Tom,
Thanks for your compliments. I would like to point out a
couple of things from my own discipline. There is such a thing
as stylistic convention. French Style is a coherency that is
different from German or Italian. Before the abuse of "convention"
and its subversion into a primitive scientific provenciality now
called racism, people understood that groups, eras, ages and
even human stages were good ways to comprehend reality and
make some order of it. The trick was to understand that it was
a convention and not applicable to the exception. Also the "convention"
was something that could be described but basically fit no one
exactly because it was based upon a general view.
It was in that spirit that I made my comment about adolescents.
We might consider that one of the elements of adolescence is
heightened perceptions within a limited life experience. We might
also consider that they are in the process of growing which makes
that task subvert almost everything else to the achievement of its
goals. This is not a crazy time but it can become so if it is not
controled by wisdom and experience. It is also not criminal although
criminals tend to have the same self absorbtion but at later times
in their lives. It is not criminal but can become so, as in the murders
in American schools of late. I tend to believe that children and
adolescents need to be given the greatest latitude while being protected
from their lack of knowledge and the experience that real knowledge
is built upon. I also know that "latitude" depends upon the ability of
the parent to exercise the kind of protective control within an attitude
of benevolence and wisdom.
It is not wrong for 16 year olds to be 16 and adolescent. It is normal.
You can take any portion of my post and create your own world but
that is not the world that I responded to and from. Consider:
To rephrase what I said, the problem is with adults operating from the
same limited experience or use of experience (that fits adolescence)
that we are faced with the delemma that "widens worlds and rips minds."
Consciousness is the only process that has any hope of manifesting a
humane future. What we do that limits consciousness, and its evolution
within the individual, is like what happens in the limited view of the
adolescent whose intractibility can create a life threatening situation due
to inexperience and an unwillingness to be take advice. That is why I
brought the spiritual folks in at the end of my post.
They seem to be particularly
effected with the "way the truth and the life" and are convinced that their
local knowledge will save the world and if the world rejects it then they can
just "go to hell." But that choice makes the rejector a murderer and worse
and therefore deserving of any punishment the locals wish to inflict.
Sounds adolescent to me. THE world only began with the writing of their
book. Not THEIR world but THE world began a few thousand years ago.
I think neither they nor the local adolescent deserves to be followed as long
as they manifest such provenciality. Do you?
Regards,
REH
Tom Karnofsky wrote:
> Ray,
>
> I've been lurking on future-work for years, and love and often agree with
> your thought provoking and passionate posts. In regards to this one,
> though, I would like to point our that there is no such thing as a "typical
> 16 year old adolescent", any more than there is such thing as a typical
> southerner, African-American, or Mainer. Prejudice against young people,
> and its expression, seems to be acceptable even among "sophisticated"
> persons but should be no more so than prejudice against any group of people.
> A good consciousness raising book on the topic of adolescent prejudice, and
> its destructive results, is Scapegoat Generation- America's War on
> Adolescents, by Mike Males, 1996, Common Courage Press.
>
> Tom Karnofsky
>
> Sounds like your
> >typical 16 year old adolescent. Any parent who has gone through
> >that should be willing to grow up themselves or quit complaining when
> >their kid explains the world to them. Whether it is my kid or the local
> >minister, rabbi, mulah,
> >
> >
> >REH
> >
> >
My complete post: REH
It seems that it still comes down to whether the chip in the brain to
record all of life's experiences constitutes consciousness. Since I
do not believe that it does, it follows that nothing put into any linear
pattern can ever describe or encapsulate reality. What does this
have to do with the future and future writers, thinkers, etc. ?
We are still only thinking as far as our hands and literate minds
function. That is inadaquate for a serious discussion or exploration
of the universe, world society, the environment, any world culture,
a family or even an individual. Seems that the mechanistic theories
are alive and well and as destructive as ever. We can blame
bureacracy but the problem is the linear rule of science and Western
thought.
As a musician, the rules of thermodynamics were a total bust at
teaching anyone how to sing much less be an artist, even though
it was tried. We are surrounded by 2,000 year old religions controlling
language & the calendar and 200 year old science formulas controlling
perception.
How else could we make such ridiculous mistakes? Sounds like your
typical 16 year old adolescent. Any parent who has gone through
that should be willing to grow up themselves or quit complaining when
their kid explains the world to them. Whether it is my kid or the local
minister, rabbi, mulah,
