<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
*Hi Paul,<br>
<br>
Paul J. Werbos, Dr. wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid6.2.0.14.0.20050314174749.01db8790@incoming.verizon.net"
type="cite">At 11:05 PM 3/13/2005, you wrote:
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">Paul writes:
<br>
They have the ability to learn to be more effective and more rational,
but some learn faster than
<br>
others, and some cultures support learning more positively in some
areas than others.
<br>
Some cultures have violated nature by tying girl's feet, so they grow
up unable to walk.
<br>
Others try to do the same with the mind. Yet it is our nature to resist
such perversions,
<br>
and to try to grow out of our mistakes (both personal and collective).
<br>
<br>
GRW: I wasn't referring to physical circumstances (link binding of
girl's feet) but rather in the way they are brow beaten by parents,
family, community, etc.
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Yes, I said "others try to do the same with the mind."
<br>
</blockquote>
*GRW: Now we are in agreement. I must have missed your second point
when I first read the post.<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid6.2.0.14.0.20050314174749.01db8790@incoming.verizon.net"
type="cite"><br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">As for "capitalism," it is a fuzzy word. Many
people nowadays seem to have adopted Karl
<br>
Marx's version of the word, especially those who delight in the image
of power of living up
<br>
to someone else's image of a great devil. If I remember correctly...
Ronald Reagan
<br>
tried hard to change the emphasis back form "capitalism" so-defined
<br>
to "freedom," which is more like the idea that our Quaker forebears had
in mind,
<br>
and is more rational, in my view.
<br>
<br>
GRW: There should be nothing wrong with the word capitalism....if it
is performed with a concern for others i.e. adding soul to capitalism.
<br>
Quakers and Ronald Reagan were fine for the time in which they lived.
<br>
Now we need to move ahead.
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
The word "capitalism" is used with different definitions by different
people,
<br>
and is doubly fuzzy (multiple meanings and a broad "membership
function")
<br>
even as used by most individual people. ANY word with such fuzziness
<br>
needs to handled with great care.
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
*GRW: If you have ever done an etymological study of words that have
existed for say at least a thousand years, you would see that most
terms end up being "fuzzy" because their meanings are in constant
change, especially words that have a political sense like "state" or in
this instance "capitalism".<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid6.2.0.14.0.20050314174749.01db8790@incoming.verizon.net"
type="cite"><br>
Examples of that principle --
<br>
<br>
The word "consciousness" has been a great toy for those who try to use
words to
<br>
liberate them from objective reality. Picture the person saying:
"Consciousness..
<br>
it is all about illumination and coherence. So of course the physical
basis of consciousness must
<br>
be zillions of tiny lasers in the brain, emitting coherent light.."
<br>
(People really believe that kind of stuff..)
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
*GRW: I don't have immediate access to the OED but I'll wager that
there are lots of definitions for the terms "consciousness" so I don't
doubt in the least what you are saying.<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid6.2.0.14.0.20050314174749.01db8790@incoming.verizon.net"
type="cite"><br>
Or: "I support capitalism, the all-America principle of freedom laid
down for generations.
<br>
And of course, since capitalism means that monopolies rule, as
explained by that all-American
<br>
capitalist Groucho Marx, it is fair that we trade on the free market
for Congressmen, in order to
<br>
buy subsidies and regulations and special tax breaks and plus ups and
pass laws to
<br>
make it illegal for people to shirk on their duty to be always obedient
to their overlords..."
<br>
</blockquote>
*GRW: I know that you and Howard Bloom have been in communication.
You might glance at his "Reinventing Capitalism" . The first draft of
this manuscript just sold on eBay for $100. Here's a link: <font
color="#008000"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www">http://www</a>.<b>howard</b><b>bloom</b>.net/<b>reinventing</b>_<b>capitalism</b>/<br>
<br>
</font>
<blockquote
cite="mid6.2.0.14.0.20050314174749.01db8790@incoming.verizon.net"
type="cite"><br>
I really do not think that the core values of the Quakers are out of
date.
<br>
They are part of the real weltanschaung (sp?) of this civilization...
they
<br>
are the kind of values the rejection of which would be an example
<br>
of what Spengler called the transition from Culture to Civilization.
<br>
I hope we can be conscious enough to choose to not do that.
<br>
But if instead we trust in teeny tiny lasers implanted in the brain...
well,
<br>
in that case, "God help us" (though would he?).
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
*GRW: Which values of the Quakers are you speaking about? My only
encounter with Quakerism is from lower school study of Puritans,
Pilgrims, and all.... and the following ditty: "Quaker's meeting has
begun, no more laughing, no more fun. If you show your teeth or tongue
you shall pay a forfeit". Possibly you might wish to elaborate.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
Gerry<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid6.2.0.14.0.20050314174749.01db8790@incoming.verizon.net"
type="cite"><br>
Best,
<br>
<br>
Paul <br>
_______________________________________________
<br>
paleopsych mailing list
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:paleopsych@paleopsych.org">paleopsych@paleopsych.org</a>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.paleopsych.org/mailman/listinfo/paleopsych">http://lists.paleopsych.org/mailman/listinfo/paleopsych</a>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>