Derrick Jensen + Anarcho-primitivism

Anything that doesn't fit anywhere else below.

Moderators: Calilasseia, DarthHelmet86, Onyx8

Re: Derrick Jensen + Anarcho-primitivism

#461  Postby reuse » Jan 14, 2013 2:49 pm

Darwinsbulldog wrote:Mysticism does not sell to the thinking person because the evidence sucks.


That's the problem. There's not many thinking people in the world. ;)
User avatar
reuse
Banned Sockpuppet
 
Posts: 101

Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Derrick Jensen + Anarcho-primitivism

#462  Postby reuse » Jan 14, 2013 2:52 pm

UndercoverElephant wrote:
reuse wrote:
UndercoverElephant wrote:
Cito di Pense wrote:

You can inspect this thread and see that somebody besides your own good self is taking me seriously.


Yep, one person. :mrgreen:


A person who got all emotional and started childishly calling people names and doing the fingers in the ears - lalalalala... I can't hear you... lalalalala.


There are a handful of regulars who take him seriously. The vast majority can't understand what the fuck he's going on about most of the time, and either ignore him, or find him mildly irritating, or amusing in a weird sort of way.

He's harmless. :)


I was talking about the other person from earlier in the thread. But regards this Cito chap, I think I'll try my best to ignore him from now on. The signal to noise ratio is VERY low. Not really worth trying to even detect it. ;)
User avatar
reuse
Banned Sockpuppet
 
Posts: 101

Print view this post

Re: Derrick Jensen + Anarcho-primitivism

#463  Postby UndercoverElephant » Jan 14, 2013 2:55 pm

Darwinsbulldog wrote:
UndercoverElephant wrote:
Cito di Pense wrote:
UndercoverElephant wrote:I believe there is everything still to play for, NOT in terms of saving this version of civilisation, but in terms of trying to influence what could possibly rise from its ashes. It's not about today. It's about tomorrow.
...My wish is to defend the truth.


Tell it, Brother! People will carry around the Sacred Writings of UE on CD's they have no equipment to decode. They will have oral traditions and sagas of The Mushroom Whisperer.


I repeat:

Do I want recognition as a deep thinker? Maybe, and I'm not sure you are as well placed to judge the depth of my thinking as you believe yourself to be. At the end of the day, it all depends who is right and who is wrong about the existence of the mystical. If you're right about this, then maybe you win the prize as the deeper thinker. But what if you're wrong, CDP? Because at the end of the day, you, as a skeptic, have no way of actually knowing whether you or not you are right. But if you're wrong, and the mystical really does exist, then quite a few people do have a way of knowing that you are wrong. In fact, everybody who has ever been there knows you are wrong.

I know this makes difficult reading for you, but I also know you're too intelligent to be unable to understand it.

Just try to imagine for a second how this exchange looks if the mystical is actually real, and that quite a lot of deep thinkers already know this. Can you imagine that?


We aren't being skeptics just for the hell of it UE.


I know that. I was a skeptic myself until the age of 33, and an outspoken one at that.


The point is not whether or not the mystical exists, but the quality of evidence [or the lack of it], that gives rise to the decision.


There can be no scientific, objective, collectively-accessible evidence for the mystical. That's why Wittgenstein says it must be "shown" because it can't be described. Anyone who thinks they can prove it, either via science or reason, is destined to follow the path jamest has followed, although they'd have to have something badly wrong with them to travel as far down that path as james has.

I am not criticising anybody for being skeptical. I do not believe skeptics are causing a problem with their skepticism. They are part of the rich tapestry of life, and provided they don't go too far, then I respect their decision. "Too far" is when they start mistaking their skepticism for absolute knowledge that the mystical does not exist. That's not skepticism - it is a positive belief in a metaphysical position for which they have no evidence, only a lack of evidence to the contrary.


Mysticism does not sell to the thinking person because the evidence sucks. If that changes then OK.


No, the evidence does not "suck." In terms of what you are calling "evidence", there is none. None for, and none against. There is only one sort of evidence that suffices, and it's the sort that is direct and personal. That's what mysticism is. It's not science and never will be. It's not a collective activity at all - if it becomes collective then it turns into religion, rather than just mysticism, which is where all the problems start. This is also why I'm not "preaching." There's no point in me preaching. If people want to explore these things, then they must explore them. Nobody else can take them there. All I can do is try to explain what mysticism actually is, and isn't, and how it relates to other forms of knowledge, especially science. Even in terms of argument, the only way it can be approached is via negativa. Again, see Wittgenstein.

Just out of interest, and this is an open question to anybody...you do realise Wittgenstein was a mystic, right? Because a hell of a lot of people seem to think he wasn't, and I really don't understand why.
Last edited by UndercoverElephant on Jan 14, 2013 3:11 pm, edited 7 times in total.
UndercoverElephant
 
Posts: 6626
Age: 50
Male

Country: UK
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Derrick Jensen + Anarcho-primitivism

#464  Postby UndercoverElephant » Jan 14, 2013 2:57 pm

reuse wrote:
Cito di Pense wrote:
reuse wrote:Please tell me why anyone should take anything you say seriously?


You can inspect this thread and see that somebody besides your own good self is taking me seriously. And you do too, or you wouldn't be trading snark with me.


Snark? I'm not doing snark (well, maybe a tiny bit as a get even). I just genuinely don't understand you. And that's both literally and figuratively. You seem to blurt out any nonsense into your keyboard, and then spend half your time explaining what went wrong that made you blurt said nonsense out. You pick tiny bits out of peoples posts, take them totally out of context or meaning and then, if we are lucky - strawman them; or if we aren't lucky, spew out some arrogant condescending nonsense. But I kind of get the feeling that's how you like to be perceived. As someone who doesn't deign to make sense. Well you certainly have mastered that. Well done.


YES. :)
UndercoverElephant
 
Posts: 6626
Age: 50
Male

Country: UK
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Derrick Jensen + Anarcho-primitivism

#465  Postby Blip » Jan 15, 2013 6:05 pm


!
GENERAL MODNOTE
Spearthrower, in your posts here and here you call another member a ‘troll’ directly.

These posts are in breach of the Forum Users’ Agreement, specifically section 1.2c, which prohibits personal attack. Please don’t post this way or sanctions may follow; if you have concerns about another member, contact the mod team and/or challenge his posts.

All contributors are asked to dial the personal comments right back, please. Arguments are fair game, but not other members.

Any comments on this modnote or moderation should not be made in the thread as they will be considered off topic. You may PM me or another moderator if you wish to discuss this further.
Evolving wrote:Blip, intrepid pilot of light aircraft and wrangler with alligators.
User avatar
Blip
Moderator
 
Posts: 20387
Female

Country: United Kingdom
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Derrick Jensen + Anarcho-primitivism

#466  Postby sky hiatt » Jan 15, 2013 6:13 pm

Wow, thanks to whoever said I did not imply a CONSPIRACY of contaminating N.A. with Old World diseases. Yes, the globalization of pathogens is simply an absent-minded function of civilization. (Of course, civilization first had to create the diseases, but that's another story) It reveals civilization's basic anti-human tendencies. It gives us some idea of where the civilized future is leading us. It's one part of the story. But basially, In our world today, no one is in charge, no one really knows what the furture will look like, the problems get bigger every day, and every time civilization takes a breath, it needs more air. If this sounds normal, it really isn't. But I don't know how to convince skeptics to understand why. Maybe those on the other side of this thinking should build a temporary cognitive framework in which all living things and all natural systems are validated and authenticated and you care about them. Maybe just conger the concept and let it sit in your brain for 5 or 10 seconds. It'll be hard. But try it just to see what happens.
sky hiatt
 
Name: Sky Hiatt
Posts: 68

Country: USA
Print view this post

Re: Derrick Jensen + Anarcho-primitivism

#467  Postby sky hiatt » Jan 15, 2013 6:14 pm

http://www.facebook.com/Chennaites#!/ph ... 0355102606 I hope it's okay to post links. This one is pretty cute and informative. If nothing else, it may explain part of the reason for the philosophic abyss separating us.
sky hiatt
 
Name: Sky Hiatt
Posts: 68

Country: USA
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Derrick Jensen + Anarcho-primitivism

#468  Postby UndercoverElephant » Jan 15, 2013 6:51 pm

sky hiatt wrote:http://www.facebook.com/Chennaites#!/photo.php?v=4140355102606 I hope it's okay to post links. This one is pretty cute and informative. If nothing else, it may explain part of the reason for the philosophic abyss separating us.


Yep, that pretty much nails it.
UndercoverElephant
 
Posts: 6626
Age: 50
Male

Country: UK
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Derrick Jensen + Anarcho-primitivism

#469  Postby UndercoverElephant » Jan 15, 2013 6:53 pm

sky hiatt wrote:no one really knows what the future will look like


We know it won't be pretty.
UndercoverElephant
 
Posts: 6626
Age: 50
Male

Country: UK
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Derrick Jensen + Anarcho-primitivism

#470  Postby Kazaman » Jan 15, 2013 8:25 pm

UndercoverElephant wrote:
sky hiatt wrote:no one really knows what the future will look like


We know it won't be pretty.


Well, if you want to go into aesthetics, there's no accounting for taste.
User avatar
Kazaman
 
Name: Stephen
Posts: 2724
Age: 24
Male

Country: Canada
Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: Derrick Jensen + Anarcho-primitivism

#471  Postby sky hiatt » Jan 15, 2013 8:57 pm

Right Undercover Elephant. It already isn't pretty.
sky hiatt
 
Name: Sky Hiatt
Posts: 68

Country: USA
Print view this post

Re: Derrick Jensen + Anarcho-primitivism

#472  Postby UndercoverElephant » Jan 15, 2013 9:25 pm

Maybe some of it might not be too bad.
Attachments
ppf.jpg
ppf.jpg (90.36 KiB) Viewed 7185 times
UndercoverElephant
 
Posts: 6626
Age: 50
Male

Country: UK
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Derrick Jensen + Anarcho-primitivism

#473  Postby Oldskeptic » Jan 16, 2013 1:04 am

sky hiatt wrote:Wow, thanks to whoever said I did not imply a CONSPIRACY of contaminating N.A. with Old World diseases.


If you didn't mean that Old world civilization conspired to contaminated the New world then why did you imply it by saying that civilization took time and trouble to do it? You're simply back peddling now. You spouted something that I showed was clearly untrue and now you want to deny it. Why not just admit that you were wrong instead of playing the "That's not what I said/meant" game.

Yes, the globalization of pathogens is simply an absent-minded function of civilization.


Well thanks for admitting the obvious, but I take issue with "function of civilization". It would be more accurate to say that "globalization" of diseases are/were a consequence of different civilizations coming into contact.

(Of course, civilization first had to create the diseases, but that's another story) It reveals civilization's basic anti-human tendencies.


Tell me, how did civilization create the diseases?

It gives us some idea of where the civilized future is leading us. It's one part of the story. But basially, In ou r world today, no one is in charge, no one really knows what the furture will look like, the problems get bigger every day, and every time civilization takes a breath, it needs more air.


That's very poetic, but is it true? You try to personify civilization. Why? Maybe to portray it as an evil entity? You can't battle anything until you give it a face, a persona. Then you have to defeat it if you don't want to be defeated.

I'm sorry but civilization is a monster the you cannot defeat without bringing about your own downfall.

The down side of peak oil may/probably happen, but that will not be the end of civilization. It will change how we do things but it will not be the end civilization.

The down side to global warming is not pretty, but it will not be the end of civilization.

Drug resistant diseases may cause hell and havoc in certain populations, but it will not be the end of civilization.

If this sounds normal, it really isn't. But I don't know how to convince skeptics to understand why. Maybe those on the other side of this thinking should build a temporary cognitive framework in which all living things and all natural systems are validated and authenticated and you care about them. Maybe just conger the concept and let it sit in your brain for 5 or 10 seconds. It'll be hard. But try it just to see what happens.


Would you like ranch or Italian with your word salad?
There is nothing so absurd that some philosopher will not say it - Cicero.

Traditionally these are questions for philosophy, but philosophy is dead - Stephen Hawking
User avatar
Oldskeptic
 
Posts: 7395
Age: 62
Male

Print view this post

Re: Derrick Jensen + Anarcho-primitivism

#474  Postby Oldskeptic » Jan 16, 2013 1:10 am

sky hiatt wrote:http://www.facebook.com/Chennaites#!/photo.php?v=4140355102606 I hope it's okay to post links. This one is pretty cute and informative. If nothing else, it may explain part of the reason for the philosophic abyss separating us.


Dumb fucking cartoon is dumb.
There is nothing so absurd that some philosopher will not say it - Cicero.

Traditionally these are questions for philosophy, but philosophy is dead - Stephen Hawking
User avatar
Oldskeptic
 
Posts: 7395
Age: 62
Male

Print view this post

Re: Derrick Jensen + Anarcho-primitivism

#475  Postby Oldskeptic » Jan 16, 2013 1:11 am

UndercoverElephant wrote:
sky hiatt wrote:no one really knows what the future will look like


We know it won't be pretty.


How do we know this?
There is nothing so absurd that some philosopher will not say it - Cicero.

Traditionally these are questions for philosophy, but philosophy is dead - Stephen Hawking
User avatar
Oldskeptic
 
Posts: 7395
Age: 62
Male

Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Derrick Jensen + Anarcho-primitivism

#476  Postby Kazaman » Jan 16, 2013 1:30 am

Oldskeptic wrote:
UndercoverElephant wrote:
sky hiatt wrote:no one really knows what the future will look like


We know it won't be pretty.


How do we know this?


He'll simply define "pretty" in such a way that his desire to be offended will be fulfilled, like most people whose aesthetics derive from ideology.
User avatar
Kazaman
 
Name: Stephen
Posts: 2724
Age: 24
Male

Country: Canada
Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: Derrick Jensen + Anarcho-primitivism

#477  Postby sky hiatt » Jan 16, 2013 2:54 am

Old sceptic/Kazaman, sorry for my lose tongue. I really need to watch every syllable here among you. Yes, "civilization took the trouble to do it" is just skyspeak for, civilization caused it. AGAIN, there was NO conspiracy no matter how deep you dig between the lines to find it. Can we move on please? "It won't be pretty." Okay, this seems basic and inarguable, but: Mt. top removal, deforestation, slums, fouled lakes and rivers. Pulluted air. Filthy shorelines. Welcome to, Ugly 101. Tell me, Kazaman, are you saying you doubt there is ugliness and that if there is you doubt civilization caused it? Is that it? And, Old sceptic, actually, medical professionals have no trouble at all imagining "civilization as we know it" derailed by microbes. Beyond that, some theorists even propose that this blunt fact confronts all advanced species in the Universe and that the reason we aren't hearing from any of them is because the microbes keep winning over and over in endless victories.
sky hiatt
 
Name: Sky Hiatt
Posts: 68

Country: USA
Print view this post

Re: Derrick Jensen + Anarcho-primitivism

#478  Postby Kazaman » Jan 16, 2013 3:04 am

Tell me, Kazaman, are you saying you doubt there is ugliness and that if there is you doubt civilization caused it? Is that it?


No, that's not it.
User avatar
Kazaman
 
Name: Stephen
Posts: 2724
Age: 24
Male

Country: Canada
Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: Derrick Jensen + Anarcho-primitivism

#479  Postby sky hiatt » Jan 16, 2013 4:33 pm

Old skeptic, in answer to your question, "How did civilization create the diseases?" Nothwithstanding the fact that humans came to inhabit every habitable part of the planet, the normal condition of human societies for almost a million years, was sameness and exclusivity. That is, cultural change or any change was (under normal consditions) so slight as to be undetectable within the framework of a single lifetime. Obviosly this means human cultures were geographically rooted. Even nomadic tribes only traveled between summer and winter zones. Exclusivity, meaning, like most species, humans kept to themselves. These are the two basic conditions most important to human health and beyond that to the health of other species and of ecosystems as related to infectious disease. Each human culture had a standing goal of protecting their stability and cultural constancy. (the 7 generations etc) They valued sameness and historic continuity.
Now, as we know, throughout the age of exploration, and colonial and emprial expansion, the more "advanced" (civilized) societies defeated and dominated the more tradtional and pastoral peoples. The cost in human life snd social stability was, in some cases catastrophic. But, perhaps, more importantly, the concepts of exploration and expansion together set into motion the normalization of chronic change and global trade and travel as an economic necessity. These activities now dominate the global scene, so that any infectious disease anywhere is spread everywhere sometimes in a matter of days. The actual movement of the pathgens was not possible during geographic settled times as the diseases that might have arisen were contained and extremely localized.
But before all this was set in place, communicable diseases were, with one or two exceptions, generally unknown. The crossover of animal pathogens into the human strain is the source of most communicable diseases, and certainly all of those that have emerged in the last 100 years. There were three basic causes for the rise of these diseases in civilized times. One was the incursion into formerly wild areas teeming with pathogens humans had never been exposed to. Second, the unnatural housing of formerly wild animal species together or in close quarters. (continued in next box)
sky hiatt
 
Name: Sky Hiatt
Posts: 68

Country: USA
Print view this post

Re: Derrick Jensen + Anarcho-primitivism

#480  Postby sky hiatt » Jan 16, 2013 5:18 pm

Modern humans have instituted the unfortunate customs of animal-based agriculture, zoos, xenotransplants, pets, live markets, puppy mills, fur farms and on and on, all of which have promoted disease crossover among animals and birds that would have normally have never come in contact with each other, and certainly not lived side by side. Let's look at the influenza virus as an example. Influenza was introduced to humans in Asia. The common custom of backyard mini-farms of pigs, chickens and other fowl contained species in adjacent pens or at times even the ducks etc above the pigs. At some point in this unnatural setting, the influenza virus carried by birds spread to the pigs which, as it turns out, are extremely good at picking up viruses in such conditions, sometimes even acquiring more than one strain which then share plasmids and evolve even more novel strains. At some point, owing to close and prolonged contact with humans, the pig viruses made the jump to our species. And then, at some point, the high mutation rates of flu virus allowed it to make the genetic changes necessary to allow it to be spread among humans withot the animal intermediary. Researchers in the field of influenza have suggested the Chinese teal be renamed, the duck of the apocolypse. I guess a sense of human is vital in trying times. Others have suggested this type of farming practice be discontinued, but sensing it won't happen, think we should prepare for the worst. These are not my thoughts or conclusions, but those of epidemiolgists and other medical professionals. The influenza scenario can be extrapolated to other corssover diseases. Just let your mind wander. Flu experts also say that if ducks etc were not housed with pigs (two species that would normally not even come in contact, let along live housed together) we would probably never even have known of the existance of influenza virus. But now it will always be with us killing voraciously in staggering worldwide death tolls year after year.
Looking at AIDs, it is thought that without the advent of steamboats traveling up Congolese rivers to Kisangani, the AIDS virus might well have gone extinct in the settled, monogomos tribes of the interior. It had existed there for thousands of years wihout posing much problem. The AIDS virus and the flu virus, as fate would have it, are two of the most rapidly mutating viruses known. One epidemiiologist has said that they are so unstable genetically, they seemingly teeter on the border of complete internal breakdown. The death tolls from these 2 diseases alone is formidable. From these stories we can better understand the health values of geographically rooted, pre-civilized society.
The third way that civilization as caused infectious and communicable disease is through the depletion of non-human animal species. The patohgens, (virus and bacteria are the oldest living things predating humans by 2 billion years), do not go away. If a host population is depleted or reduced, they just move on to next convenient species. Lyme disease in humans is a direct result of depleted forests pushing the tick carriers closer to human habitations, and the elimination and extinction of the 2 to 3 billion passenger pigions that once lived in N.A. The pigions ate tree nuts that now feed a bulging population of deer mice that carry the ticks into the back yard where they jump to pets that can walk this neuroinvasive disease right into your house. You can't eliminate 3 billion birds from the ecosystem with consequences.
sky hiatt
 
Name: Sky Hiatt
Posts: 68

Country: USA
Print view this post

PreviousNext

Return to General Debunking

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest