On Communication
posted by mike | June 16, 2009
- Login or register to post comments
- Print this page
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Propeller
Reddit
Magnoliacom
Newsvine
Furl
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
IcerocketI don't like debating religion. For one it's not my strong point, two it is ingrained in peoples identities very deeply so it always leads to conflicts and offense (unless you share the same beliefs that is) and three I'm still on my spiritual discovery path or whatever. I don't know whats going on, I'm trying to figure it out. The best way to get something right is to get it wrong first you know. So as I post opinions and thoughts on this or any other site just remember that they are organic, think of them as a work in progress. I am very open to all kinds of opinions and beliefs and I always analyze information as it is presented to me objectivly and as openly as possible. Never draw conclusions, never close your mind. I am way too young for that. So that being said, I'm going to go about my merry way and record my thoughts on this site for whoever's viewing pleasure, or displeasure. Remember "it's all good" is my motto. I believe the person who believes he knows it all is the person who knows less than me. You know unless he's a thousand years old or something. But that never happens so there you go, lol. I like the fact that people feel the need to express themselves here. Great, we need people to speak up and be heard. Especially in these crazy days. Communication man. We need more of it. I think debate should be a mandatory class in school. It is so important to be able to hear each other out without resorting to name calling or all out fighting. This is how we grow. This is how we learn about each other. You will always have this group of people who thinks this way, and this group of people who think that way. That is never going to change, ever. The trick is learning how to live with that other group. That is what we should be working at. That I believe is the foundation for a more peacefull existance on this planet. That and doing away with money. But I'm not an econimist so I'm not even going to touch that one. I'll just keep watching stiff socks acent of money blogs, lol. After watching all six I'll get back to you. Thats all, I'm out.
Comments
courage
— Jun 17, 2009
Very good post
It seems like all our problems are already solved? We will all just need courage to apply them? I personally want to start a warrior society were you don't believe, you HAVE to believe. So if u don't believe its fine...come in and we will serve you for free! Maybe the motto could be "IF YOU DON'T BELIEVE ITS FREE!"
p.s. HAVING to believe=knowing
From Laziness to patience to patients to patents
re: getting rid of money
— Jun 17, 2009
hello there,
nice post, and thanks for sharing. religion was always tough for me, having been raised atheist and never feeling like i could understand how people could grow up believing in something...i guess things change...i still don't have a religion, but i guess i can understand more about them these days...i'm still pretty sure i won't pick one.
that said:
just quickly, i heard charles eisenstein talk at the Gaian Mind Summer Festival in Darlington, Maryland this past weekend, and he spoke of money in a way i'd never thought of before...he said that our money system is based on the idea that gathering a ton and holding onto it is a great idea (because of interest...because of growth...) which makes people not want to spend it, to exchange it. he said that inherently money doesn't have to be devoid of meaning, because it's a symbol that you provided services to someone, and though they didn't have something you wanted (to trade), they gave you money, which is a symbol of work they did, or something they brought to someone else, etc... i had never thought about it before, but he threw out the idea of money that becomes devalued...money that does not get better when you hang on to it, but instead, it will eventually run out of value, so trade it now while it's worth something! of course this leads us to, well...then, what do you do when you're old and can't work anymore? our society has a lot to figure out, and that simple solution sure wouldn't cut it...but still...an interesting way to get us thinking about reenvisioning economy in a completeyl different way.
namaste,
beck
I agree, debate should be a
— Jun 17, 2009
I agree, debate should be a required high school class, so kids can learn to speak peacefully with one another. Too often nowadays, emotionally volatile people press these hot button issues like religion and politics just so they can flip out on people and their beliefs. It's unkind and only leads to hurt feelings. Communication is certainly the way!
right on
— Jun 18, 2009
I totally agree with what you say, I dont think in reality anyones Spiritual journey or journey of discovery can end until death, every day brings a new challenge, a new way to perceive the world and new things to learn from. Your totally right that by getting things wrong we can learn and grow, people who never admit their mistakes or learn from them are never going to move forward and its so important to be able to step outside of yourself and examine things without the attachment of ego or pride so that you can reach a meaningful conclusion and decision.
Debate should definately be mandatory, i can remember being in school debating society arguing to a group of ageing rotarians why all drugs should be legal, i think in a way that spurred my lifelong quest to challenge the status quo and think differently. I agree with what you say about learning to live with people though, and its something i touch on in my first blog entry (written today) whats really important is learning that everyone has a different set of rules thats right for them and you should never impose your will on someone else. Whatever anyone decides, as long as it doesnt hurt anyone else is cool, cos they arnt you and your system is not theirs and never will be. The only real way to reach an accord with those around you is to let them do what they want, dont worry about the small differences, and work together to do things that really count.
- evolving daily
nyarlathotep...
— Jun 18, 2009
I like what Bradley Nowell says in one of his songs.....
"Leagalize it, yeah, yeah, and we'll advertise it" lol.
what i meant by what i said
— Jun 19, 2009
what i meant by what i said is that its best not to ever think that you know it all, theres always new information to uncover and life has a way of always suprising you with some new information or something which makes you revise your judgments and beliefs. If you allow yourself to be open to ideas which are new (to you) then you allow yourself to work better in the now i think. If you close your mind to debate and questioning ther world then you can allow yourself to dig too many holes to hide in..
and it can indeed be a wonderful trip, life after all is fantastic
Adam Smith 101
— Jun 19, 2009
he said that inherently money doesn't have to be devoid of meaning, because it's a symbol that you provided services to someone, and though they didn't have something you wanted (to trade), they gave you money, which is a symbol of work they did, or something they brought to someone else, etc...
It's not about the money - it's about the people handling it!
The evil one...
— Jun 21, 2009
The quote is all about the tyranny of government! It is a statement of nature; with every action there is a reaction, the consequence of choices. When government exercises tyranny the civil society breaks down because not everybody is willing to follow the law any longer.
People have hoarded money for as long as they have been able to for financial peace of mind due to the seasons of economy, the ups and downs, along with the very real concern of old age.
The term has far more relevance in the time and place of Adam Smith and the Christian ideology of usury, Christians do not lend money. I may be wrong but if you read further I thought Adam Smith goes on to explain that while hoarding money serves the individual purpose of security it is actually an evil because it makes that wealth useless to the rest of civil society retarding the full potential for economic growth, industry and creativity in a capitalist economy. Adam Smith supported the concept of savings, banking and credit in it’s most simplistic form. A bank provides a place to securely store my wealth in the form of savings and they in turn can make that wealth available to responsible individuals in the form of providing credit for a fee, to cover their services, allowing the creation of new businesses or expanding one.
Marx had a social economic philosophy that survives in modern economics based on the potential breakdown of civil society that can occur when wealth, created by the exchange of commodities, can be replaced by wealth created solely from the exchange of money, rather than directed towards the making of goods and services. This is the infamous evolutionary role of money formula described as C-C, C-M-C, M-C-M ending up as M-M. C is commodity and M is money. Most modern economists recognize the very real threat this creates with the natural checks and balances of the capitalist system and can point to it’s effect in history. But...
The current crisis is directly related to the final outcome of M-M yet greedy capitalism was not the cause. Banks were forced to make irresponsible loans, the interest rate on credit was pushed down artificially, creating a housing boom that those exercising the M-M aspect of life took full advantage of, creating an artificial housing bubble of inflated prices along with state government regulations on development creating artificial housing shortages further inflating prices, requiring a utopian spring time of economy to maintain, which is not realistic, and like so many times in the past the house of cards fell in on itself. Did you know that the government has been doing this for decades creating a fairly reliable 18 year cycle of boom and bust in the housing market? To top it off, the Enron scandal and their accounting misdeeds caused congress to create economically ignorant new financial accounting legislation called mark to market, putting the historical standard of evaluating assets on it’s head which is directly related to the failure of most banks; Per the new law assets that realistically had value did not solely because they did not have current value! Funny, that law was recently rescinded to help the banks! Ultimately in this example, as in so many others, government manipulation of the economy is the cause yet the media enforces herd think to convince us it was all the fault of evil capitalism and evil money. Of course, government is then begged to fix the very problem it created.
The mis-information and insanity of it all!
The man in the mirror...
— Jun 22, 2009
Now we are back to how guns kill people and money is the root of all evil...?
Imagine any system you want, it will be us who make it work or us who make it fail. Therefore any system depends on the civil society. If you read Adam Smith or our founding fathers they go into great length over this concept.
Most systems are created to control human behavior and what ever system you choose to combat the human frailty of greed you are legislating human behavior based on incentives (read 'moderator,' if you will... ;O).
consistent with a competitive society that begins with very early encouragement, from little league to competition for jobs to one form or another of 'getting ahead' to global competition and of course... wars... everybody seems to want to be on top... an interestingly left-brain approach to life...
Competition plays a positive fundamental role in human nature and like all things it is not as pure as the white driven snow. There is nothing wrong with the left brain. There is nothing wrong with the right brain. God gave us both. How about using both? Using only the right brain can cause as much misery as using only the left brain. What ever happened to balance? Is it the lack of balance that prevents common sense? Is finding balance within ourselves the real potential of 2012?
Indeed, where are the balancing opinions of all the great things a capitalist system has created for modern society? Is this missing due to the templates that each individual projects onto his or her observation of life? It would appear the common template at evolver is capitalism equals nothing but misery. That is a focused right brain emotional response looking for a weak left brain template since history clearly proves both the benefit and misery along with good philosophy to explain their root causes!
This blog is about communication; the fundamentals of exchanging ideas fermenting either progress / evolution or in the case of Mike, at least understanding and tolerance. Has our little Adam Smith exchange created that?
Where do we disagree...
— Jun 22, 2009
We clearly agree on so many things, all resting on human nature. You disagree with capitalism... was / is there another system you proposed? You propose no system?
Are you inferring that competition should not exist even though competition is a fundamental aspect of nature (yet balanced)?
Wha........?
— Jun 23, 2009
I do not disagree with capitalism... I do not agree with capitalism..
Then why did you take a stance against it? If balance is your creed then why provide all the negative rhetoric and none of the positive?
Where was the Great Way in your participation? Are you not forcing yourself to make distinctions in your effort to be contrary?
You're back!?
— Jun 25, 2009
How about my other Great Way question: Are you not forcing yourself to make distinctions in your effort to be contrary?
it is clear to me, if not to most, that strictures such as reason, adherence to fact, idiot compassion, consistency, precise distinctions, logic, humility, balance and their ilk, never support Truth... they simply hide it in a mountain of clutter ... science and religion are devoted to such obscuration...
It is humanity, especially those in power who wish to be authoritarians, that is devoted to such clutter and obscuration, not the other way around. Again, you pick on the tools... not the people using the tool(s) to deceive themselves and others.
I keep hearing how this is a left brain society. Does that actually match the observation? It appears to me that much of society is right brained seeking any left brain template that supports their right brain ideological fantasy.
Curiously, do you see any possibility of how you are adding to the clutter and obscuration?
yes my comments are seldom balanced, nor do I make the slightest effort to make them such... if you reflect on what you have read of my blogs and comments, they are not even consistent... facts are muddled... the truth often stretched beyond recognition or even ignored all together...
The power of semantics...
— Jun 22, 2009
Definition: The language used (as in advertising or political propaganda) to achieve a desired effect on an audience especially through the use of words with novel or dual meanings
From a great column in Liberty, click on the link and scroll about halfway down to...
The price is right
http://libertyunbound.com/article.php?id=325
Highlights
That may seem merely semantic, but the language we use to describe a problem affects our ability to solve it.
Why are we so enamored of the wrong semantics? Alexis de Tocqueville noticed that historians in aristocracies worked to identify the individual action of an individual man as the cause of a given historical event. They would go out of their way to find this individual attribution, ignoring most other, external causes. He noticed that historians in democracies tend to do just the opposite — to attribute grand, abstract, external causes to even the most trivial events, ignoring the individual actions of individual men. Because men in democracies tend toward equality, and hence mediocrity, an individual in a democracy is obviously not interesting enough or powerful enough to be the sole cause of any event. De Toqueville also noticed our love of the abstract over the specific, and traces that love to similar characteristics of democracies.
Unfortunately, because of our inability to think about our world in a semantically accurate manner, I have no doubt the tinkerers will have the same amount of success in affecting “the market” as they have on poverty, drugs, and terror.
