Tuesday, April 10, 2007

The Logophobia of the Left

Not much time this morning. Let's see what we can cover before it's too soon. I have an early morning doctor's appointment, followed by my day gig.

Speaking of which, any other Coons out there have Reynaud's phenomenon? It's pretty common. It's where your peripheral vascular system goes haywire and makes your hands and feet cold all the time. In my case, I guess it's pretty mild. I looked it up on line, and they showed photos of some bad cases, in which the digits turn either white as a sheet or dark blue because of the lack of blood and oxygen. Mine's nothing like that. Ran it by my endo, but he's useless -- said words to the effect of, "well, it's not my fingers, so frankly I'm not that interested" -- so I thought I'd check with an actual vascular specialist, just to make sure there's nothing I can do about it. Usually it's idiopathic, meaning that the idiots don't know what causes it, although diabetics often have cold extremities. Generally it's just a nuisance, but it would be nice to be able to do something about it.

Anyway, neocoon James picked up on what we was puttin' down yesterday about language, and commented that

'The need to reduce everything to something measurable is fine as far as measurable things go, but what factsimians don't appreciate is that so much of the cosmos cannot be measured at all. I just wanted to point out that this idea applies to many areas considered non-spiritual. For example, how do you measure education, or pornography? I've met many people who consider themselves educated and intelligent. They have taken all the tests, and they have the skills that are measured, but frankly they are complete dinks. I work in higher education and the stereotypes are true. It seems that they have focused on skills that can be tested and measured and haven't really thought about the big picture....

"This trend to measure everything and if it can't be measured or defined precisely then it isn't important creates other problems in society besides the loss of all things spiritual.... What about the loss of human judgment? I think a lot of trouble with our legal system comes from people following the rules and ignoring good judgment or common sense. I'm not suggesting we ignore empirical evidence and return to the dark ages, but we have gone too far the other way. Perhaps the pendulum has reached the limit of its empirical swing, and now it's time to swing back towards human judgment. We need a healthy balance, or a recognition that trying to measure the unmeasurable is folly. The factsimian mindset threatens civilization the same way anti-rational Islamists threaten society. We see one clearly, because we have the lens of history. The other we see darkly because we are living it right now."

Much to ponder here, for James has brought awareness to the ultimate "wedge issue," that is, the wedge that modernity placed between language and essences, or between immanence and transcendence. You might say that modernity initially drove in the wedge, but that the postmodernists pounded it all the way in with the axe, thus splitting the log right down the center of the logos.

This gets to the very heart of the luciferian program of the left, for once you have mauled language in this way -- once you have shattered the sacred covenant between word and thing, whether that thing is a material object or immaterial essence -- you have created a linguistic tyranny that clears the way for political tyranny. America could never have even been founded had the framers not had an unproblematic grasp of "self-evident" immaterial essences such as liberty, private property, and other rights that inhere "in the nature of things."

Put another way, almost everything objectionable about the left begins with an assault on human language, which is not this or that specific language, but our very means of access to a transcendent realm charged with the noetic light of the Other. This simply cannot be overemphasized, for it explains the specific way in which revelation is "eternally true," whereas any form of materialism is "eternally false" -- including secular leftism a priori. You will have noticed, however, that leftism must always -- always -- misappropriate and piggyback on this or that liberal or religious truth, truth that it covertly denies at the outset.

To cite just one obvious example, the use of the the state to force "homosexual marriage" upon us obviously has nothing to do with promoting marriage but destroying its very foundation -- including, of course, its linguistic foundation. "Marriage" is a word that actually means something, both literally and spiritually, which is to say, a sacred union between a Man and a Woman. Therefore, anyone with a remnant of common sense -- anyone not already infected by leftism -- knows without thinking about it that homosexuals cannot marry for the same reason that a baseball player cannot kick a field goal. A classical liberal would affirm that homosexuals are free to invent most any form of human arrangement they wish, but they cannot marry without forever destroying both the literal word and the very real -- but "invisible" -- spiritual state it signifies.

But you will also notice that the illiberal left steals another classical liberal concept in order to undermine the meaning of marriage, which is equality. Because of the abuse of language, the illiberal leftist does not mean the same thing as the liberal does by the term "equality." For the classical liberal, equality before the law inevitably redounds to hierarchy, whereas to the leftist, the natural hierarchy that emerges from equality represents de facto inequality, so that full equality must therefore involve the destruction of all hierarchy.

I hope you're getting the point, and that this is not too abstract, for it is a key idea. For the illiberal leftist, "equivalence" is substituted for equality, so that all of the good things that result from equality -- for degrees of goodness can only manifest in a hierarchy of values -- must be undone by a heavy-handed state to enforce equivalence, thereby undermining excellence. The redefinition of marriage is just one example. Due to various anxiety-provoking psychosexual mind parasites that have always been with us, the left hates the idea that men and woman are equal but not equivalent. Therefore, a major part of their perverse agenda is the effacement of sexual differences and the invention of the concept of "gender." Once everyone is a gender and no longer a sex, they are equivalent. And once the sexes are equivalent, then "homosexual marriage" is no different than marriage properly so-called.

To say that my metaphysics has nothing whatsoever to do with "homophobia" should be obvious to all. But it isn't. To further abuse the language -- and use it to further abuse others -- the left invented a new word, "homophobia," with which to club anyone who does not bend over before their rigid agenda. Which only emphasizes that the illiberal leftist obviously believes in hierarchy, just not a natural one. Rather, they wish to impose their hierarchy on the rest of us, always with the assistance of a powerful state that Knows Best.

This ubiquitous pattern of language abuse by the illiberal left was described by Michael Polanyi back in the 1940s. First, undermine the possibility of truth and meaning, so that there is no way to arbitrate between competing "truth claims." Next, seize positions of power in order to arbitrarily impose your own truth. This is how the academy was successfully taken over by people who do not believe in any truth except the one they impose on others and enforce through the mechanisms of speech codes, political correctness, and denial of tenure to those who do not conform. Free scholarship is replaced by all sorts of mechanisms of coercion. You may not be aware of the coercion until you step outside the bounds of what is acceptable, as we see in the global warming debate.

I only have some peripheral awareness of what this idiot Imus is going through. First of all, Imus' greatest offense is that he is an idiot, not a racist. That there are people who do not notice his idiocy mystifies me. In any event, he is now being ground up by the machinery of the compassionate left for using words in such a way that they do not approve.

But of just what abuse of language can the left disapprove in good faith? Do they disapprove of racial animus? Hardly. The Democrats could not even be a functioning party without guilt-ridden whites who gain power by shamelessly exploiting and caricaturing blacks as helpless and dependent children. Are they opposed to degenerate language? Hardly. In most any other context, they celebrate linguistic depravity as "courage," "authenticity," or "being real." Are they opposed to disgusting depictions of blacks as sex-crazed animals and ghetto hos? Er, I don't think so. I have never heard a leftist attack the generally debased world of rap and hip hip (I know, I know, there are exceptions), let alone with the sort of frenzy with which they are piling on the useless Imus.

But this whole pecadillo begs the question, for if language is just a "play of signifiers," what does it matter what anyone says? Certainly this is always the first defense of any prominent leftist who says something vile, which they only do every day. They immediately skirt the content by emphasizing that they are simply patriots engaging in that highest of callings, dissent. If dissent is the highest form of patriotism, why can't Imus just say that he is dissenting from the PC mind control of the left? For one thing, he's too stupid and probably not devious enough to think in that way.

Unlike the left. A couple of weeks ago, Rosie O'Donnell said something far more hateful, implicitly accusing the United States of blowing up the World Trade Centers -- including all the blacks therein. And in her case, it wasn't even a stupid joke. When called on it, she shifted the debate from the insanely vile content of what she said to the noble process in which she had been engaged, and lashed back at those who would dominate and oppress her in her free pursuit of truth!

Damn. Future Leader is stirring. We'll have to continue this line of thought tomorrow. Just ponder this disgusting non-apology by Rosie O'Donnell -- not just the words, but the abuse of language:

--"9/11 affected me deeply, as I know it did many Americans."

Wow, nothing gets past you, does it! Next:

--"The falling of the twin towers served to remind me that many of the assumptions Americans have about their lives are rooted in false feelings of security. "

Hmm. That's an odd thing to be reminded of when people are jumping to their death from a hundred floors up. Where's she going with this? "Assumptions rooted in false feelings of security." Is she talking about our denial of the evils of contemporary Islam? I guess I'm on board.

--"In light of this reminder, I have begun doing exactly what this country, at its best, allows for me to do: inquire. Investigate."

I see. Very good. So you've been reading the Koran, logging onto MEMRI.org., checking out Little Green Footballs, that kind of thing?

"America is great in so many ways, one of which is the freedom to speak, and indeed think, freely."

Indeed. But you sound a little defensive. What does this have to do with accusing the American government of attacking its own citizens on 9-11?

--"I have, of late, begun exercising the rights bestowed upon me by the democratic system I value, and the exercising of these rights has taken the form of an inquiry into what happened five years ago, an inquiry that resists the dominant explanations and that dares to entertain ideas that push me to the edge of what is bearable."

Wo, wo, slow down, sister. Are you suggesting that you're not really a vicious and paranoid hater and kook, but a daring intellectual adventerer who refuses to be dominated by racistsexisthomophobicwhiterethuglicanoppressors and is courageously skirting the edge of unbearable truth? Is that it?

--"I have come to no conclusions and, given the scope of the subject, will not for some time."

Sounds like you've concluded that you'd better shut your piehole about your daring discoveries in order to appease your corporate oppressors and keep your job.

--"If the very act of asking is so destabilizing for people, than I have to wonder whether the fabric of our democracy is indeed so raveled it is beyond salvage."

I see. The people who are exercising their free speech by questioning your sanity are "destabilized" and evidence that our system is beyond repair. Would it surprise you to learn that your continuing presence on national TV is prima faeces evidence of a liberal news media establishment so lacking in credibility or even basic decency that is broken beyond repair?

--"My own belief is that the act of asking is itself reparative, because it brings to life the values on which our constitution rests."

But why then isn't questioning your evil ideas reparative?

--"I am, therefore, pledging my allegiance, hand over heart, trying, as always, for a rigorous truth."

The news-speak credo of the leftist MSMistry of Truth. Pledge allegiance to the Truth you have spent your life undermining.

Not so strange bedfellows and well-fed bellowers: Rosie O'Donnell, New York Times Honored For Liberal Bias By GLAAD.

More on Imus, the decay of language, and the lost art of really insulting someone. Dupree is taking notes.

More on the disorder of Rosie crass and other fascists.

70 Comments:

Blogger juliec said...

RE: Reynaud's - yes, I think I have that. If the temperature in my house drops below about 70, as it did all winter, my hands and feet turn into frozen blocks. I didn't get the color changes though. Once they get cold, it seems to take forever to warm them up. Fortunately, I only have to be bothered by it a few months out of the year here.

4/10/2007 08:35:00 AM  
Blogger gumshoe1 said...

the study of the origin and meaning of words and their connection to thinking processes used to be called "philology"...Nietschze
was apparently an accolyte,if that means anything.

the topic seemed (to me) singularly boring...and had it not grown into its present day attack on the possibility of Truth,would have remained so...

the field has transformed itself
first into "Semantics" and then "Semiotics",and now into "Critical Theory"...(if i've got the sequence straight)
this trend has only gained momentum and metastasized in the late 20thC. with battalions of academics
trying to pound language apart as a means of getting at *something*.Chomksy,one of the strain's sanctified heros, was one of its founding fathers in the form of his elaborations on "Structuralism",which i believe was
yet another bastard child of the French philosophes.
_______________________________

this article/book
linked by Van several days ago is eye opening and an enjoyable,
humorous read...and still quite serious.

LESS THAN WORDS CAN SAY
by Richard Mitchell

http://www.sourcetext.com/grammarian/
less-than-words-can-say/index.html

Foreword excerpt:
"According to Mitchell, this bureaucratic jargon is turning us into a nation of baffled, inept, frustrated, and--ultimately--violent people, and the public schools are to blame. For the past thirty-five years, they have taught children to socialize rather than to read, write, and cipher--the only disciplines that foster clear language and logical thought. Mitchell's alarming conclusion is that our schools are turning out illiterates who will never manage their lives--because, lacking "the power of language," they can't think."

_______________________________

PS: why is it rarely(never?)
pointed out that if "there are "no Truths" then,presumably, there must be "no Lies".

is it a quest to level all "opinions" to Nothing?

to what end??

4/10/2007 08:49:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

Gumshoe1,
I'm thrilled to be beaten to the Richard Mitchell reference. Here's the same link with some magic blue glow added

4/10/2007 09:09:00 AM  
Anonymous ximeze said...

Reynauds: used to get the fullblown version, with both death-white & purple digits, often at the concurrently. Very weird & scary.

Started taking Grape Seed Extract(GSE) to improve vision & the Reynauds disappeared! Seem GSE strenghens all sizes of bloodvessels, thus improves circulation everywhere, capillaries included.

HEADS UP COMPUTER USER: GSE & Bilberry will address your eyestrain probs, by increasing bloodflow to your peepers, help with blurry vision & contrast. RAF pilots during WWII ate Bilberry(related to Blueberries) pie & jam to improve their nightvision.

Don't Coons in the wild have good night vision? What are the eating out there!

4/10/2007 09:10:00 AM  
Anonymous Kurt Offal said...

My father, PhD, University of Berlin, used to call himself a 'comparative philologist.' He claimed fluency in fifteen languages and a reading ability of another thirty-five or so. I, on the other hand, am a ne'er-do-well of no import.

Nevertheless,'Homophobia' is not in my unabridged dictionary with a copyright date of 1987. Not only that, its meaniing, 'fear of man,' has nothing to do with its usage.

The same people who defend Rosie's 'right' to question her government's involvement in 9/11 (insanity) are the ones who condemned anyone who claimed a 'right' to question the government's role in killing innocent men, women and children at Waco (an inconvenient reality.)

When, and by whose authority, did the color of states voting for republicans turn from blue to red? It used to be, much more appropriately, the other way 'round.

Just things that come to mind. Don't mean to distract from Bob's greater point.

4/10/2007 09:11:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

Gagdad said "...continuing presence on national TV is prima faeces evidence of a liberal news media"...

Hmm... need to ask Mr. Language Person whether 'prima faeces' or 'primary feces' would be more appropriate here... works either way I suppose.

4/10/2007 09:13:00 AM  
Blogger Ricky Raccoon said...

Bob said,
“..they are simply patriots engaging in that highest of callings, dissent.”

This so-called defense really cuts me. It seems obvious to me that the Founders were not interested in dissent for the sake of dissent. They were most concerned with protecting the right to speak truth. The libs argument always seems to be, in effect, that dissent should be expected and protected in anyform – reading between those lines, that we should always disagree. As Bob says this brings the truth (down) to the false, and brings the false (up) to equal level in value and destroys their natural hierarchy.

I am not suggesting their rights be taken away. That’s not the point. But it seems they demand their speech be assigned the same value as anyone else’s after it’s been spoken. They are forcing people to consider the not-worthy-of-consideration.

The Founders would never have wanted ‘wrongness’ given so much airtime, and therefore assigned some level of credibility by virtue of this airtime.

As Van said awhile back, but in my own words, their right to free speech is protected, but they are not protected from condemnation.

The Founders would have ‘run them out of town on a rail.’

4/10/2007 09:15:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

Magic Blue Glow Link...Viola!

4/10/2007 09:15:00 AM  
Blogger Ricky Raccoon said...

This is the coffee sprayer quote of the day:

“--I have come to no conclusions and, given the scope of the subject, will not for some time."

I know this is Dr Bob’s department, but if I may…You made some typos there, Rosie. Let me help you:

“I began with conclusions and, given the scope of my hate for myself and America, will not exchange my conclusions for facts."

4/10/2007 09:19:00 AM  
Anonymous interlocutor said...

In today's post Bob writes:

"But this whole pecadillo begs the question, for if language is just a "play of signifiers," what does it matter what anyone says?"

Precisely. It doesn't matter what people say, as much as what they DO.

I've been reminding Bob for months now that he's proven his case (via his posts) against the Left well and thoroughly and its time to move on into the realm of action.

The prosecution has presented its case, and the verdict has been read. There is no need to cross- examine any more witnesses in the form of Rosie O'Donnell et al.

What we need is action. What is the sentence handed down by the court? What shall the correction be, and how shall it be implemented?

4/10/2007 09:26:00 AM  
Anonymous ximeze said...

Oh bother, my typos.
So much for my editing ability and I'm sure you can get the gist.

Really: just trying to make Van not feel all alone in the typo arena.

PS - For info: Google

"grape seed extract" reynauds

4/10/2007 09:27:00 AM  
Blogger gumshoe1 said...

interlocutor -

you imply that Bob takes "no action".

your trolling implies otherwise.

4/10/2007 09:39:00 AM  
Blogger River Cocytus said...

Interlocutor: your immediately following rebuffs nonwithstanding, I maintain that you are leprous jacobin at heart, and should show yourself the door permanently.

4/10/2007 09:41:00 AM  
Blogger gumshoe1 said...

"But this whole pecadillo begs the question, for if language is just a "play of signifiers," what does it matter what anyone says?"

Precisely. It doesn't matter what people say, as much as what they DO.

-interlocutor.
_______________________
wrong.

lying is something people "DO".

attacks on language and thought
are the progeny of a lying mind.

4/10/2007 09:41:00 AM  
Anonymous pj said...

Raynaud's - Things that might help: (1) Yoga/stretching/exercise -- many circulatory & neurological problems are caused by tight and misplaced muscles, which squeeze vessels and nerves as they pass through restricted spaces, especially in the shoulders, wrists, and, in people who spend a lot of time sitting, hips and knees. Exercise and stretching will improve circulation and the body's natural healing mechanisms. (2) The problem frequently has an autoimmune origin, and autoimmune disorders frequently are aggravated by disruptions to leukocyte energy metabolism. Safe supplements which can help this are pantothenic acid (500 mg/day), which is the precursor to Coenzyme A, and coenzyme Q10 (100 mg/day). Since these coenzymes are so abundant in your body, it may take months of supplementation to notice a difference, but when I had Sjogren's syndrome I noticed a difference the first day. (3) In any autoimmune disorder, reducing stress is often critical; good posture, yoga/stretching, exercise, and deep breathing exercises / relaxation techniques can help build a habit of keeping stress low.

These three things are safe and even if they don't improve your Raynaud's, will be good for you in other ways. And they might help the Raynaud's.

4/10/2007 09:51:00 AM  
Anonymous walt said...

Bob, this seems a bit personal, but you asked. My wife is Type 1 also, and suffers from Reynaud's. She has researched extensively, and says there is no clinical help available. She says that recent research into Pycnogenol (a tree extract) and Alpha Lipoic Acid both have shown some hopeful results for peripheral neuropathy. I've seen extreme cases of neuropathy, so stay diligent.

There are medical reports (even one today) about various forms of Chinese yoga effecting remarkable nerve repair. Probably the most widely-recognized expert in these matters is Yang, Jwang-ming (Google: YMAA).

4/10/2007 10:02:00 AM  
Blogger Joan of Argghh! said...

Dupree, no need to take insult notes, just go here.

4/10/2007 10:02:00 AM  
Anonymous pj said...

Oh, one other thing you could consider trying -- I have no experience with this, but vascular dilation is controlled by nitric oxide, and arginine is the precursor amino acid from which nitric oxide is created. If you're deficient in arginine, that might lead to an NO deficiency and excessive constriction of vessels.

The Grape Seed Extract mentioned above is known to enhance NO release, see e.g. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11401934&dopt=Abstract. So his experience might indicate the NO angle is a good one to search in.

Spinach, shellfish, and meats are high in arginine; or, supplements are available.

4/10/2007 10:04:00 AM  
Blogger gumshoe1 said...

"The libs argument always seems to be, in effect, that dissent should be expected and protected in any form – reading between those lines, that we should always disagree."

well put,Ricky.

"always disagree."

imo, it is the Gramscian
"War of Each against All".

4/10/2007 10:15:00 AM  
Blogger Ricky Raccoon said...

I probably don’t have Reynaud's, but my hands are cold mostly at the office and get increasingly cold as I get closer to lunchtime. Feet too, but not so much. After lunch they warm up quite a bit. So I’m wondering if yours may be related to your diabetes. But I don’t have diabetes.
I think mine may be due to lower heart rate/circulation caused by being so still in front of the computer for extended periods.

4/10/2007 10:27:00 AM  
Anonymous Dr_Qi said...

gumshoe, you do not know what you are talking about in regards to Semantics, Semiotics and Critical theory. These discursive subjects are not direct descendants of Philology nor are they directly related to one another.

Philology is related, vaguely, to Semantics and to Semiotics due to the fact that they are all involved in looking at and analyzing various parts of language, but it doesn't go much further than that.

Semantics is part of linguistics and philosophy of language and is largely done by analytic philosophers and professional linguists.

Semiotics is not, in itself, a particularly well defined area, either in content or methodology, and usually interests those in Cultural Studies or Comparative Literature departments. Those who do formal Semantics do not usually think much of those who claim to do Semiotics.

Critical theory is somewhat related to Semiotics, though it is more of a political theory largely steeped in language and its effects on the basic ontologies of society.

Also, to associate Chomsky with Structuralism is simply incorrect. Of course, there is some connection since he is a linguist and Structuralism looks at language, but there is little more than that and Chomsky is squarely against most aspects and personalities within the Structuralist movement. This is probably the only way in which Chomsky and Derrida converge.

Why do you all continue to believe that those on the left, even postmodern theorists, believe things like 'there are no Truths'? Perhaps you should actually read their works and study what they say rather than relying on bad second hand accounts.

None of this is hugely important, but don't pretend like you know what you are talking about when it comes to any of these topics.

4/10/2007 10:33:00 AM  
Anonymous Johan said...

Ah, spot on target there!

The leftists twisted ways of using language would be a very amusing thing if it wasn't for the facts that it had led (and still leads) to the death and oppression of millions.

Why did they call it the DDR (Deutche Democratiche Republic)? They had so such thing as democracy. Why did/do so many communist countries put the word "democracy" or "the peoples (rebulic)" in their names? They obviously couldn't belive that the civilized part of the world belived them. We watched them from the outside and saw that there weas no such thing in power as "the people", and absolutely no such thing as a democratic shift of power. It has to be because they like to fool themselvs. When you tell the lie so many times, it will soon enough be the truth to you. The actual truth will be burried beneath so many, and so heavy lies, that no light will ever reach them (if they do, and they still push the lies, they must be beyond an evil I can understand).

The western leftist are also pushing the word "democracy" on to all the different places they actually not should have access to. Like our homes and land, our businesses, and ofcourse - our wallets. When they want your money, they call it "economic democracy", like everybody should have a say about everybodys money. Putting the fine word "democracy" in it, they think they can fool us to belive it's something nice and good when they want mine or yours money for their projects.

Hey, let's vote if we shall take all -insert random minority group of people here- money and build a statue for the glory of Dear Leader! :)

4/10/2007 10:33:00 AM  
Blogger robinstarfish said...

thanks van for the link
mitchell writes my epitaph
less than words can say

4/10/2007 10:41:00 AM  
Anonymous hoarhey said...

Rosie's Pledge:

I pledge allegiance to the truth, I have spent my life undermining.
And to the equivocation for which it stands,
Un-sated, uber-hog
With libertines and license for all.

4/10/2007 11:02:00 AM  
Anonymous hoarhey said...

Dhaktah-key,

Have you published a book?

4/10/2007 11:04:00 AM  
Blogger James said...

Van,

I've been looking for The Underground Grammarian for years. I've sensed something was off for awhile now, but this puts words to the vague feeling of unease I've had with language. It's quite remarkable I keep finding gold here at OC. Thanks all.

4/10/2007 11:05:00 AM  
Blogger robinstarfish said...

Symbiosis
wax buds blush & burst
young shoots crane to face new light
blue heron in bloom

4/10/2007 11:07:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

Joan of Argghh!,
Argh! Teasing me with your blue nic but no info!
Hurumph!
;-)

4/10/2007 11:19:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

Johan said "Hey, let's vote if we shall take all -insert random minority group of people here- money and build a statue for the glory of Dear Leader!"

hmmm... how about those with 'dr''s, '_''s & 'qi''s in their nic's?

4/10/2007 11:21:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

dr_qi said "Why do you all continue to believe that those on the left, even postmodern theorists, believe things like 'there are no Truths'?"

Defining something out of any meaningful existence, and then claiming that you still have respect for it, is the quintessence of the semi-idiotics you revere.

sigh. I'll dig into the bountiful slop bucket of post-modern muck tonight for some quotes... oh, sorry, 'texts', to refresh your post-intelligence with.

"...but don't pretend like you know what you are talking about..."

Physician, heal thyself.

4/10/2007 11:31:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

InteLockYourDoor said "What we need is action."

Agreed.

"What is the sentence handed down by the court?"

You're an idiot.

"What shall the correction be"

Stop writing. Continue reading.

"... and how shall it be implemented?"

Don't call us. We won't call you.

4/10/2007 11:35:00 AM  
Blogger Ricky Raccoon said...

Van,
RE Interloper, I prefer this one:

If the phone doesn’t ring, you’ll know it’s us.

Enjoy.

4/10/2007 12:17:00 PM  
Blogger MizzE said...

DL - Excellent job of squashing the vulgars who crept through when the pale tumbled down.

Hoorah - the same goes for Hoarhey too.

"With libertines and license for all"

Big differene between freedom and license.

4/10/2007 12:25:00 PM  
Blogger NoMo said...

Bob - re: Reynaud's

Red Wine and Dark Chocolate (more than 80% cocoa, sugar free perhaps) - in moderation of course. Seriously. Nice stress reliever too.

In other words, polyphenols and flavonoids.

4/10/2007 12:26:00 PM  
Anonymous bubba said...

“Precisely. It doesn't matter what people say, as much as what they DO.

I've been reminding Bob for months now that he's proven his case (via his posts) against the Left well and thoroughly and its time to move on into the realm of action.” – Intralectrocuter

The problem, of course, is that every time the judge passes sentence, the leftists print up another bogus get out of jail free card. So we have to DO the trial all over again just to stay even.

A perfect example is the decades long refusal of leftists to admit Alger Hiss was a Soviet spy in Roosevelt’s state department. Every six months the Wa Po or the NY Times runs another article proclaiming his innocence or, at least, lack of proof concerning his guilt.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UmM9bMkiRuM&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fpowerlineblog%2Ecom%2F

This kind of refusal to accept reality requires someone, again and again, to restate the truth.

If Bob ran the media and put reality in front of the masses 24/7, he would, no doubt, MOVE ON to your satisfaction.

One very obvious solution to your months of frustration is to write letters to the editors of leftist media correcting THEIR obvious failings. Why don’t you take on that task? When they’re all squared away, come back and alert Bob that the coast is clear.

4/10/2007 01:13:00 PM  
Anonymous walt said...

More info for Bob -

There is a recent article on Pycnogenol at www.diabeteshealth.com;
just enter 'pycnogenol' in the search engine.

There is information about Alpha Lipoic Acid in Richard Bernstein's book, Diabetes Solution. He recommends two products for Reynaud's:
1) Insulow (which is R-Alpha Lipoic Acid)
2)Benfotiamine (which is a fat soluable B1)

4/10/2007 02:00:00 PM  
Blogger Ricky Raccoon said...

RE Bob’s post today, another example:

From today’s WSJ’s Opinion Journal

'At What Point Do You Stop Doing What You Think Is Right?'
“Scott Pelley of "60 Minutes" interviewed John McCain for Sunday's program, and he put this question to the senator:
‘We've talked about the majority of Americans wanting out of Iraq at this point. I wonder at what point do you stop doing what you think is right and you start doing what the majority of the American people want?’
Wow. Did any reporter ever ask this of an antiwar politician in 2003, when the war was popular? For that matter, has any reporter ever asked a politician this question when the politician is on the liberal side of an issue and the majority on the conservative side?”

4/10/2007 02:25:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

Ricky Racoon quoted "...at what point do you stop doing what you think is right and you start doing what the majority of the American people want?"

Aside from anything else, what does that say about the reporter/MSM's concept of right and wrong?

Much as I'd like to tick off dr_qi some more, that predates pomo... no French fries there, I'm afraid that 'Pragmatism' came from the good ol' american know-how (fermented through the German Phd funktories) of Charles Sanders Peirce, William James and John Dewey.

4/10/2007 02:41:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

It's funny (meaning sad), that if you watch the press, especially at the anchor levels, when they know they can't get anywhere with any more 'nuanced' tactics, and they want to sound all folksy, just one of the guys, they trot out the ol' "What we need here is some to do what is sensible, someone with the strength to be Pragmatic..."

As if that does anything other than completely undercut and toss out the window any possiblities of being principled, of doing what is Right... leaving the way clear for another nuanced spinshot of 'desirable outcomes'.

They've sold pragmatism as something that's 'sensible', the 'can do spirit behind getting things done!', when all it means is unprincipled actions (InteLockYourDoor should like that very action oriented, no thought needed) made for short term gain. Too hell with what's right, and what to do when the chickens come home to roost? Well... we'll think of something then....

(Ximeze, thanks for the typo's, I feel better already)

4/10/2007 02:57:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

"For the classical liberal, equality before the law inevitably redounds to hierarchy, whereas to the leftist, the natural hierarchy that emerges from equality represents de facto inequality, so that full equality must therefore involve the destruction of all hierarchy."

The lefties are always looking for a way to replace the heirarchy of values, with an heirarchy of raw flatland power. Global cooling? Global warming? It's all good, whichever cause has the most limelightability and whose spokesthug has the most 'charm' (like Al Capone had charm, like Algore has... uh... hmm, well like Al Capone had charm) at the moment will do just fine.

4/10/2007 03:12:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

(BTW Gagdad, excellent post today)

4/10/2007 03:13:00 PM  
Blogger NoMo said...

I know I sound like a broken record sometimes a broken record sometimes, but here may have been the Original Wedge – watch the logos being split down the center:

The scene -
In the middle of the garden were the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil... the Lord God took the man and put him in the garden to work it and take care of it.

The statement of truth -
He commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die."

The truth is questioned, twisted, then changed -
Now the serpent was craftier than any of the wild animals God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God really say, 'You must not eat from any tree in the garden'?" The woman said to the serpent, "We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, but God did say, 'You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.' "You will not surely die," the serpent said to the woman. "For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."

How the truth becomes the lie - then and now. Language is power.

4/10/2007 03:47:00 PM  
Anonymous dilys said...

"ground up by the machinery of the compassionate left for using words in such a way that they do not approve. "

Show trials.

4/10/2007 04:13:00 PM  
Blogger shoprat said...

Christian apologist and amateur theologian, CS Lewis wrote of the same things you are talking about in the years right after WWII. The book is called The Abolition of Man but he came to the conclusion that the left's view of language was unsustainable and due to the nature of human communications, we would slip back to a more sensible view.

4/10/2007 04:37:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

Shoprat said "...he came to the conclusion that the left's view of language was unsustainable and due to the nature of human communications, we would slip back to a more sensible view."

Yes, he did. To which I'll add, as yesterday - 'Eventually'.

4/10/2007 05:54:00 PM  
Blogger Bleepless said...

"Diversity" meand uniformity of opinion. "Equality" means uniformity of all other public appearance.

4/10/2007 06:33:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

uh... I think I have 3rd degree Sun burn.

4/10/2007 07:51:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

Gagdad? Did Dupree zap your own link?

4/10/2007 07:52:00 PM  
Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

Yes. File under "not funny enough for the trouble."

4/10/2007 08:23:00 PM  
Anonymous dilys said...

David Thompson on Peddling Stupidity for more on the assault on language & perception itself: "This is the legacy of postmodern thought, as trafficked by many academics of the left – the ‘freedom’ to blunt the senses and be triumphantly, shamelessly wrong."

4/10/2007 08:52:00 PM  
Anonymous Fontessa said...

I've had Reynaud's in my hands since I was 14 (55 now). It occurs when I get chilled, and can even happen in the summer, coming into an especially cool house from outdoors, or holding an iced drink. While only my hands go dead, I have hard, almost painful shivers until it passes.

4/10/2007 09:07:00 PM  
Anonymous Fontessa said...

For what it's worth: My mother, an "amateur" (but educated) nutritionist, was convinced that diabetics suffered from neuropathy and other nerve dysfunctions like Reynaud's because they didn't get enough fat in their diets ... that the only thing that actually nourishes the myelin sheathing and keeps it healthy was FAT. She believed it was vitally important to adjust the rest of the diet and/or insulin to accommodate a slight increase in fat intake. (I don't have diabetes but others in my family did).

4/10/2007 09:18:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

jwm said...

Speaking of language,this is one of my favorite quotes. (pared down a little)

Tzu Lu said:
If the prince of Wei were waiting for you to come and administer his country for him, what would be your first measure? The Master said, It would certainly be to correct language....If language is incorrect, then what is said does not concord with what was meant; and if what is said does not concord with what was meant, what is to be done cannot be effected. If what is to be done cannot be effected, then rites and music will not flourish. If rites and music do not flourish, then mutilations and lesser punishments will go astray. And if mutilations and lesser punishments go astry, then the people have nowhere to put hand or foot....
Confucius


"lesser punishments gone astray"
Sound familiar?

JWM

4/10/2007 09:27:00 PM  
Anonymous interlocutor said...

Well, to restate my case, because I do think I have a case here that merits attention--

I'll accept that Bob transmits a constant stream of variations on a theme--the how, why, when and who is cracked and dangerous on the Left---and that is useful. Bob is doing his part. He is the theorist behind raccoonism.

But if nobody else changes the way they live as a result, then somehow the circuit is not closed, the tea is not tossed in the harbor, and nothing changes.

We need "middle-managers" that will play Lenin to Bob's Marx, to borrow from a hated ideology that nevertheless became very influential.

Raccoons want to be influential: I take that to be axiomatic, or Bob would not Blog, nor Van read. If not wanting to create change, why bother?

Bob freely acknowledges that the enemy ideology dominates the media, parts of the government, academia, and business. There should be some plan for contesting this domination.

I have an idea of where to start: on the level of each individual raccoon. Each one should identify a target leftist individual and campaign to influence their thinking. If enough raccoons do this a snowball effect will take place.

I'll stop picking on Bob, who is one of the few who is already working hard on the cause. The rest of you people should man up and get going too. Let's get those tea crates into the harbor.

4/10/2007 09:48:00 PM  
Anonymous hoarhey said...

interlocutor,

How do you "know" what anyone here does with regard to activism? Coons are self starters.

4/10/2007 10:20:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

InteLockYurDoor said "I have an idea of where to start: on the level of each individual raccoon."

Sure wish you did have that idea.

4/10/2007 10:51:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

JWM,
Good choice of quotes, that's a favorite of mine too.

4/10/2007 10:51:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

Thanks Dilys,

I started diving into the muck, and it's just too bludgeoning Stupid to waste my the time on.
From your link:

“Postmodern prose is perhaps best approached as an exercise in posturing and phonetics, of couching slim and trite observations in needlessly Byzantine language… Efforts to fathom deep meaning, or, very often, meaning of any kind, are generally exhausting and rarely rewarded. More often, what you’ll find is essentially a pile of language, carefully disorganized so as to obscure a lack of content.”

Pretty much says it all. Equivocation, useless neologisms, convolution, extended plodding efforts to raise the most silly and trite globservations to farfetched significance... I'd hunt for some more adjectives, but the rest that fit are mostly of the four letter variety.

My apologies to all for the length, but oh... I'm a flogger... (sorry for eating the space Gagdad - at least it's at the end of the day)

Spot the Post-Modernist:
A:
"Deconstruction is justice. It is perhaps because law (droit) (which I will consistently try to distinguish from justice) is constructible, in a sense that goes beyond the opposition between convention and nature, it is perhaps insofar as it goes beyond this opposition that it is constructible and so deconstructible and, what’s more, that it makes deconstruction possible, or at least the practice of a deconstruction that, fundamentally, always proceeds to questions of droit and to the subject of droit. (1) The deconstructibility of law (droit), of legality, legitimacy ot legitimation (for example) makes deconstruction possible. (2) The undeconstructiblity of justice also makes deconstruction possible, indeed inseparable from it. (3) The result: deconstruction takes place in the interval that separates the undeconstructibility of justice from the deconstructibility of droit (authority, legitimacy, and so on). It is possible as an experience of the impossible, there where, even if it does not exist (or does not yet exist, or never does exist), there is justice. "

B:
“Society is fundamentally dead,” says Derrida; however, according to Pickett[3] , it is not so much society that is fundamentally dead, but rather the collapse, and subsequent economy, of society. In a sense, the characteristic theme of the works of Joyce is the bridge between reality and sexual identity. If subcultural discourse holds, we have to choose between dialectic nihilism and predialectic deconstruction.
Sexuality is used in the service of capitalism,” says Bataille. Thus, Derrida uses the term ’subcultural discourse’ to denote a self-fulfilling whole. The subject is contextualised into a dialectic nihilism that includes truth as a totality. "


The first is from Derrida on law, the second is from a Priceless Pomo generator, computer generated and indistinguishable from the real thing.

Doubtless DQ will point out how I haven't grasped the finer details of PoMo, but what our eeisteamed dr_qi doesn't get, with all of his careful separating of philology, semantics, semiotics (I think you missed on that a bit, but that's neither here nor there, except that Peirce had much to do with it), and other assorted DecomPostHooie, he doesn't get that it's like wasting time differentiating between different brands of fruit cake - what's the point? They're all crap!

You can trace every damn one of them back through Communism, Socialism, Progressivism, Pragmatism, Hegelianism, Kantianism to their source in Rousseau - Chomsky included - and just because they scream at each other doesn't make them any less alike in style, 'content' and purpose - the destruction of Western Civilization in general, the Enlightenment (English branch) and Classical Liberalism in particular, foisting in it's place some variant of socialism, which means brute force, ugliness and lies (oh, excuse me, 'many truths') over the Good, the Beautiful and the True.

Gagdad had a good post a while back on Stephen Hicks book on Post-modernism, this interview gives a good overview of the PoMo disease as well.

For a decent job of gumshoeing deconstruction-Marxist-multi-culti-deconstructivitis back to the source. A collection of essays, in particular Political Correctness: Deconstruction and Literature ties them up well. For a shorter summary of them, The Origins of Political Correctness - An Accuracy in Academia Address by Bill Lind

4/10/2007 10:54:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't have Reynaud's, but I think Inclined Bed Therapy is worth trying for that and most health problems. IBT has been shown to improve circulation and regenerate nerves, and there have been cases in which people with spinal cord injuries have been able to walk again. Since I inclined my bed (head higher than feet) a few inches a couple months ago, I sleep much better and breathe easier at night. Also, my ankles are no longer puffy. I'm so glad Dr. Bob asked a health related question so I had an excuse to share this here.

4/10/2007 11:46:00 PM  
Anonymous Dr_Qi said...

Van, I figure I'll put my response here instead of sullying a new day's space with reference to your confusion[there will be plenty of that in tomorrow's post anyway I'm sure]. I just got up from a nap so excuse any typos that may arise.

Firstly, I'm not a postmodernist[despite the fact that the definition of what that would suggest is very vague] so I would never attempt a general defense of it, though I think a general attack on it, such as Bob and the rest of you all regularly engage in, is equally nebulous and futile. I would agree that a great deal of what is written by supposed Postmodernist theorists is in error or is trivially true. However, this also applies to most schools of thought and to most individual writers. Like in every discourse a great deal of work is necessary to sift through the great mass of work to find specific arguments or insights that assist one in making sense of or solving some problem that wasn't understood before. To assert that people like Derrida, Foucault and Baudrillard have added nothing to human understanding of areas of human experience is simply false even if you fail to notice. How much they have contributed can be debated, but to outright dismiss them completely is just lazy. My critique of your understanding of them isn't asserting that they are all right but that you clearly don't know enough about it to intelligently criticize them.

Second, I agree with you that Derrida's writing on Law is not very good and that his attempt to draw a connection between Justice and Deconstruction is probably just the tendency of a theorist to start seeing his specific theoretical ontology everywhere.

As to Pierce and the development of various linguistic philosophies, It is true he did write a great deal on those subjects, the extent of which is still not fully apprehended even today, but that he played little part in their overall development[especially in the early days when they were becoming somewhat distinct discourses] because his works were never published in any collected way until recently and he didn't get all that much attention from a broad class of scholars until recently as well, recently meaning the last two to three decades.

Again, despite your loathing of Chomsky and his political views, it is simply false to equate his work in Linguistics with that of someone like Derrida or any of those in the semiotics camp.

Similarly, to blandly suggest that Pragmatism has a direct connection or influence from Communism or Hegel shows a total lack of understanding them. William James and Hegel have very little in common, either stylistically or in their basic assumptions regarding nearly anything.

Likewise, to link Kant and Communism or Kant to Rousseau just shows little knowledge of the history of Philosophy. To think that Kant was interested in the downfall of Western Civilization is completely backward. Rousseau is a more complicated issue, but still what you say is a large exaggeration.

Lastly, the interview with Hicks is a good example of a complete lack of rigor in reading Kant and his connection and interplay with Hume's philosophy. Hicks seems connected to Rand and Objectivism, which isn't surprising in this regard since Rand's misreading and misunderstanding of Kant is famous for being so far off the mark and is one large reason[among many] why no reputable or esteemed Philosophers take Rand seriously as anything other than a novelist.

4/11/2007 12:02:00 AM  
Anonymous dr_qi said...

Van,
You're wrong.


You're wrong.


You're wrong,.


AND, OH YES,


You're wrong!


And did you notice that I have absolutely NO ability to articulate any point which proves that? And that you are supposed to believe I know what I'm talking about without actually explaining anything because, after all, I am Dr_Qi?
Hey, works with the undergrads.

4/11/2007 12:25:00 AM  
Blogger USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

"For the illiberal leftist, "equivalence" is substituted for equality, so that all of the good things that result from equality -- for degrees of goodness can only manifest in a hierarchy of values -- must be undone by a heavy-handed state to enforce equivalence, thereby undermining excellence."

Indeed. Forced equivalence destroys any incentive to excel.
Why bust your butt to excel when parasitical self-imposed losers get to steal everything you work for, backed by the force of the State?

Where good is ridiculed and evil is exalted.

There is no liberty, no good, no truth, and no beauty under forced equivalence.
Quite the opposite.

4/11/2007 02:29:00 AM  
Blogger USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

Johan said:
"The leftists twisted ways of using language would be a very amusing thing if it wasn't for the facts that it had led (and still leads) to the death and oppression of millions."

How ironic (and sad) that leftists destroy those they claim to want to help.

4/11/2007 02:40:00 AM  
Blogger USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

Hoarhey said...
Rosie's Pledge:

I pledge allegiance to the truth, I have spent my life undermining.
And to the equivocation for which it stands,
Un-sated, uber-hog
With libertines and license for all.

LOL! Bravo Zulu Hoarhey!

4/11/2007 02:49:00 AM  
Blogger USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

Van said...
InteLockYourDoor said "What we need is action."

Agreed.

"What is the sentence handed down by the court?"

You're an idiot.

"What shall the correction be"

Stop writing. Continue reading.

"... and how shall it be implemented?"

Don't call us. We won't call you.

Heh! I'm glad I saran-wrapped my computer screen today!

4/11/2007 02:55:00 AM  
Anonymous walt said...

Bob mentioned that, "The left invented a new word, "homophobia," with which to club anyone who does not bend over before their rigid agenda."

Rubs me the wrong way as well.

4/11/2007 04:26:00 AM  
Anonymous cousin dupree said...

Qi:

Bearing in mind that it is strictly impossible to be "always wrong," tell us what you think Foucault's general philosophy contributred to human understanding -- the original wisdom it embodies that you personally rely upon to live well. I would love to hear it.

4/11/2007 04:33:00 AM  
Blogger River Cocytus said...

QI: you're getting lost in the details. I'm no study of PoMo'ers or a real historian of the various philosophers, but from the standpoint of music, I can tell you that having different ideas and opinions does not prevent reasonable grouping. To for instance say that Liszt and Schubert played the same style ought to be ridiculous, and yet they are both Romantic composers. And in truth, despite differences in opinions, roots and styles, their music both comes and goes the same way - somewhat of the climate of the times.

In other words, don't get too lost in your own discriminatory abilities - even clones have differences.

We speak mainly of where the ideas lead - the erosion of truth they foster and their overall self-serving irrelevancy.

All forms of pomo do something like this:

1. The receiver determines the meaning of the message.

2. Choose one to deconstruct: receivers, determining, meanings, messages or 'of'.

NOTE: you may feel free to ignore universality of any of the five concepts as it suits you.

As for Rand, her misreading of Kant seemed to work out fine. Of course, I think everyone misreads him. Maybe he did it on purpose.

4/11/2007 04:37:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

dr_qi said "Again, despite your loathing of Chomsky and his political views, it is simply false to equate his work in Linguistics with that of someone like Derrida or any of those in the semiotics camp"

Shows that you miss the point once again. You seem to think that philosophical influence is traced through the person's likes and dislikes as if they were favored flavors of literary theory, which is to completely misunderstand what philosophy is.

I can look at a painting such as munch's 'the scream' or anything by Jackson Pollock and tell you flat out that though they may not have studied philosophy, the branch of modern philosophy which shaped their souls came from Rousseau's trunk rather than Lockes.

You, like most modernists, are bedeviled by the details. The devil is not only in the details, it is the detail fetish that nearly defines them. Kant's philosophy is a veritable glorification of details, all intent on showing that this tree which he has your face pressed up against, is separate from that tree... "over there NO! Don't pull your head back! Out of the corner of your eye! See that shadow? Yes, it's separate from this one, and to say that they are part of a forrest is just silly, because you can't even See a forrest can you? NO! Keep your cheek in the bark! Can you see it? No! Then to assert that there is something called a forrest is to talk about what you have no direct experience of and so can not truly describe. So..." That line of thought, separating forrests and principles from the real world, is what came through Kant & Hegel. The mania for quantification that followed, with the german Phd'ists & experimental psychologists directly influenced american education and thought.

Pearce took the first wave of it. His follower, Dewey, more explicitly united the ideas of Hegel, Marx, the Proregressives, etc. To not be able to see that or understand it shows you to be their follower, whether you recognize it or not. You may not be a post modernist, but you apparently buy every essential 'thought' which fuels them.

The rest of your comments say little different. I have neither the time nor inclination to continue this now. Guess I'll have to finally finish my series of posts that left off with the proregressives. yuch.

4/11/2007 05:57:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

4/16/2007 02:51:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home