Wednesday, April 11, 2007

My God Can Beat Up Your Godlessness

First of all, a collective thank you for the chorus of medical advoices, everything from herbs & spices to medical intuitives to inclined beds. I've had no time to carefully sift through or coonsider any of it, but I will. Although I am an unreserved advocate of the white man's medicine, I am not at all averse to alternative approaches as an adjunct. As a matter of fact, the vascular physician I consulted with yesterday thought I might even be too drug happy. That is, with my diabetes, I am extremely proactive, and take certain medications before it is even necessary to do so.

But not only did he find absolutely nothing wrong with the sturdy Gagdad vascular system, he was extremely impressed with my diabetic control. He said it would probably be another couple of months before he would see a patient with an A1c in my range (mid 5s). (This is a critical number for diabetics, as it indicates the average blood sugar level during the previous three months. It's very difficult to get A1c under my range without risking dangerous lows.) My goal is to exert strict control until the day they either come out with a pump that mimics the pancreas (which will probably be less than ten years) or perfect beta cell transplants or regeneration.

(Speaking of the latter, just look at the shockingly deceptive way this leftist writer handles this good news for diabetics, taking a gratuitous swipe at President Bush while misleading the reader that this breakthrough with adult stem cells has something to do with embryonic stem cells [now edited out, but still containing a misleading reference to a non-existent "debate" in Washington about adult stem cells]. This is why I despise the left: the agenda always comes first. Truth is of no consequence whatsoever.)

I don't mean to get sidetracked into a post about my various symptoms, but I should have been more specific. It's not the cold resulting from the vasoconstriction that bothers me so much, but I started having the opposite problem alternating with it -- excessive vasodilation in the extremities. Whereas the cold is just cold, the vasodilation is kind of uncomfortable. It's like the capillaries can't decide on a nice middle range. But the doc assured me that it was clinically insignificant and even subtly implied -- or at least I picked it up with my Coon scent -- that Dear Leader was a bit of a hypochondriac.

But as I have written before, Dear Leader does indeed have many mysterious and diverse symptoms that come and go, not all of them unpleasant, including the ability to wake up blogging out of a sound sleep.

*****

Now, what is the best philosophy? That question popped into my noggin this morning, and it does have direct relevance to what we were discussing yesterday regarding language. For the best philosophy would necessarily encompass the best linguistic theory, if only because any philosophy must be stored and transmitted in the medium of language. Therefore, if your philosophy of language is off, then your entire philosophy will be built on sand.

Put another way, is it possible for human beings to build a philosophy on "solid rock," so to speak? To actually arrive at the "One True Philosophy" that cannot not be true? Yes, I believe so -- and believing so is one of the things that immediately sets one apart from any middlebrow postmodern lie-roasted wackademia nut. Contrary to the caviling Dr. Qi, we have no objection whatsoever to any postmodernist who believes in absolute Truth that may be known by the naturally supernatural intellect. I fully acknowledge my ignorance in this arena, and will be grateful if Dr. Qi can point us in the direction of any such postmodernists.

Speaking of the pretentiously vacuous Dr. Qi, he keeps suggesting that there is something valuable about postmodern philosophy that has eluded Coons, something that would presumably contribute to our wisdom, our happiness and our salvation. But the evasive rascal won't say what it is. Rather, he simply critiques our views, which in itself sounds suspiciously postmodern, since postmodernism is an intensely skeptical and even paranoid enterprise -- after all, it does advocate the "hermeneutics of suspicion" -- that knows only how to question but not build anything meaningful or enduring. If it has built something meaningful -- a timeless religion, a precious institution, an unsurpassable book of wisdom -- I would certainly like to know what it is, for I am no an ideologue -- I take truth where I can find it, and I only advocate "what works" -- i.e., what is spiritually efficacious.

You will notice that the left generally tears down or appropriates but does not build, for the very reason that it is infused with the cynical spirit of postmodernism. For example, instead of attacking a wonderful institution such as the Boy Scouts, why doesn't the left simply invent ther own version of the Boy Scouts, built around leftist principles instead of traditional manly virtues? It is my view -- and I assume the general view of Coons -- that the Boy Scouts is not intended to be a place to scout for boys. But if a leftist wants to have an institution that teaches impressionable young men that homosexuality is a perfectly acceptable lifestyle, then why not form such a group? Why the intolerance toward those of us who believe that adolescent boys -- because of cosmic laws inscribed in nature -- require noble and virtuous heterosexual male role models in order to become proper men? The very notion that "obeying the cosmic law" has something to do with so-called "homophobia" is strict nonsense.

Perhaps Dr. Qi will correct us with some actual examples instead of merely critiquing our view, but it is my opinion that postmodernism, as a general movement, has contributed nothing to human wisdom, happiness, or virtue -- which, along with salvation, are all that really counts in a philosophy. I cannot think of any postmodernist idea that I rely upon to govern my life -- or, if there is such an idea, I am quite certain that it is better expressed in one of the great revelations. But the entire idea of "revelation" is completely unacceptable to postmodernism. Rather, there are no privileged texts, much less timelessly true texts authored or inspired by an ontologically real transcendent source.

I don't care what religion you are, but assuming it is rooted in an orthodox vertical revelation and "extended" in a sound horizontal tradition, it is going to be profoundly true and truly profound in a way that no postmodern philosophy can ever be. Christianity, Judaism, Vedanta, Taoism, even Buddhism -- each of these embodies a core of timeless wisdom that far surpasses anything postmodernism has ever produced. Michel Foucault will not be read in 1,000 years. In fact, I know of no serious person who reads him today, except as a perverse curiosity. Just look at how the man lived -- which we will not get into here, since this is a family blog.

But real wisdom -- wisdom emanating from the religio perennis -- is both horizontally effective and vertically transformative. It also embodies standards and ideals which do not come down to our level, but which we must elevate ourselves to understand and to live. Would anyone suggest that you must elevate yourself in order to live out the "Foucault ideal?" Yes, I suppose some Qi theorist would. Conversely, are there really a great number of pomofessors at elite universities who teach the spiritual truism that virtue is the mark, the seal, and the guarantor of wisdom? Examples, please.

Dilys left us a quote yesterday by David Thompson: "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."

Yes, postmodernism is simply a game. Now, I have no objection to games, but the problem with postmodernism is that it has no rules except that there are no rules. For we may only know the Good, the True, and the Beautiful in the nonlocal light of their relationship to the Absolute. In other words, there is no meaningful game for humans -- in fact, no game at all -- in the absence of the Absolute. Therefore, the existence of the Absolute -- or O -- is "rule one" in any functioning philosophy. Remove the Absolute, and you have pulled the rug out from under your own wigged-out philosophy -- and that is a hair-raising reality for these bald-faced liars.

This applies not only to postmodernists, but to any philosophy, for, as the Catholic philosopher of science and baseball, Stanley Jaki, points out, you cannot get to second base before you have touched first base. Intellectually larcenous postmodernists are under the illusion that it is possible to "steal second base." They entirely take for granted the fact that it is only because they ungratefully pee in the stream of the Judeo-Christian West that first base has been safely secured by our precious intellectual tradition. They sit out on a limb that they imagine is independent of that religious tradition, but postmodernism is a deeply reactionary and parasitic philosophy that appears as an inevitable but perverse "possibilty" in an intellectually Christianized world.

Now, there is nothing wrong with being a "relativist." It all depends upon that to which one is a relative. The problem with postmodernism is that it is "relative to nothing," which isn't actually relativism, but a bizarre form of absolute nihilism. The relative plane only exists because it is relative to the Absolute. This is an example of another religious truth that "cannot not be." And it is why the First Commandment is the first commandment: I am your God, and you shall have no other gods before me. For if you have any god other than the one God, or any absolute other than the Absolute, your philosophy is ultimately worthless.

Because the relative plane inheres in the light of the Absolute, there exist qualities. Again, given the necessary structure of cosmic existence, qualities, or degrees of being and perfection, cannot not exist. But the qualities are not merely arbitrary, as argued by postmodernists. Rather, qualities only exist because they represent degrees of being on an absolute scale. Is this not obvious? No, it is not obvious. I was never taught this in the 12-odd years I meanderthralled my way through the higher educational establishment. No one told me that absolute truth of necessity exists absolutely, and that the plane of maya represents a vertical scale of intelligible being, in which it is our task -- the task of our life -- to rise up, rung by rung -- but always accompanied by the perfections of virtue. Or if they did, I was absent that day.

Damn, I'm really getting sidetracked, for I had intended to explain why Christianity provides such a vastly superior linguistic theory than any postmodern sophistry. I hope to get to that tomorrow.

Without belief in God, without belief that the truth is real, is in him, all our attempts to "tell the truth" become no more than stories told for human purposes -- to persuade, to comfort, to stake claims, to build power -- but none of them means anything, or, more accurately, means anything else. Behind the images and metaphors of paintings and poems, behind the patterns of music and verse, behind the imagined characters of novels and plays, there is no mysterious depth of meaning, there is nothing. And yet, a child of four knows what a lie is and knows what a story is and knows that they are not the same. --Lucy Beckett

100 Comments:

Anonymous sawdust said...

According to Wickepedia, postmodernism is abbreviated as PoMo. Does this make Qi a PoMoFo? That's a good name for a rock band, and in fact is a local (sometime) band.

Today's post reminds me of a Mark Twain quote; "You cannot trust your eyes if your imagination is out of focus".

4/11/2007 07:57:00 AM  
Blogger juliec said...

"The problem with postmodernism is that it is "relative to nothing,"..."

In other words, philosophizing with pomo is like dividing by zero. You can write it out, make it look big and complex, but you can't solve anything with it and it guarantees a wrong answer.

RE the latest stem cell news, I saw that article yesterday, and just last week I saw one about adult stem cells being used to create a living heart valve. That one was more subtle; they didn't actually say what kind of stem cells they used until deep in the article, but there again the good news about the wonders of modern medicine became a platform for arguing about embryonic stem cells.

4/11/2007 08:04:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Apologies in advance for the slightly hostile tone - it's responsive to your tone, nothing personal. You asked for some information of Dr Qi, I'll be glad to answer:

"I fully acknowledge my ignorance in this arena, and will be grateful if Dr. Qi can point us in the direction of any such postmodernists."

Zizek, Derrida.

"Speaking of the pretentiously vacuous Dr. Qi, he keeps suggesting that there is something valuable about postmodern philosophy that has eluded Coons, something that would presumably contribute to our wisdom, our happiness and our salvation. But the evasive rascal won't say what it is."

It's the philosophy of the One, the Singular, the correct version of what you end up calling 'the vertical'.

"But if a leftist wants to have an institution that teaches impressionable young men that homosexuality is a perfectly acceptable lifestyle, then why not form such a group?"

FWIW, Gay Straight Alliance.

"Why the intolerance toward those of us who believe that adolescent boys -- because of cosmic laws inscribed in nature -- require noble and virtuous heterosexual male role models in order to become proper men?"

The same reason you aren't 'tolerant' toward terrorists - it's prima facia unacceptable to condone that in civilized society (says the 'leftist')

"I cannot think of any postmodernist idea that I rely upon to govern my life -- or, if there is such an idea, I am quite certain that it is better expressed in one of the great revelations."

Come on now, that claim is absurd. Your blog is clearly a conservative conclusion argued using postmodern rhetoric. Your blog is exemplary if only for this reason.

"But the entire idea of "revelation" is completely unacceptable to postmodernism."

That is because the distinction between revelation and reason is standard dualism, making it a good candidate for Buddhist philosophy, but not Christian theology, which is strictly monist. Radically monist, to emphasize the point.

Postmodernism is nothing but the contemporary translation for Plato, Christ, Leibniz, Kant, among many others.

4/11/2007 08:06:00 AM  
Anonymous dilys said...

Thinking about your question, what is positive in postmodernism, reminds me that it was said that Derrida converted or returned to Christianity. A lecture by him is not without sense, either.

Some of the postmodern ways of thinking and delving into texts are, as auxiliary tools, indispensable. However, motive is everything. If the enterprise is driven with the narcissistic demand to demonstrate that nothing is true or beautiful, and that no work of art has any more integrity than the fleeting moi, then something else has become the tool. I believe Gagdad said elsewhere that sincerity is the key, sincerity in light of communicative integrity and acknowledgement of objective truth.

Refusal to stake a claim and develop a territory in positive terms violates basic human agency. To risk a pragmatic and testable outcome is missing in "postmodernism" as she shows up in the ivory-colored hard-steel academic office blocks. It reduces to a barely-camouflaged program to muzzle others, to ridicule and demonize their perceptual "gaze," and to have one's own indeterminate feelings "heard."

The leftist motivation is, not to inherit and improve, but to take over  structures someone else created [Gramsci's long march through the institutions].

I seem to remember there are crabs and snails that hijack others' shells. However, in nature they mostly postpone seizure until the shell is vacant. Squatters, not thieves.

The cuckoo also springs to mind.

4/11/2007 08:14:00 AM  
Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

As I said, I have no quarrel with any postmodernist who agrees with me.

4/11/2007 08:18:00 AM  
Blogger MizzE said...

In commemorating my discovery of One Cosmos and GB, da man with a swift sword, I offer:

For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart.
-- Hebrews 4:12

" Someone gave me a bit of brick and a little slab of marble from Rome. It was wonderful to touch one of them and think, Perhaps the Apostle Paul or one of the martyrs touched this as they passed. But how much more wonderful is it to think that we have, for our own use, the very same sword our Lord used when the Devil attacked Him. [Brooke Foss] Westcott says "the Word of God" in Ephesians 6:17 means "a definite utterance of God." We know these "definite utterances"--we have the same Book that He had, and we can do as He did. So let us learn the "definite utterances" that they may be ready in our minds; ready for use at the moment of need--our sword which never grows dull and rusty, but is always keen and bright. So once more I say, let us not expect defeat but victory. Let us take fast hold and keep fast hold of our sword, and we shall win in any assault of the enemy".
... Amy Carmichael (1867-1951), Edges of His Ways [1955]

4/11/2007 08:25:00 AM  
Blogger Ricky Raccoon said...

Bob said:
“If it has built something meaningful -- a timeless religion, a precious institution, an unsurpassable book of wisdom -- I would certainly like to know what it is…”

In fact I’ll take it one step more. If Dr Qi wants to continue that quest, go for it. If he finds it, let us know. But I ain’t picking up that stone. I’ve found it requires too much energy. I got what I need – and I sense it’s a map toward my maker.

4/11/2007 08:36:00 AM  
Blogger Ricky Raccoon said...

Bob said:
“You will notice that the left only tears down but does not build.”

Yes. And remind me again please, how is this progressive?

4/11/2007 09:05:00 AM  
Blogger Ricky Raccoon said...

That was lovely, Mizze. Particularly the Amy Carmichael quote.
I have a strong need myself to touch these things too (museums) with my hands and for the very same reason. It is difficult to resist – and I do 99% of the time (wink). Everyone should try their hand at carving stone. I’m serous. What gave me my greatest pleasure while doing is was knowing all the great masterpieces started like this, with these materials and simple tools and two hands just like these.

4/11/2007 09:12:00 AM  
Blogger Ricky Raccoon said...

Since it’s feeding time here on the east coast, I’ll just keep at it, if I may Bob.

Dr Qi suffers from the much too common ‘too zoomed in syndrome”.
Pull back will ya, Qi?

My Mom used to say this to my brother all the time (no, not to me ever, I swear):

“You’re so smart, you’re stupid.”

It worked every time, Mom. Just so you know.

4/11/2007 09:27:00 AM  
Blogger Ricky Raccoon said...

What really amazes me, what is so wonderful – thank you God - is how you don’t ‘need to be’ a pointy-headed intellectual with the 59 degrees on your ‘I love me’ wall that tell you so. I have access to what I now know because it IS so accessible. The joy to be able to understand enough of it now, to convince me beyond doubt and at the same time thourholy enjoy it, and in so – if that wasn’t enough - am also saved by it.

How great is that.

As Bob quoted:
“And yet, a child of four knows what a lie is and knows what a story is and knows that they are not the same.”

4/11/2007 09:56:00 AM  
Blogger Ricky Raccoon said...

One more thing…

Dr Bob said:
“…since this is a family blog.”

Thank you again Bob – because I hope my son will be reading here someday.

4/11/2007 09:57:00 AM  
Anonymous ximeze said...

Mizze said: "my discovery of One Cosmos and GB, da man with a swift sword"

Yes! Exactly! I wandered in via some now forgotten link & thought immediately: OMG! THIS is more like! Here, at last, is somebody with
'a pair' who lays it on the line & who stands fast.

I could feel the LifeForce pumping red thru the prose, so unlike most of what's out there that passes for 'spiritual', ie: repellant, lily-livered stuff that reeks of fear, filled with platitudes about being 'above' backed up by Scriptural non-sequiters.

Here ye, Hear ye, come one & all, join us now! Please just park your brain & lifeforce at the Church door. You'll have the umph of O behind ya & the first thing we'll teach ya is to be whimpy, for the Glory of the Lord.

Huh?

Thanks, Mizze, for the quotes. Archangels with flaming swords are much more to my taste than large-eyed, weeping Saints with clasped hands.

That reminds me: can any of you artsy types refer me to peachy renditions of Archangels with flaming swords? Have a yen to stitch one up, but have yet to find one that suits.

4/11/2007 10:05:00 AM  
Anonymous irked said...

Yes Bob, we know God is real. You said it again in so many words.

I'm wondering about your constant comparison of godly philosophies with ungodly ones; what's going on here?

Who are you trying to convince? We don't need convincing. You don't need convincing (I hope).

The people who need to read a tract like this one are elsewhere. Raccoons don't need reinforcement in this manner.

So what gives?

4/11/2007 10:09:00 AM  
Anonymous line judge said...

Re: Qi –

from Dupree in yesterday's post:
tell us what you think Foucault's general philosophy contributred to human understanding ...I would love to hear it.

from Van in yesterday's post:
"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."

from Ricky Raccoon, in todays post:
Dr Qi suffers from the much too common ‘too zoomed in syndrome”.

The posts each day on this blog are nothing if not "an examination of the details" through Bob's eye, almost with the power of an electron microscope. Why is this technique suddenly off limits to a critical voice? Qi is respectful and articulate. No need to toss garbage unless a coon is territorial with...what, the truth? Very uncoonlike. His own spoils, perhaps? More likely.

When it's more important to be a coon than it is to contemplate truth, maybe a little interpersonal redress is in order.

4/11/2007 10:14:00 AM  
Blogger Joan of Argghh! said...

Bob said:
As I said, I have no quarrel with any postmodernist who agrees with me.

And with that, back to work! LOL!!

****

Lyin' Judge: Coon or No. There is no try. It's muy importante to be a Coon, and speak Coonglish, to have any fun at all here.

4/11/2007 10:24:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

anonymouse said "Postmodernism is nothing but the contemporary translation for Plato, Christ, Leibniz, Kant, among many others."

Correction, PoMoFo is nothing but the contemporary corruption of Plato & Christ. I'd be interested in seeing even a single PoMoFo thought which has even the slightest claim to worth, that is not either a shallow seizing of, reworking and/or corruption of Plato & the long line of Christian thought(um... might have to fudge in a Sophocles, Euripides & Aristotle or two).

They haven't come up with anything new, only convoluted & obscured what came before them.

Thanks again Gagdad & Diyls, saved me from another rant & did it in far fewer words!

wv:mdual - no, monist = One

4/11/2007 10:24:00 AM  
Anonymous GLASR said...

Hyper-skepticism is the root of all and nothing. ;~)

4/11/2007 10:28:00 AM  
Blogger juliec said...

ximeze - define "peachy rendition of archangel," and perhaps we'll be able to help a bit more :)

4/11/2007 10:34:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

line judge said "The posts each day on this blog are nothing if not "an examination of the details" through Bob's eye, almost with the power of an electron microscope."

It's not looking at details that are bad, it's using them in place of, or as a way of discarding principles.

Gagdad uses details to illustrate principles, pomofo's use details as a way to deny principles.

4/11/2007 10:39:00 AM  
Anonymous geckofeeder said...

Ximeze
"That reminds me: can any of you artsy types refer me to peachy renditions of Archangels" As a matter of factual, there is an artist living in Santa Barbara who draws and paints the most exquisite angels and archangels.If you give me your email I will get you his number.
Gecko

4/11/2007 10:40:00 AM  
Anonymous petey said...

To the extent that postmodernism bears any distant relationship to Plato or Christ, it is an indigestible ad nauseam rewordgitation of them by a bunch of bellyaching gastrophysophists who serve up little warmed over hater tots for the spuds and common taters among us.

4/11/2007 10:43:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Common indeed.

4/11/2007 10:43:00 AM  
Blogger juliec said...

Ximeze,
If you're interested in more classic paintings, you can go here on the Art Renewal Center page.

4/11/2007 10:44:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

Juliec - ya beat me to it!

4/11/2007 10:46:00 AM  
Blogger MizzE said...

XIMEZE said: ". . .renditions of Archangels with flaming swords? "

Hold that thought . . . I'm busy with 4 livin' hatchlings
at the moment. Four viable wrenettes? and one more to go. Where are the parents?

4/11/2007 10:57:00 AM  
Anonymous cousin dupree said...

Irked:

I have no idea who left the den door open, but none of what goes on in here is intended for your kind, so we are not surprsed at your bersirksomeness.

4/11/2007 11:01:00 AM  
Anonymous geckofeeder said...

Petey, bless his wings, speaking of the
"bellyaching gastrophysophists"must have
William Shakespeare roaring wherever he is.
Gecko

4/11/2007 11:03:00 AM  
Anonymous line judge said...

Joan:
"Lyin' Judge: Coon or No. There is no try. It's muy importante to be a Coon, and speak Coonglish, to have any fun at all here."

Thanks. As I was saying.

GB reminds us of a bit of Coon Gospel:
I take truth where I can find it, and I only advocate "what works" -- i.e., what is spiritually efficacious.

A coon knows what that means, right?

Van, you said
It's not looking at details that are bad, it's using them in place of, or as a way of discarding principles.

Qi said
It's the philosophy of the One, the Singular, the correct version of what you end up calling 'the vertical'.

"PoMoFo", an invention, may or may not be discarding principles, but Dr Qi, here, seems to be examining principles from a different viewpoint. This should not be cause for ridicule or disdain. Qi is here, looking, questioning, respectfully.

I find that gratifying.

4/11/2007 11:33:00 AM  
Anonymous joseph said...

As I have been attempting of late to try and digest Whitehead, I note that his disciples (not literally, mind you) view him, and themselves, as "constructive postmodernists", pointing out that Whitehead used many of the same tactics as the deconstructive postmodernists, but arrived at different destinations.

4/11/2007 11:34:00 AM  
Anonymous napoleondynamite said...

Tots? Did someone say tots?

4/11/2007 11:38:00 AM  
Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

Joseph:

Exactly. What is new in postmodernism is not useful and what is useful has always been known to the intelligent.

4/11/2007 11:39:00 AM  
Anonymous cousin dupree said...

Napoleon, lay off my tots. You're just jealous that I've online been smacking trolls all day.

4/11/2007 11:41:00 AM  
Blogger Ricky Raccoon said...

Dear line judge,
Thank you for proving my point. You also are too zoomed-in.

But to your credit, while you were zoomed-in too much, you noticed I did not include, by my mistake, the word ‘only’.
Thank you again. Please allow me to rephrase:
He suffers from “only too zoomed in syndrome”.

4/11/2007 12:02:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Exactly. What is new in postmodernism is not useful and what is useful has always been known to the intelligent."

You could say the same thing about this blog - in both cases you would be wrong. Postmodernism is a way for contemporary readers to access what has always been true, but it is written and argued in a way that is mindful to modern technology. It's use is that it is engaging for people who live in today's world.

If you don't think people need that kind of contemporary crutch to access ancient truth, then you might as well stop publishing your blog and tell people to brush up on their ancient Greek.

4/11/2007 12:09:00 PM  
Blogger Ricky Raccoon said...

Cousin,
Pedro offers you his protection.

4/11/2007 12:23:00 PM  
Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

Anonymous:

You are strikingly confused about postmodernism and its baleful effects on the mind and spirit. I can only refer you to Hick's outstanding book on postmodernism and wish you the best.

4/11/2007 12:27:00 PM  
Anonymous hoarhey said...

Self Appointed Line Judge said,

"Qi is here, looking, questioning, respectfully.'

You are you kidding, right?


His condescending jabs are the only points that he has been able to effectively articulate. His actual philosophy is some sort of implied fogbank known only to him.

Help me out here.
Do you actually think that people are seeing you as some kind of fair arbiter? Or are you just here to provide the stereotypical, comic relief common among "progressives" which tells people that what they see with their own eyes, isn't?

4/11/2007 12:35:00 PM  
Blogger Lisa said...

Yes,nap-py dyna-ho has a point, we really should be talking about Ligers!!! ;)

4/11/2007 12:36:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

Anonymous said... "Postmodernism is a way for contemporary readers to access what has always been true, but it is written and argued in a way that is mindful to modern technology. It's use is that it is engaging for people who live in today's world."

Pegged the B.S. meter on that one. Are you seriously trying to say that due to the accessibility of post-modernist approach (but first lets take a moment to review some of that quality Derrida prose you speak of:"...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..." - such a lyric quality, just draws you in with it's accessibility, doesn't it?), more people have been feeling closser and more tuned into the thoughts of our fine post-modernist intellectuals?

Puh-lease!

And this "... people who live in today's world." I think shows you temporal provincialism - as if today's world is somehow fundamentally alien & superior to people in other civilized ages (other than perhaps in the clarity of thought and morals - take a bow proregressives, lefties and post-modernists everywhere)

4/11/2007 12:36:00 PM  
Anonymous hoarhey said...

Anon said,

"Postmodernism is a way for contemporary readers to access what has always been true, but it is written and argued in a way that is mindful to modern technology. It's use is that it is engaging for people who live in today's world."

How about just one example of your theory? Just one. Shed a little light here. Define postmodernism and give us one example of how it has helped you understand what has always been true. (and please don't say "Bob's blog")

4/11/2007 12:45:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Gagdad - I have to question either Hicks' literacy or his integrity. On the second or third page (of the pages amazon allows you to view), he offers a quote by Lyotard and says "postmodernists like Lyotard look at the third world as a victim of the west, for example here Lyotard calls Saddam Hussein a victim of the west" while the Lyotard quote makes a completely different argument - that Saddam has been supported by western governments. Check it out yourself. More broadly, I would prefer to read Kant myself rather than have someone else tell me what to think about it. Hicks either doesn't get it or thinks he can publish some books by deliberately misreading.

Van:

You realize that Derrida is cracking jokes, right? I can't tell you how often criticisms of Derrida misses that he's being funny and playful. Pretty much all of them.

I'm not saying today's world is alien or superior. But is the context of our lives - it's why you read this blog (and have your own?) rather than just rest easy in your certainty that you know the truth. People can and should stay engaged - thats all postmodernism is: continued, engaged literacy.

Hoarhey:

Okay, easy question, easy answer: postmodernism is the discourse of singular cosmos (ie monotheism), which of course is an ancient problem.

4/11/2007 01:00:00 PM  
Anonymous cousin dupree said...

Gaze.

/too insensate to respond to application of pliers.

4/11/2007 01:19:00 PM  
Anonymous hoarhey said...

Anon said,

"postmodernism is the discourse of singular cosmos".

If that's your definition of postmodernism, I can see your point.

My opinion is that the "cosmos" of most postmodernists ignores/replaces the source of Truth, Beauty and Wisdom with their own sophistic nihilism, resulting in an extremely small and cramped vision limited to what they can get their brains around.

4/11/2007 01:21:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

That may be true in some cases, but there is the bathwater, and then there is the baby.

4/11/2007 01:29:00 PM  
Anonymous hoarhey said...

Anon also said,
"thats all postmodernism is: continued, engaged literacy."


The following is more along the lines of what I see postmodernists engaging in.

"stereotypical, comic relief common among "progressives" which tells people that what they see with their own eyes, isn't? "


You see continued, engaged literacy about a single cosmos as postmodernism.
I see postmodernism as nihilistic sophistry which replaces God with the sophist.
Hmmm.

4/11/2007 01:46:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'd wager I've read more of what would be considered postmodern. Yea, there is a bunch of incomprehensible BS. But BS is not unique to postmodern academic writing. There are idiots of every persuasion, including Christian idiots. Just as the idiots don't discredit Christianity (or shouldn't, though in many cases they do) the idiots don't discredit deconstruction or postmodernism (or shouldn't, even though in many cases they do).

4/11/2007 01:54:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

annonymouse said "I'm not saying today's world is alien or superior. But is the context of our lives - it's why you read this blog (and have your own?) rather than just rest easy in your certainty that you know the truth. People can and should stay engaged - thats all postmodernism is: continued, engaged literacy."

Are you trying to say that prior to PoMoFo's, people didn't discuss, argue, seek out a fuller understanding of their lives? What were Matthew Arnold and Huxley doing? Cardinal John Henry Newman (1801-1890)? What were the people clamoring for them, and many others besides, in cities and nations around the world (western anyway) involved in - dogma ditties?

The only thing that has changed between then and now, is our ability to access information - I assume you are trying to algorize the issue into our owing that to PoMoFo's?

"You realize that Derrida is cracking jokes, right? I can't tell you how often criticisms of Derrida misses that he's being funny and playful. Pretty much all of them."

Yeah. Can't wait for the ComedyChannel special. The timing. The punchlines "...fundamentally, always proceeds to questions of droit!" Masterful. Yucks galore.

Plato has humor. When I read the dialogs I generally imagine Bob Hoskins as Socrates conversing with the members of Monty Python's Flying Circus. Especially "Euthypro" & "Parmenides", "The Symposium" & "the Republic" Seriously. That level of irony, conceptual heirarchy & clarity of characterization is prime for it.

Derrida? Foucault? Flat heads, flat lines & obfuscating self important bores. Gimme a break.

"...thats all postmodernism is: continued, engaged literacy."

PoMoFo has done more in the last few decades to turn people away from literature and retard literacy than nearly anything else.

4/11/2007 01:59:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

Please pardon my post-modern typing:
"I assume you are trying to algorize the issue into our owing that to PoMoFo's?"
=
"I assume you aren't trying to algorize the issue into our owing the Internet to PoMoFo's?"

(not really worth repeating, but...)

wv:oowrf - yep

4/11/2007 02:16:00 PM  
Blogger I R A Darth Aggie said...

“You will notice that the left only tears down but does not build."

Yes. And remind me again please, how is this progressive?


Because it leads to equality. We'll all be equally miserable in our squalor. But by Marx, we'll be equal.

Except, of course, for our betters, who will be in charge of things and have better accomodations. It's all about obtaining power. That power won't be used to confront their real foes, those who would seize their power and cut their heads off, but those of us who'd object to our equal squalor, in light of the administration's relatively fine living.

4/11/2007 02:25:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

annonymous said "Yea, there is a bunch of incomprehensible BS. But BS is not unique to postmodern academic writing. There are idiots of every persuasion"

Uh-huh. The difference is that a couple college kids on a lark could easily concoct a computer generated PoMo puker that on first & second glance is just as dense as the real thing, not to mention NYU Physics Professor Alan Sokal’s killer hoax article which was actually accepted by a cultural criticism publication, "Transgressing the Boundaries: Toward a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity".

I have a very difficult time imagining any such contraption reproducing even a first glance similarity to anything written by Gagdad, Richard Mitchell, Matthew Arnold, Fredric Bastiat... and so on. In fact millions, if not billions of dollars are being spent trying to just create an AI capable of passing the Turing test.

Intelligence and the pursuit of Truth is difficult to duplicate. B.S. is available cheaply by the pasture full.

4/11/2007 02:33:00 PM  
Blogger River Cocytus said...

AFAIK, post modernism stems from the concept that the generator of meaning and intellect is the self, which is viewed as the 'interior' or 'vertical' whereas the exterior is viewed as the 'horizontal'.

Its a perversion, generally, of 'I think therefore I am.'

I recall a Nietzche book cover which shows a person in the center with a 'cosmos' - swirling mass of color and matter, coming from their head.

Which is to say, the post-modern discovered that people interpret and that the 'world' as opposed to the 'earth' is behind the eyes; but Christian men had always known this. Invent some new terms, and you have a philosophy (again) which allows you to by default already know what you need to know and not have to learn anything.

The 'world' is not vertical; just being of the mind does not make anything not materialistic.

This is it: man is more than body and mind.

The problem with attacking post mordor-in-ism is that it is by default scattered and hardened, like a bunch of cockroaches. The best method is to just keep stomping hard until you get all of them.

Any post modernist will always say 'you don't know post modernism' simply because it by its nature always means something different to someone else; and in particular becomes completely molded by that person's intentions.

And, being of Christian understanding, no man is without sin. Thus, post-modernism, being of the world, condemns itself a priori.

Yes, we already know that the receiver determines the meaning of the message. However, this does not limit the message, the receiver or the meaning from linking to or resting in spiritual or transcendent truths. In fact, without the universals all messages are de facto meaningless, since meaning comprises symbols, which are a connection of two concepts.

While some meaning is constructed, that's like saying buildings are constructed. Duh! but the SUBSTANCE at the very least is universal; if not what works. It is far simpler to transmit higher order understandings and use them, as when we all understand the symbols, the meanings are clear.

But higher order stuff is complex and multi-layered... how to transmit it?

Oh, right. They've been doing it for centuries - often enough with the aid of the Paraclete... its called religion.

To wit, for the PoMo the only real arbiter is the self, which is gradually elevated to the position of God.

Something that is entirely impossible.

And knowing what I do about memory and understanding, one falsity falsifies everything it contacts. Like the prions of mad cow disease.

4/11/2007 02:38:00 PM  
Blogger River Cocytus said...

Rather, to clarify, meaning is transmitted via symbols. The meanings are not constructed but rather the symbols are.

Thus the relation between buildings and messages, IMO. Meaning is similar in this sense to substance or material, so that a cathedral and a skyscraper look very different, but when a man touches one, and then the other, he might say, "They're made of concrete."

If we pretend like meaning is entirely arbitrary (rather than just partly so) it would be the same as saying that because buildings look different they must be made of different substances, and in fact, these substances can not mix nor do they share properties. Then we wonder in a new, false amazement how anyone could build a building. Magical Geniuses! Celebrities! I need to pay someone to learn me stuff, someone who is one of those philosopher kings!

4/11/2007 02:52:00 PM  
Anonymous dilys said...

In the continuing discussion at David Thompson's, one commenter suggests that post-modernism is the turn taken by modernism when it bangs into the walls of the materialist corner it has painted itself into.

My take: rather than saying, "Oh, yes, we needed to take an empirical tour of reality. Now, let us return to retrieve and incorporate (an Obverse Renaissance) the Ageless Wisdom we may have mislaid...", moderns (as Freud was) have made themselves phobic about religion yet desperate for the mythic and the subjective. Thus po-mo self-referential discourse and The People's Romance. (pdf here, linked by Will Wilkinson here.)

4/11/2007 02:52:00 PM  
Blogger River Cocytus said...

What I'm saying, more or less, is post modernism is a vehicle made to create 'users' of post modernists.

Which is precisely what post modernists love to claim that everyone else is doing... especially certain religious groups.

No test of truth involved of course, so the ones who are really doing it might just slip by...

4/11/2007 02:54:00 PM  
Blogger River Cocytus said...

Also, the continual denial and redefinition:

A complete reversal of I AM THAT I AM
- it is,

I AM NOT THAT I AM!

Antichrist spirit indeed, messrs.

4/11/2007 03:00:00 PM  
Anonymous pj said...

On your vasodilation: Wikipedia says:

"Excessive vasodilation, or insufficient constriction of the resistance blood vessels (mostly arterioles), causes hypotension. This can be due to decreased sympathetic nervous system output or to increased parasympathetic activity occurring as a consequence of injury to the brain or spinal cord or of dysautonomia, an intrinsic abnormality in autonomic system functioning. Excessive vasodilation can also result from sepsis, acidosis, or medications, such as nitrate preparations, calcium channel blockers, or ACE inhibitors. Many anesthetic agents and techniques, including spinal anesthesia and most inhalational agents, produce significant vasodilation."

Your record of autoimmune symptoms (your diabetes was Type I, yes?) suggests that we should be suspicious of autoimmune etiologies. Unfortunately, these are not easily remedied.

I would suggest:

1) Yoga/stretching as well as strengthening exercises to open joints and relieve any pressure on nerves.

2) Avoiding acidosis by sufficient intake of potassium-rich vegetables and salt.

3) Trying the pantothenic acid and coenzyme Q10 as I suggested yesterday, but not the arginine or nitric oxide promoters. In fact, you could try taking lysine supplements, which block the transformation of arginine to NO (see below).

4) Avoid stress and relax through deep breathing and prayer.

A likely pathway to your condition is excessive expression of the nitric oxide synthases, enzymes which catalyze the production of nitric oxide. I read that:

"The neuronal and epithelial NOS isoforms are regulated by calcium concentration via calmodulin interaction....

The activity of eNOS and nNOS is controlled by tetrahydrobiopterin and Ca/CaM availability because these two cofactors are needed for the proper dimer formation of an active synthetase. The dependence on calmodulin has been used as a model to explain the role of glutamate in neurotoxicity in the central nervous system. Neurotoxicity is a mechanism of glutamate induced neuronal cell death. The immediate effect of glutamate on neurons is its role in activating glutamate receptor, namely to pharmacological subtypes known as NMDA Receptors (NMDA is a methylated derivative of aspartate). Glutamate receptors are selective for calcium ions. Thus, prolonged activation of glutamate receptors stimulates eNOS via Ca/CaM complex binding to the synthetase. The formation of NO is implicated in cell death as described above: DNA damage, suppressed mitochondrial respiration, leading to energy depletion. Neurons are particularly sensitive to impaired mitochondrial ATP synthesis capacity, because neurons depend almost exclusively on the oxidative degradation of glucose and ketone bodies. The formed ATP is used by ion selective pumps to maintain the proper ion gradients for action potential generation and neurotransmitter release of presynaptic membranes.

NO can only be synthesized, however, if the amino acid arginine is available. Neuronal NOS critically depends on this substrate, which is mainly synthesized in adjacent glial cells and is transported into neurons. Arginine uptake into neurons is controlled by non-NMDA glutamate receptors. This became evident when these receptors were blocked by arginine-uptake inhibitors such as L-lysine which functions as antagonist of these glutamate receptors. The physiological role of nNOS in mechanisms such as long term potentiation has been shown to involve retrograde transport (diffusion) of NO synthesized in post synaptic neurons across the synaptic cleft into synapses, where they stimulated guanyl cyclase."

This suggests also checking

5) That you have adequate Vitamin D and K, which both control circulating calcium levels. Get at least 20 minutes in the sun or 4000 IU/day of cholecalciferol (and read up at www.vitamindcouncil.org).

6) Your glutathione metabolism may be important. Glutathione is the principal immune system antioxidant and defends the immune system against nitric oxide, which simultaneously enables immune cells to release more nitric oxide. If you are taking supplements like selenium or folate/B12/B6 which affect glutathione levels, or niacin or riboflavin which help regenerate NO, you might reconsider.

7) Melatonin has also been reported to inhibit nitric oxide synthetase. So, sleep in total darkness at night, or maybe as an experiment try a melatonin tablet before bed.

These are just ideas for possible experiments, but I doubt your doctors can do much better.

4/11/2007 03:04:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Are you trying to say that prior to PoMoFo's, people didn't discuss, argue, seek out a fuller understanding of their lives?"

No. What a stupid question.

4/11/2007 03:05:00 PM  
Anonymous dilys said...

A more fine-tuned, quite different, intelligent discussion of all this has been going on at Protein Wisdom since at least 2002. For serious backgrounders, see this, and search "postmodernism" on the site. Bottom line, depends on integrity, consistency, and purpose.

Penultimate line, we all probably rely on many of the strategies of Po-mo to communicate and interpret our lives, except perhaps in liturgical or other ritual speech, or, at the opposite extreme, talking in our sleep or to a toddler. :-)

4/11/2007 03:08:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Penultimate line, we all probably rely on many of the strategies of Po-mo to communicate and interpret our lives, except perhaps in liturgical or other ritual speech, or, at the opposite extreme, talking in our sleep or to a toddler."

The reason I come to this blog is I think it is interesting to reading conservatives appropriating postmodern rhetoric.

4/11/2007 03:11:00 PM  
Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

PJ--

You took the words out of my mouth.

4/11/2007 03:17:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

Anonymous said...
"No. What a stupid question."

It was a rhetorical question ya maroon.

4/11/2007 03:26:00 PM  
Anonymous ximeze said...

Julie: re 'peachy' renditions - what an absured & useless word to have used, expecially when asking for help. Duhh.

I'm looking for a 'manly' angel, a warrior w/ flaming sword, 'more chest that breast' as DL put it some time ago. What I've seen tends toward the ethereal & makes me think: oh right! YOU'LL be lots of help in a real fight-
spare me.

Have seen a couple of 'St.Georges' that get closer, tho the poses are all wrong with the dragon dead below or medieval armor instead of a costume that 'drapes'.

I'm pretty sure what I see in my head is a classical-something I've actually seen, since I don't tend toward original visuals. More of a copyist, if you will, getting the bones of the design from one who has the talent for it & doing 'my thing' with their vision.

Does that help? Thanks for the link, perhaps I'll find what I'm looking for there.

4/11/2007 04:04:00 PM  
Anonymous ximeze said...

Gecko: does the StBarb artist have a web site?

4/11/2007 04:07:00 PM  
Blogger robinstarfish said...

The kits are getting restless with all this grownup talk. Time out for a game!

First to solve this coonzenpunctaiku can grab a fresh peanut butter coonkie from the jar:

(^<^)

Only one though - don't want to spoil your supper... ;-)

4/11/2007 04:14:00 PM  
Blogger Joan of Argghh! said...

Robin, it looks like someone with their nose out of joint!

4/11/2007 04:36:00 PM  
Blogger Ricky Raccoon said...

Robin,
Raccoon smells a rat?

4/11/2007 05:01:00 PM  
Blogger Ricky Raccoon said...

Van,
You get ‘em tiger. I love watching you work. You make it looks so easy.

And Van said:
“Derrida? Foucault? Flat heads, flat lines & obfuscating self important bores. Gimme a break.”

But I’m sorry you had to read all that horse manure. I’m serious.
Same for everyone else here.

4/11/2007 05:08:00 PM  
Blogger MizzE said...

(^<^) & (^<^)

Mr. & Mrs. Aedon successfully hatched a brood of FIVE
today.

(^<^)
(^<^)
(^<^)
(^<^)
(^<^)

Let's have a naming party now!

4/11/2007 05:43:00 PM  
Anonymous Old Yeller said...

Ricky Raccardo said
I’m sorry you had to read all that horse manure. I’m serious.
Same for everyone else here.


Thank you Ricky for your thoughtfulness. If it weren't for folks like you, folks like...well, everyone else... might end up reading horse manure and other stuff that we don't agree with. Patoooieee! Keep your Koon nose high, brother. Now that Imus (and Dr IQ) is gone, the world is again safe for a wannabe.

BTW, your mullet looks like a coon skin cap in the right light.

4/11/2007 05:59:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

Joan of Argghh!
Thanks for the reflection.

;-)

4/11/2007 06:08:00 PM  
Anonymous line judge said...

Hoarhey said:
Help me out here.
Do you actually think that people are seeing you as some kind of fair arbiter?


Nice try. You aren't "people". You are Hoarhey. That's your biggest stumbling block.

For someone who's not guilty, you sure seem anxious to plead a case.

Try phrasing a response without speaking down to your imagined audience and you'll see what the Dr. saw. Here's betting you can't do it.

4/11/2007 06:17:00 PM  
Anonymous Jacob C. said...

Postmodernism reminds me of Calvinball. The only rules are that you have a ball, all the players wear masks, and you're never allowed to play the game the exact same way twice.

4/11/2007 06:40:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bob,
This may or even may not be off topic, but where does Viktor Frankl fall in "the cosmos?" Curious because a leftist friend is pushing the book "Mans Search for Meaning" on me. Some of the pull quotes piqued my interest as it seems Frankl promotes individual responsibility. But does he really or is he a PoMo Marxist transnational progressive in disguise? Anyone else care to comment on Frankl? Thanks.

4/11/2007 06:48:00 PM  
Anonymous bubba kartoffel said...

Hey, Bill Whittle has a new post:

http://www.ejectejecteject.com/

for us run of the mill spuds.

4/11/2007 06:53:00 PM  
Blogger MizzE said...

Jacob,
LOL
And I recall Calvin telling Roslyn that no one is allowed to question the masks.

4/11/2007 06:53:00 PM  
Blogger juliec said...

Thanks, Bubba. I just checked his site yesterday, but there was nothing new up yet.

4/11/2007 07:17:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

4/11/2007 08:29:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

line judge said to Hoarhey "For someone who's not guilty, you sure seem anxious to plead a case."

Wha...?

"Try phrasing a response without speaking down to your imagined audience and you'll see what the Dr. saw. Here's betting you can't do it. "

line judge... go to your bathroom, take a long look at that big shiny glass thing. It's called a 'mirror'. Say 'Hello Mirror', mirror, say 'Hello line judge". Now that you've been introduced, you two have a good long talk, okay?

No need to hurry back. Really.

4/11/2007 08:32:00 PM  
Blogger robinstarfish said...

(^<^) =

open parenthesis caret less than caret close parenthesis

I know, a little obscure, just had to get it out of my system.

Good news mizze; can we have a Stimpy, maybe the runt of the bunch?

4/11/2007 08:42:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

BTW, an excellent book from the perspective of classical education and the post-modernist assault on it, "Who Killed Homer?" by Victor Davis Hanson and John Heath, gives an inside look at the conflict.

4/11/2007 09:11:00 PM  
Blogger Joan of Argghh! said...

Bubba said, for us run of the mill spuds

When did kits become tots and Coons become spuds?

I can't keep up.

Sigh.

4/11/2007 09:32:00 PM  
Anonymous hoarhey said...

line judge said...
"Hoarhey said:
Help me out here.
Do you actually think that people are seeing you as some kind of fair arbiter?

Nice try. You aren't "people". You are Hoarhey. That's your biggest stumbling block.

For someone who's not guilty, you sure seem anxious to plead a case.

Try phrasing a response without speaking down to your imagined audience and you'll see what the Dr. saw. Here's betting you can't do it."


???

Love the disarticulation judge. Thanks for the continued examples of PoMo "thought" process.

4/11/2007 11:55:00 PM  
Anonymous hoarhey said...

Are you using the computer generated PoMo puker?

4/12/2007 12:07:00 AM  
Anonymous USS Ben said...

B'ob-
I don't know if this will help with Reynauld, but who knows?
I have peripheral neuropathy and the only thing that helps relieve the symptons to any noticable degree has been Gabapentin (also known as Neurotin).

It takes awhile to get used to it though.
Assuming it can be used for Reynauld.

4/12/2007 01:24:00 AM  
Anonymous will said...

Taking a really, really wide-angled lens view (and probably an over-the-top generous view) of post-modernism, one might liken it to a certain stage in the Dark Night of the Soul process - the "disintegration" stage in which prior standards of meaning, significance, and cohesion are dashed to nothing. The spiritual pilgrim is left with a disconcerting sense of nothingness, a sense of headlong free-falling into the abyss.

In the individual, this is, of course, a prerequisite to the birth of an entirely new, spiritual perspective. Make no mistake, though - before one acquires the new spiritual foundation, the sense of cosmic absurdity can really be overwhelming. In terms of spiritual-historical progression, I think there might be some links between this state and the meaninglessness of current po-mo. Or maybe a more authentic link might be made between the disintegration state and things like 12-tone music, the so-called Theater of the Absurd, Samuel Beckett, etc., all of which augured a kind of dissolution of accepted standard and form.

The disintegration state, however, is essentially a passive one. Po-mo is willfully aggressive. It's as if a satanic spirit appropriated the disintegration state, gave it a half-life, made it walk upright like a zombie.

4/12/2007 03:58:00 AM  
Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

Amen.

4/12/2007 04:40:00 AM  
Blogger River Cocytus said...

"The reason I come to this blog is I think it is interesting to reading conservatives appropriating postmodern rhetoric."

Who do you think it belonged to before the PoMos claimed it? Don't recall them ever making anything at all.

4/12/2007 04:59:00 AM  
Anonymous dilys said...

Literally, a mind-virus that gets into their heads as they promulgate it.

The "narrative": "With the final outcome of the Duke [lacrosse] rape idiocy, it is finally and fully apparent that the Duke faculty and administration have made fools of themselves. . . . It was obvious to normal people without an agenda a year ago that there was something fishy about the Duke story."

Funny and sad both. "Fishy." Stanley Fish turned the Duke English Department into a hotbed of pomo. And I'm so embarrassed I took Duke off my resume wherever possible.

4/12/2007 05:34:00 AM  
Anonymous dilys said...

Thanks for the Bill Whittle reference. His new post and the one below it show how tyrannically weak a "narrative" is, and how it takes the mind hostage.

Part of that function is to elevate the tribe over the world. Regressive as heck. And part is to avoid the hard work of weighing evidence.

4/12/2007 05:53:00 AM  
Anonymous line judge said...

Collecting twice on the same bet?! Suuweeet!

Wanna try for double or nothing, desagradables?

4/12/2007 06:36:00 AM  
Blogger Ricky Raccoon said...

Dear Old Yeller,
I’m sorry you found my comment so offensive. It wasn’t meant to be and in fact it was meant for Van. So you sort of injected yourself into that brief conversation. I realize I said “everyone” but only because I try to keep my comments as short as possible out of respect for people’s time. By ‘everyone’ I meant anyone who read those pomo authors.

Your response was only hurtful but I can assure you I’ve received worse by smarter people. And not so smart people as well. But I won’t assign you to any categories because I don’t know you nearly well enough. But it is obvious you don’t know me.

But please read this for a moment in case you haven’t considered it. And this is meant to all the anonymous posters out there (good and bad) with all sincerity. When you post as Anon, your readers, because they really can’t tell who you are, just may as well include you in a single category as if you are just one big Army of Anon. The good anons are unfortunately grouped with the bad anons because we can’t tell any of you apart. I could post as Old Yeller and literally put words in your mouth.
So you should register for a blog name so this won’t happen and we can get to know you better.

Getting back to the point I was trying to make (which I’ll admit was not much of a point at all – more like an observation) was that I was sorry Van spent anytime reading those pomo authors – because even as he (and Bob says) they have yet to provide any meaningful value. I’ve read enough of what Van thinks and writes about books and authors to know without doubt how much he thoroughly enjoys his favorite ones. To think he traded time reading them instead of something truly enriching makes me sad. Because I’ve spent time like this myself on some useless books. I admire his determination to complete them. I don’t have that type of determination when it comes to books. But I see Van’s work did have value. He gets to speak with authority on the subject and steer others away from these authors.

4/12/2007 07:33:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

RObinstarfish, I finally get it - on my PocketPC it looks just like a peanut.

4/12/2007 07:42:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

line judge said...
"Collecting twice on the same bet?! Suuweeet!"

line judge - Foul! You're ejected for unsensemenlike behavior!

Back to the mirror with you!
(Ricky Raccoon - thanks, but no worries)

4/12/2007 07:58:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

'Back to the mirror with you!'

Phew! Talk about your penalties!

4/12/2007 08:11:00 AM  
Anonymous old yeller said...

Ricky Raccoon,

Thank you for a sincere, thoughtful reply. I stand corrected.

A word on "anonymous" posters. I personally choose to remain a "black" name rather than a "blue" one for a couple of reasons. The most important one is because of the way opposing views are considered, or not, by the assemblage gathered here. I understand that there are genuine obnxious posters out there looking for fights, but when no one rises to the bait, they go away. My concern is with the people who come here in response to the mix of spirit and state, trying to get some idea of what is being stated and why. Remember that Bob is patently antagonistic. It's his style. He doesn't believe in soft-pedaling his philosophy, and after becoming better acquainted with his source points I understand why.
But it is as if he is standing on a rooftop shouting insults, then wonders why people come and throw insults back at him. This behavior shouldn't be hard for a coon to understand, especially since so many here claim to have stood where the insult-throwers stand. Yet there are "coons" among the regulars here who seem to delight in tossing rocks back rather than even attempting to offer an exchange of dialogue. What's the proof of vertical movement if you don't behave any differently than those on the ground? I submit that the proof becomes "self-righteousness". And I can point to abundant evidence of it in most posts. If there's a quality that stands out in the comments besides "wisdom", it's "self-righteousness". That's not a quality I'm trying to add to my palette. But it is a quality in abundance among many coons here, even though it is decried in the "enemy".

The second reason I post in black is precisely why I am here. I am free to explore without ridicule. I am considering new ideas, trying them on, wandering out into the real world wearing a different suit of clothes, if you will.

The hypocritical behavior (like I accused you of) often exhibited here really stands out to me. When a "coon" behaves like those closed-minded, high-minded people they "despise", it knocks the legs from under the concepts and ideas put forth here that I admire.

I'm a student here. I may not be a coon. Or I may. If I am, I certainly was before I got here and will be after I leave, and not because I join some close circle of like-minded thinkers. I study these concepts by choice. I could spend time on more like-minded sites than this one, but I choose to come here often, to see what I can learn. It is precisely because I disagree with some of the ideas put forth that I consider them so carefully. And in the considering, without ridicule, in the sanctuary of my own mind, I am changed.

Many here seem to be treading water, waiting for the time when they can zip out and zap some "troll".

I'm not impressed nor moved by that behavior, no matter where I find it.

Thanks again for your response to my own bit of troll-zapping. You've helped me to see myself as just another part of the same problem. The urge to pound on an opposing viewpoint comes from the same sour source, no matter which side of the line you stand on. I apologize for my behavior toward you, and do believe you have led me to effect a permanent change in my attitude in this regard.

It won't surprise me to have my response to you picked apart by the crows for inconsistencies or slips of the cerebral tongue. Sincerity among the unfaithful here is ridiculed. I'll stay in black. Thank you again.

4/12/2007 08:24:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

old yeller said "...It is precisely because I disagree with some of the ide








as put forth that I consider them so carefully"

I think you miss or misstate a few of your observations, but that one I understand and agree with completely.

4/12/2007 08:59:00 AM  
Anonymous minnesota said...

hind judge,

Since you made and agreed to the bet yourself, did you also pay yourself off?

4/12/2007 11:48:00 PM  
Anonymous hind judge said...

Minnesota:

How'd you get so far from home?

BTW: Nice Ass.

4/13/2007 04:49:00 AM  
Anonymous Tom said...

Thank you for bringing such nice posts. Your blog is always fascinating to read.

6/20/2007 12:44:00 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home