives back to 2003: <a href="http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/" rel="noreferrer">http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/</a><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">FRIAM-COMIC <a href="http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/" rel="noreferrer">http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/</a> by Dr. Strangelove<br></div></blockquote></div><div>============================================================<br></div><div>FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv<br></div><div>Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College<br></div><div>to unsubscribe <a href="http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com" class="qt-moz-txt-link-freetext">http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com</a><br></div><div>archives back to 2003: <a href="http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/" class="qt-moz-txt-link-freetext">http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/</a><br></div><div>FRIAM-COMIC <a href="http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/" class="qt-moz-txt-link-freetext">http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/</a> by Dr.
          Strangelove<br></div><div><br></div></blockquote><div style="font-family:Arial;"><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;"><br></div><pre class="qt-moz-quote-pre" wrap="">============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe <a href="http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com" class="qt-moz-txt-link-freetext">http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com</a>
archives back to 2003: <a href="http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/" class="qt-moz-txt-link-freetext">http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/</a>
FRIAM-COMIC <a href="http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/" class="qt-moz-txt-link-freetext">http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/</a> by Dr. Strangelove
<br></pre></blockquote><div>============================================================<br></div><div>FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv<br></div><div>Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College<br></div><div>to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com<br></div><div>archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/<br></div><div>FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove<br></div><div><br></div></blockquote><div style="font-family:Arial;"><br></div></body></html>