From kirstenschneide at hotmail.com Sat Sep 23 00:41:15 2006
From: kirstenschneide at hotmail.com (kirsten schneide)
Date: Sun Sep 24 01:35:10 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Risky"
In-Reply-To: <20060922154741.65115.qmail@web55008.mail.re4.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BAY107-F277F26CBA3C50E9E9B6BF7A8210@phx.gbl>
Dear Zoe, yes, Reynold's. Why do animals (chat)group? Herding, for example.
Just watch here. "Risk dilution" of "predators'.... of that little cozy,
sleepy belief&system. Zoe, would you see this Bohm&Chat Group as such?
Belief, System? Early theorists developed ideas like 'mental contagion' and
'herd instinc', which became very popular. But as freud was quick to see,
these ideas never really did explain what men did with their judgment and
common sense when they got caught up in groups. Good old Freud saw right
away what they did with it: they simply became dependent children again,
blindly following the inner voice of their parents, which now came from them
under the hypnotic spell of the leader. A Belief/System is a leader, too,
dear Subscribers. TAS is a: "leader". Thus Subscribers abandoned their egos
to his, identified with his power, tried to function with him as an ideal.
Bohm/Dialog as crutch. Don't like "crutch/es"? try: Tit/s...
PS: Student;-? ....... I am the daughter of a millionaire.
Love & Nike, Kbot
>Kirsten - Thanks for that. Quite Interesting. Will look into that. By the
>way: Are you familiar with Craig Reynold's work (Boids)?
> 1, separation (avoid crowding neighbours)
> 2 , alignment (steer towards average heading of neighbours)
> 3 , cohesion (steer towards average position of neighbours)
> Somehow seems to resonate nicely with Solomon's work on TMT
> 1, to deny or belittle and devalue the importance third (second) party
>"Weltanschauung" (Hegel), but try
> 2, to controvert (To raise arguments against; voice opposition to) the
>ideas and opinions of others which may, as a consequence,
> 3, escalate into a conflict. Force. Violence. Elimination. You name it -
> What do you think? Are you a student, too? -- Zoe
>
>
>kirsten schneide <kirstenschneide@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Zoe, did you read how Donf keeps drooling about his (Chat group
>going):
>Laser-thinkg;-? It all ways cracks me up. Mon Cheri Donf, how many decades
>have you taken care of (by) now by 'doing' (Bohm)Dialog? And? Any Lasers in
>sight? In-sights?? Any "fresh" stuff? O Boy! At any 'rate', Zoe, this 'all'
>brings up the great problem raised by the therapeutic revolution, namely:::
>" So What?".... Even with numerous (chat) groups of really liberated
>people,
>at their best, we can't imagine that the world will be any pleasanter or
>less tragic a place. It may even be worse in still unknown ways. As Tillich
>warned us, and Donl likes to make-up himselves a bit here&there with T, New
>Being, under the conditions and limitations of existence, will only bring
>into play new and sharper paradoxes, new tensions, and more painful
>disharmonies—a "more intense demonism." Reality is remorseless because gods
>do not walk upon the earth; and if men could become noble repositories of
>great gulfs of nonbeing, they would have even less peace than we oblivious
>and driven madmen have today. Besides, can any ideal of therapeutic
>revolutions touch the vast masses of this globe, the modern mechanical men
>in Russia, the near-billion sheeplike followers in China, the brutalized
>and
>ignorant populations of almost every continent? When one lives in the
>liberation atmosphere of Berkeley, California, or in the intoxications of
>small doses of unconstriction in a therapeutic group in one's home town,
>one
>is living in a hothouse atmosphere that shuts out the reality of the rest
>of
>the planet, the way things really are in this world. It is this therapeutic
>megalomania that must quickly been seen through if we are not to be perfect
>fools. The empirical facts of the world will not fade away because one has
>analyzed his Oedipus complex, as Freud so well knew, or because one can
>make
>love with tenderness, as so many now believe. Forget it. In this sense
>again
>it is Freud's somber pessimism, especially of his later writings such as
>"Civilization and Its Discontents", that keeps him so contemporary. Us
>human
>animals are doomed, doomed to live&die in an overwhelmingly tragic and
>demonic world. Enough said, it's good to have you on board .... of this
>ship
>of fools.
>
>
>
>
>Love & Nuts, Kirsten
>
>
>
> >From: Zoe Chu
> >Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> >To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> >Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Risky"
> >Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 10:28:58 -0700 (PDT)
> >
> >Kirsten - You seem to be a real nut --- just the kind of humans I
>cherish!
> >Glad M told me about this list.
> >
> > The brains of creative people appear to be more open to incoming stimuli
> >from the surrounding environment. Other people's brains might shut out
>this
> >same information through a process called "latent inhibition" - defined
>as
> >an animal's unconscious capacity to ignore stimuli that experience has
> >shown are irrelevant to its needs. Through psychological testing, the
> >researchers showed that creative individuals are much more likely to have
> >low levels of latent inhibition.
> >
> > "This means that creative individuals remain in contact with the extra
> >information constantly streaming in from the environment," says Jordan
> >Peterson. "The normal person classifies an object, and then forgets about
> >it, even though that object is much more complex and interesting than he
>or
> >she thinks. The creative person, by contrast, is always open to new
> >possibilities."
> >
> > Previously, scientists have associated failure to screen out stimuli
> >with psychosis. However, researchers hypothesized that it might also
> >contribute to original thinking, especially when combined with high IQ.
> >
> > The authors hypothesize that latent inhibition may be positive when
> >combined with high intelligence and good working memory - the capacity to
> >think about many things at once - but negative otherwise. Peterson
>states:
> >"If you are open to new information, new ideas, you better be able to
> >intelligently and carefully edit and choose. If you have 50 ideas, only
>two
> >or three are likely to be good. You have to be able to discriminate or
> >you'll get swamped."
> >
> > "Scientists have wondered for a long time why madness and creativity
> >seem linked," says Carson. "It appears likely that low levels of latent
> >inhibition and exceptional flexibility in thought might predispose to
> >mental illness under some conditions and to creative accomplishment under
> >others."
> >
> > For example, during the early stages of diseases such as schizophrenia,
> >which are often accompanied by feelings of deep insight, mystical
>knowledge
> >and religious experience, chemical changes take place in which latent
> >inhibition disappears.
> >
> > "We are very excited by the results of these studies," says Peterson.
> >"It appears that we have not only identified one of the biological bases
>of
> >creativity but have moved towards cracking an age-old mystery: the
> >relationship between genius, madness and the doors of perception."
> >
> > Zoe
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >kirsten schneide wrote:
> > Dear Zoe, Hans Eysenck proposed that extraversion was caused by
> >variability
> >in cortical arousal; "introverts are characterized by higher levels of
> >activity than extraverts and so are chronically more cortically aroused
> >than
> >extraverts". While it seems counterintuitive to suppose that introverts
>are
> >more aroused than extraverts, the putative effect this has on behaviour
>is
> >such that the introvert seeks lower levels of stimulation. Conversely,
>the
> >extravert seeks to heighten their arousal to a more optimal level ~ ~ as
> >predicted by the Yerkes-Dodson Law) ~ ~ by increased activity, social
> >engagement and other stimulation-seeking behaviours.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Love & Drugsl, Kirsten
> >--------------------------
> >Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > >Hi Kristen -
> > >
> > > Funny. I currently read some of that stuff for class. What do you make
> > >of that? Do you see co-relations? Anyone?
> > >
> > > Warwick's claims that robots that can program themselves to avoid each
> > >other while operating in a group raises the issue of self-organization,
> >and
> > >as such might be the major impetus in following developments in this
> >area.
> > >In particular, the works of Fransisco Varela and Humberto Maturana,
>once
> >in
> > >the province of pure speculation now have become immediately relevant
> >with
> > >respect to synthetic intelligence. Cyborg-type systems not only are
> > >homeostatic (meaning that they are abe to preserve stable internal
> > >conditions in various environments) but adaptive, if they are to
>survive.
> > >Testing the claims of Varela and Maturana via synthetic devices is the
> > >larger and more serious concern in the discussion about Warwick and
>those
> > >involved in similar research. "Pulling the plug" on independent devices
> > >cannot be as simple as it appears, for if the device displays
>sufficient
> > >intelligence and assumes a diagnostic and prognostic stature, we may
> > >ultimately one day be forced to decide
> > > between what it could be telling us as counterintuitive (but correct)
> >and
> > >our impulse to disconnect because of our limited and "intuitive"
> > >perceptions. Warwick's robots seemed to have exhibited behavior not
> > >anticipated by the research, one such robot "committing suicide"
>because
> >it
> > >could not cope with its environment. In a more complex setting, it may
>be
> > >asked whether a "natural selection" may be possible, neural networks
> >being
> > >the major operative.
> > >
> > > Thinking about the implications of Warwick's research is not confined
>to
> > >device implantation or automatons. Researching websites on the U.S.
> > >Department of Defense's (DoD) development of a simulated international
> > >battlespace. It is no secret that the DoD foresees the day when not
>only
> > >all military systems are interoperable, but can be coordinated globally
> >in
> > >a real-time war. Ultimately, simulations not only are to be used for
> > >assessing alternative outcomes in wargaming settings but also are to be
> > >used as diagnostic "tools" interactive with a real time battlefield
> > >situation. If this happens, we must consider self-organization in these
> > >synthetic systems operating in critical environments. That is, if
>allowed
> > >to operate with minimal or no human intervention, what of the character
> >of
> > >the system, itself and its evolution? Hence, Warwick should be a
>starting
> > >point for a more serious discussion than the popular media seems to be
> > >capable of maintaining. In the worst case scenario,
> > > Warwick is deemed a proponent of science fiction, but it may be said
> >that
> > >it is great science fiction, as it is based upon the plausible, rather
> >than
> > >the impossible. In the best case scenario, Warwick, indeed has given us
> > >ample notice to humanity to concern itself with the choice of thinking
> > >about ourselves and our place in the universe or abnegate in favor of
> > >another consciousness. A return to Aristotle and Plato is in order.
> > >
> > > -- Zoe
> > >
> > >kirsten schneide wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >Dear habituated Susbcribers
> > >
> > >The study of group polarization began with an unpublished 1961 Master’s
> > >thesis by MIT student James Stoner, who observed the so-called "risky
> > >shift", meaning that a group’s decisions are riskier than the average
>of
> > >the individual decisions of members before the group met. The discovery
> >of
> > >the risky shift was considered surprising and counterintuitive,
> >especially
> > >since earlier work in the 1920s and 1930s by Allport and other
> >researchers
> > >suggested that individuals made more extreme decisions than did groups,
> > >leading to the expectation that groups would make decisions that would
> > >conform to the average risk level of its members. The seemingly
> > >counterintuitive findings of Stoner led to a flurry of research around
> >the
> > >risky shift, which was originally thought to be a special case
>exception
> >to
> > >the standard decision-making practice. By the late 1960s, however, it
>had
> > >become clear that the risky shift was just one type of many attitudes
> >that
> > >became more extreme in groups, leading Moscovici and Zavalloni to term
> >the
> > >overall phenomenon "group polarization".
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >Love & Shiftstick, Kirsten
> > >--------------------------
> > >Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld
> > >
> > > >From: "kirsten schneide"
> > > >Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> > > >To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> > > >Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Welt*Bild
> > > >Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2006 18:15:38 -0400
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >Oh William, I like your
> > > >
> > > >Attitude/s
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >Love & Dress, Kirsten
> > > >
> > > >PS:
> > > >
> > > >There is a pervasive sense of rootlessness and disorientation that
> >causes
> > > >many people to avoid contemplating their place in the universe and to
> > >focus
> > > >instead on the trivial concerns of consumerism.
> > > >
> > > >The lack of social consensus on cosmology in the modern world has
> >caused
> > > >many people to close off their thinking to large issues and long time
> > > >scales, so that small matters dominate their consciousness.
> > > >
> > > >In most traditional cultures, people's sense of identity and codes of
> > > >behavior are grounded in a cosmology that provides a picture of who
> >they
> > > >are, where they come from, and what their personal relationship to
>the
> > > >larger world should be. For more than 300 years, however, scientific
> > > >advances have tended to undermine traditional cosmologies while
> >offering
> > >an
> > > >image of the cosmos bereft of spiritual or mythic dimensions.
> > > >
> > > >Are you looking for an image of the cosmos consistent with what
> > >scientists
> > > >understand about the universe today. That symbol, known to the
>ancient
> > > >Greeks as a "uroboros," is the snake swallowing its tail. This:
>symbol
> >:
> > > >represents the universe as a continuity of vastly different size
> >scales,
> > > >with the swallowing of the tail representing the hoped-for
>unification
> >of
> > > >theories governing the largest and smallest scales.
> > > >
> > > >The size scales in the known universe encompass about 60 orders of
> > > >magnitude, from the vastness of the cosmic horizon to the subatomic
> > >Planck
> > > >scale, the smallest size allowed by relativity and quantum physics.
>Yet
> > > >people asked to visualize "the universe" tend to think of endless
>space
> > >and
> > > >uncountable stars and galaxies, while the human scale shrinks into
> > > >insignificance.
> > > >
> > > >Gute Nacht!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >> >I would love to know what anyone here thinks
> > > >> >about the Deikmans' piece.
> > > >>
> > > >>Not much; as much nonsense as ever
> > > >>
> > > >>William
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>_______________________________________________
> > > >>info:
> > > >>www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> > > >>
> > > >>post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
> > > >>
> > > >>dialogue facilitator:
> > > >>facilitator@david-bohm.net
> > > >>
> > > >>Administrator of the mailing list:
> > > >>admin@david-bohm.net
> > > >>
> > > >>_______________________________________________
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >_________________________________________________________________
> > > >Add fun gadgets and colorful themes to express yourself on Windows
>Live
> > > >Spaces
> > >
> >
> >http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwsp0070000001msn/direct/01/?href=http://www.get.live.com/spaces/features
> > > >
> > > >_______________________________________________
> > > >info:
> > > >www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> > > >
> > > >post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
> > > >
> > > >dialogue facilitator:
> > > >facilitator@david-bohm.net
> > > >
> > > >Administrator of the mailing list:
> > > >admin@david-bohm.net
> > > >
> > > >_______________________________________________
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >_________________________________________________________________
> > >Express yourself - download free Windows Live Messenger themes!
> >
> >http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwme0020000001msn/direct/01/?href=http://imagine-msn.com/themes/vibe/default.aspx?locale=en-us&source=hmtagline
> > >
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >info:
> > >www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> > >
> > >post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
> > >
> > >dialogue facilitator:
> > >facilitator@david-bohm.net
> > >
> > >Administrator of the mailing list:
> > >admin@david-bohm.net
> > >
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >---------------------------------
> > >Stay in the know. Pulse on the new Yahoo.com. Check it out.
> >
> >
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >info:
> > >www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> > >
> > >post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
> > >
> > >dialogue facilitator:
> > >facilitator@david-bohm.net
> > >
> > >Administrator of the mailing list:
> > >admin@david-bohm.net
> > >
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >
> > >
> >
> >_________________________________________________________________
> >Express yourself - download free Windows Live Messenger themes!
> >http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwme0020000001msn/direct/01/?href=http://imagine-msn.com/themes/vibe/default.aspx?locale=en-us&source=hmtagline
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >info:
> >www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> >
> >post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
> >
> >dialogue facilitator:
> >facilitator@david-bohm.net
> >
> >Administrator of the mailing list:
> >admin@david-bohm.net
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >---------------------------------
> >Get your email and more, right on the new Yahoo.com
>
>
> >_______________________________________________
> >info:
> >www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> >
> >post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
> >
> >dialogue facilitator:
> >facilitator@david-bohm.net
> >
> >Administrator of the mailing list:
> >admin@david-bohm.net
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >
> >
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Share your special moments by uploading 500 photos per month to Windows
>Live
>Spaces
>http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwsp0070000001msn/direct/01/?href=http://www.get.live.com/spaces/features
>
>_______________________________________________
>info:
>www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>
>dialogue facilitator:
>facilitator@david-bohm.net
>
>Administrator of the mailing list:
>admin@david-bohm.net
>
>_______________________________________________
>
>
>
>
>
>---------------------------------
> All-new Yahoo! Mail - Fire up a more powerful email and get things done
>faster.
>_______________________________________________
>info:
>www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>
>dialogue facilitator:
>facilitator@david-bohm.net
>
>Administrator of the mailing list:
>admin@david-bohm.net
>
>_______________________________________________
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Share your special moments by uploading 500 photos per month to Windows Live
Spaces
http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwsp0070000001msn/direct/01/?href=http://www.get.live.com/spaces/features
From kirstenschneide at hotmail.com Sat Sep 23 00:44:50 2006
From: kirstenschneide at hotmail.com (kirsten schneide)
Date: Sun Sep 24 01:38:43 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Riskinky"
In-Reply-To: <20060922155631.67789.qmail@web55008.mail.re4.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BAY107-F18283012C13FFFE7141BD5A8210@phx.gbl>
Dear Weltverbesserer ~
science and religion merge in a critique of the
deadening of perception of this kind of truth, and science
betrays us when it is willing to absorb lived truth all into
itself. here the criticism of all behaviorist psychology, all
manipulations of men, and all coercive utopianism comes to
rest. these techniques try to make the world other than it
is, legislate the grotesque out of it, inaugurate a "proper"
human condition. The psychologist kenneth clark, in his
recent presidential address to the American Psychological
Association, called for a new kind of chemical to deaden
man's aggressiveness and to make the world a less dangerous
place. the Watsons, the Skinners, the Pavlovians - all have
their formulas for smoothing thinkgs out. even freud -
enlightenment man that he was, after all - wanted to see a
saner world and seemed willing to absorb lived truth into
science if only it were possible. he once mused that in order
to really change thinkgs by therapy one would have to get at
the masses of men; and that the only way to do this would be
to mix the copper of suggestion into the pure gold of
psychoanalysis. in other words, to coerce, by transference, a
less evil world. but freud knew better, as he gradually came
to see that the evil in the world is not only in the insides
of people but on the outside, in nature - which is why he
became more realistic and pessimistic in his later work.
the problem with all the scientific manipulators is
that somehow they dont take life seriously enough; in thise
sense, all science is "bourgeois", an affair of bureaucrats.
I think that taking life seriously means something such as
this: that whatever man does on this planet has to be done in
the lived truth of the terror of creation, of the
grotesque, of the rumble of panic underneath everything.
Otherwise it is false. Whatever is achieved must be achieved
from within the subjective energies of creatures, without
deadening, with the full exercise of passion, of vision, of
pain, of fear, and of sorrow. How do we know - with
Rilke- that our part of the meaning of the universe might not
be a rhythm in sorrow? Manipulative, utopian science, by
deadening human sensitivity, would also deprive men of the
heroic in their urge to victory. And we know that in some
very important way this falsifies our struggle by emptying
us, by preventing us from incorporating the maximum of
experience. It means the end of the distinctively human- or
even, we must say, the distinctively organismic.
Love & Wetdreams, KiBot
>Dorothy - We are using that "line" of thinking building models in
>Catastrophe Theory (Christopher Zeeman) --- Zoe
>
>Dorothy Stulberg <DStulberg@msw-law.com> wrote: Joseph Campbell says live
>within the good and the bad. This is a "gray"
>existence. We are foolish to think it is all good or all bad. But
>living in it means doing our best-knowing there is good. That's my take
>on the world we live in. Likewise my belief is that there is "good" and
>"bad" in all of us whatever those words mean. D.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org
>[mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org] On Behalf Of kirsten
>schneide
>Sent: Friday, September 22, 2006 8:38 AM
>To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Risky"
>
>Dear Zoe, did you read how Donf keeps drooling about his (Chat group
>going):
>Laser-thinkg;-? It all ways cracks me up. Mon Cheri Donf, how many
>decades have you taken care of (by) now by 'doing' (Bohm)Dialog? And?
>Any Lasers in sight? In-sights?? Any "fresh" stuff? O Boy! At any
>'rate', Zoe, this 'all'
>brings up the great problem raised by the therapeutic revolution,
>namely:::
>" So What?".... Even with numerous (chat) groups of really liberated
>people, at their best, we can't imagine that the world will be any
>pleasanter or less tragic a place. It may even be worse in still unknown
>ways. As Tillich warned us, and Donl likes to make-up himselves a bit
>here&there with T, New Being, under the conditions and limitations of
>existence, will only bring into play new and sharper paradoxes, new
>tensions, and more painful disharmonies-a "more intense demonism."
>Reality is remorseless because gods do not walk upon the earth; and if
>men could become noble repositories of great gulfs of nonbeing, they
>would have even less peace than we oblivious and driven madmen have
>today. Besides, can any ideal of therapeutic revolutions touch the vast
>masses of this globe, the modern mechanical men in Russia, the
>near-billion sheeplike followers in China, the brutalized and ignorant
>populations of almost every continent? When one lives in the liberation
>atmosphere of Berkeley, California, or in the intoxications of small
>doses of unconstriction in a therapeutic group in one's home town, one
>is living in a hothouse atmosphere that shuts out the reality of the
>rest of the planet, the way things really are in this world. It is this
>therapeutic megalomania that must quickly been seen through if we are
>not to be perfect fools. The empirical facts of the world will not fade
>away because one has analyzed his Oedipus complex, as Freud so well
>knew, or because one can make love with tenderness, as so many now
>believe. Forget it. In this sense again it is Freud's somber pessimism,
>especially of his later writings such as "Civilization and Its
>Discontents", that keeps him so contemporary. Us human animals are
>doomed, doomed to live&die in an overwhelmingly tragic and demonic
>world. Enough said, it's good to have you on board .... of this ship of
>fools.
>
>
>
>
>Love & Nuts, Kirsten
>
>
>
> >From: Zoe Chu
> >Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> >To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> >Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Risky"
> >Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 10:28:58 -0700 (PDT)
> >
> >Kirsten - You seem to be a real nut --- just the kind of humans I
>cherish!
> >Glad M told me about this list.
> >
> > The brains of creative people appear to be more open to incoming
> >stimuli from the surrounding environment. Other people's brains might
> >shut out this same information through a process called "latent
> >inhibition" - defined as an animal's unconscious capacity to ignore
> >stimuli that experience has shown are irrelevant to its needs. Through
> >psychological testing, the researchers showed that creative individuals
>
> >are much more likely to have low levels of latent inhibition.
> >
> > "This means that creative individuals remain in contact with the
> >extra information constantly streaming in from the environment," says
> >Jordan Peterson. "The normal person classifies an object, and then
> >forgets about it, even though that object is much more complex and
> >interesting than he or she thinks. The creative person, by contrast, is
>
> >always open to new possibilities."
> >
> > Previously, scientists have associated failure to screen out stimuli
>
> >with psychosis. However, researchers hypothesized that it might also
> >contribute to original thinking, especially when combined with high IQ.
> >
> > The authors hypothesize that latent inhibition may be positive when
> >combined with high intelligence and good working memory - the capacity
> >to think about many things at once - but negative otherwise. Peterson
>states:
> >"If you are open to new information, new ideas, you better be able to
> >intelligently and carefully edit and choose. If you have 50 ideas, only
>
> >two or three are likely to be good. You have to be able to discriminate
>
> >or you'll get swamped."
> >
> > "Scientists have wondered for a long time why madness and creativity
>
> >seem linked," says Carson. "It appears likely that low levels of latent
>
> >inhibition and exceptional flexibility in thought might predispose to
> >mental illness under some conditions and to creative accomplishment
> >under others."
> >
> > For example, during the early stages of diseases such as
> >schizophrenia, which are often accompanied by feelings of deep insight,
>
> >mystical knowledge and religious experience, chemical changes take
> >place in which latent inhibition disappears.
> >
> > "We are very excited by the results of these studies," says
>Peterson.
> >"It appears that we have not only identified one of the biological
> >bases of creativity but have moved towards cracking an age-old mystery:
>
> >the relationship between genius, madness and the doors of perception."
> >
> > Zoe
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >kirsten schneide wrote:
> > Dear Zoe, Hans Eysenck proposed that extraversion was caused by
> >variability in cortical arousal; "introverts are characterized by
> >higher levels of activity than extraverts and so are chronically more
> >cortically aroused than extraverts". While it seems counterintuitive to
>
> >suppose that introverts are more aroused than extraverts, the putative
> >effect this has on behaviour is such that the introvert seeks lower
> >levels of stimulation. Conversely, the extravert seeks to heighten
> >their arousal to a more optimal level ~ ~ as predicted by the
> >Yerkes-Dodson Law) ~ ~ by increased activity, social engagement and
> >other stimulation-seeking behaviours.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Love & Drugsl, Kirsten
> >--------------------------
> >Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > >Hi Kristen -
> > >
> > > Funny. I currently read some of that stuff for class. What do you
> > >make of that? Do you see co-relations? Anyone?
> > >
> > > Warwick's claims that robots that can program themselves to avoid
> > >each other while operating in a group raises the issue of
> > >self-organization,
> >and
> > >as such might be the major impetus in following developments in this
> >area.
> > >In particular, the works of Fransisco Varela and Humberto Maturana,
> > >once
> >in
> > >the province of pure speculation now have become immediately relevant
> >with
> > >respect to synthetic intelligence. Cyborg-type systems not only are
> > >homeostatic (meaning that they are abe to preserve stable internal
> > >conditions in various environments) but adaptive, if they are to
>survive.
> > >Testing the claims of Varela and Maturana via synthetic devices is
> > >the larger and more serious concern in the discussion about Warwick
> > >and those involved in similar research. "Pulling the plug" on
> > >independent devices cannot be as simple as it appears, for if the
> > >device displays sufficient intelligence and assumes a diagnostic and
> > >prognostic stature, we may ultimately one day be forced to decide
> > >between what it could be telling us as counterintuitive (but correct)
> >and
> > >our impulse to disconnect because of our limited and "intuitive"
> > >perceptions. Warwick's robots seemed to have exhibited behavior not
> > >anticipated by the research, one such robot "committing suicide"
> > >because
> >it
> > >could not cope with its environment. In a more complex setting, it
> > >may be asked whether a "natural selection" may be possible, neural
> > >networks
> >being
> > >the major operative.
> > >
> > > Thinking about the implications of Warwick's research is not
> > >confined to device implantation or automatons. Researching websites
>on the U.S.
> > >Department of Defense's (DoD) development of a simulated
> > >international battlespace. It is no secret that the DoD foresees the
> > >day when not only all military systems are interoperable, but can be
> > >coordinated globally
> >in
> > >a real-time war. Ultimately, simulations not only are to be used for
> > >assessing alternative outcomes in wargaming settings but also are to
> > >be used as diagnostic "tools" interactive with a real time
> > >battlefield situation. If this happens, we must consider
> > >self-organization in these synthetic systems operating in critical
> > >environments. That is, if allowed to operate with minimal or no human
>
> > >intervention, what of the character
> >of
> > >the system, itself and its evolution? Hence, Warwick should be a
> > >starting point for a more serious discussion than the popular media
> > >seems to be capable of maintaining. In the worst case scenario,
> > >Warwick is deemed a proponent of science fiction, but it may be said
> >that
> > >it is great science fiction, as it is based upon the plausible,
> > >rather
> >than
> > >the impossible. In the best case scenario, Warwick, indeed has given
> > >us ample notice to humanity to concern itself with the choice of
> > >thinking about ourselves and our place in the universe or abnegate in
>
> > >favor of another consciousness. A return to Aristotle and Plato is in
>order.
> > >
> > > -- Zoe
> > >
> > >kirsten schneide wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >Dear habituated Susbcribers
> > >
> > >The study of group polarization began with an unpublished 1961
> > >Master's thesis by MIT student James Stoner, who observed the
> > >so-called "risky shift", meaning that a group's decisions are riskier
>
> > >than the average of the individual decisions of members before the
> > >group met. The discovery
> >of
> > >the risky shift was considered surprising and counterintuitive,
> >especially
> > >since earlier work in the 1920s and 1930s by Allport and other
> >researchers
> > >suggested that individuals made more extreme decisions than did
> > >groups, leading to the expectation that groups would make decisions
> > >that would conform to the average risk level of its members. The
> > >seemingly counterintuitive findings of Stoner led to a flurry of
> > >research around
> >the
> > >risky shift, which was originally thought to be a special case
> > >exception
> >to
> > >the standard decision-making practice. By the late 1960s, however, it
>
> > >had become clear that the risky shift was just one type of many
> > >attitudes
> >that
> > >became more extreme in groups, leading Moscovici and Zavalloni to
> > >term
> >the
> > >overall phenomenon "group polarization".
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >Love & Shiftstick, Kirsten
> > >--------------------------
> > >Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld
> > >
> > > >From: "kirsten schneide"
> > > >Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> > > >To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> > > >Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Welt*Bild
> > > >Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2006 18:15:38 -0400
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >Oh William, I like your
> > > >
> > > >Attitude/s
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >Love & Dress, Kirsten
> > > >
> > > >PS:
> > > >
> > > >There is a pervasive sense of rootlessness and disorientation that
> >causes
> > > >many people to avoid contemplating their place in the universe and
> > > >to
> > >focus
> > > >instead on the trivial concerns of consumerism.
> > > >
> > > >The lack of social consensus on cosmology in the modern world has
> >caused
> > > >many people to close off their thinking to large issues and long
> > > >time scales, so that small matters dominate their consciousness.
> > > >
> > > >In most traditional cultures, people's sense of identity and codes
> > > >of behavior are grounded in a cosmology that provides a picture of
> > > >who
> >they
> > > >are, where they come from, and what their personal relationship to
> > > >the larger world should be. For more than 300 years, however,
> > > >scientific advances have tended to undermine traditional
> > > >cosmologies while
> >offering
> > >an
> > > >image of the cosmos bereft of spiritual or mythic dimensions.
> > > >
> > > >Are you looking for an image of the cosmos consistent with what
> > >scientists
> > > >understand about the universe today. That symbol, known to the
> > > >ancient Greeks as a "uroboros," is the snake swallowing its tail.
> > > >This: symbol
> >:
> > > >represents the universe as a continuity of vastly different size
> >scales,
> > > >with the swallowing of the tail representing the hoped-for
> > > >unification
> >of
> > > >theories governing the largest and smallest scales.
> > > >
> > > >The size scales in the known universe encompass about 60 orders of
> > > >magnitude, from the vastness of the cosmic horizon to the subatomic
> > >Planck
> > > >scale, the smallest size allowed by relativity and quantum physics.
>
> > > >Yet people asked to visualize "the universe" tend to think of
> > > >endless space
> > >and
> > > >uncountable stars and galaxies, while the human scale shrinks into
> > > >insignificance.
> > > >
> > > >Gute Nacht!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >> >I would love to know what anyone here thinks about the Deikmans'
>
> > > >> >piece.
> > > >>
> > > >>Not much; as much nonsense as ever
> > > >>
> > > >>William
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>_______________________________________________
> > > >>info:
> > > >>www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> > > >>
> > > >>post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
> > > >>
> > > >>dialogue facilitator:
> > > >>facilitator@david-bohm.net
> > > >>
> > > >>Administrator of the mailing list:
> > > >>admin@david-bohm.net
> > > >>
> > > >>_______________________________________________
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >_________________________________________________________________
> > > >Add fun gadgets and colorful themes to express yourself on Windows
> > > >Live Spaces
> > >
> > >http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwsp0070000001msn/direct/01/?href=htt
> > >p://www.get.live.com/spaces/features
> > > >
> > > >_______________________________________________
> > > >info:
> > > >www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> > > >
> > > >post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
> > > >
> > > >dialogue facilitator:
> > > >facilitator@david-bohm.net
> > > >
> > > >Administrator of the mailing list:
> > > >admin@david-bohm.net
> > > >
> > > >_______________________________________________
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >_________________________________________________________________
> > >Express yourself - download free Windows Live Messenger themes!
> > >http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwme0020000001msn/direct/01/?href=htt
> > >p://imagine-msn.com/themes/vibe/default.aspx?locale=en-us&source=hmta
> > >gline
> > >
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >info:
> > >www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> > >
> > >post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
> > >
> > >dialogue facilitator:
> > >facilitator@david-bohm.net
> > >
> > >Administrator of the mailing list:
> > >admin@david-bohm.net
> > >
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >---------------------------------
> > >Stay in the know. Pulse on the new Yahoo.com. Check it out.
> >
> >
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >info:
> > >www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> > >
> > >post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
> > >
> > >dialogue facilitator:
> > >facilitator@david-bohm.net
> > >
> > >Administrator of the mailing list:
> > >admin@david-bohm.net
> > >
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >
> > >
> >
> >_________________________________________________________________
> >Express yourself - download free Windows Live Messenger themes!
> >http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwme0020000001msn/direct/01/?href=http:
> >//imagine-msn.com/themes/vibe/default.aspx?locale=en-us&source=hmtaglin
> >e
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >info:
> >www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> >
> >post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
> >
> >dialogue facilitator:
> >facilitator@david-bohm.net
> >
> >Administrator of the mailing list:
> >admin@david-bohm.net
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >---------------------------------
> >Get your email and more, right on the new Yahoo.com
>
>
> >_______________________________________________
> >info:
> >www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> >
> >post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
> >
> >dialogue facilitator:
> >facilitator@david-bohm.net
> >
> >Administrator of the mailing list:
> >admin@david-bohm.net
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >
> >
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Share your special moments by uploading 500 photos per month to Windows
>Live Spaces
>http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwsp0070000001msn/direct/01/?href=http:/
>/www.get.live.com/spaces/features
>
>_______________________________________________
>info:
>www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>
>dialogue facilitator:
>facilitator@david-bohm.net
>
>Administrator of the mailing list:
>admin@david-bohm.net
>
>_______________________________________________
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>info:
>www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>
>dialogue facilitator:
>facilitator@david-bohm.net
>
>Administrator of the mailing list:
>admin@david-bohm.net
>
>_______________________________________________
>
>
>
>
>
>---------------------------------
>How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger’s low PC-to-Phone call
>rates.
>_______________________________________________
>info:
>www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>
>dialogue facilitator:
>facilitator@david-bohm.net
>
>Administrator of the mailing list:
>admin@david-bohm.net
>
>_______________________________________________
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
All-in-one security and maintenance for your PC. Get a free 90-day trial!
http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwlo0050000001msn/direct/01/?href=http://www.windowsonecare.com/?sc_cid=msn_hotmail
From donfactor at donfactor.demon.co.uk Sat Sep 23 00:55:53 2006
From: donfactor at donfactor.demon.co.uk (Don Factor)
Date: Sun Sep 24 01:49:44 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Risky"
In-Reply-To: <BAY107-F32DD05AFDDBBDDE53768C5A8210@phx.gbl>
References: <BAY107-F32DD05AFDDBBDDE53768C5A8210@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <F8532FE1-D62D-4519-96C5-69FB7A06C0F4@donfactor.demon.co.uk>
On 22 Sep 2006, at 14:37, kirsten schneide wrote:
> Reality is remorseless because gods do not walk upon the earth; and
> if men could become noble repositories of great gulfs of nonbeing,
> they would have even less peace than we oblivious and driven madmen
> have today. Besides, can any ideal of therapeutic revolutions touch
> the vast masses of this globe, the modern mechanical men in Russia,
> the near-billion sheeplike followers in China, the brutalized and
> ignorant populations of almost every continent?
I know you are fond of quoting Ernest Becker's pessimism, and
actually doing the sort of stuff he wrote about - cannibalising and
plagiarising his texts, for your own purposes. But Becker for some
reason had a very rough time of it, even after writing his
masterpiece, The Denial of Death, he couldn't hold a job. He died of
cancer at a very young age. Pity. But this was one man's experience.
I figure we have a choice. The laws of human nature are not fixed nor
are they final. And if there is a limit, then it is yet to be
discovered.
Amongst the animals we are unique in that we can imagine and we can
communicate abstract concepts. We can, or some of us can, experience
love without the necessity of it leading to reproduction or orgasms
or power. Simple things like this hold out possibilities for
something beyond what you might call our biological necessities.
You choose to take the path of pessimism which reveals your own fear
of death and meaningless. I am happier with optimism seasoned lightly
with a bit of scepticism. Remember there was a time when humans had
no idea how to cook food and that was that. They knew nothing of
domesticating animals and were prey to the bigger and faster
predators. There was also a time when a consensus of the experts
agreed on ideas such as nobody can travel faster than a mile a
minute and that space travel was a physical impossibility. They also
agreed that, before Einstein came along that physics was finished.
pretty well all wrapped up. Nobody should be advised to become a
physicist because there was nothing left to learn. And there was also
a time when people with psychological disorders ended up in mad
houses that served mainly as places where the bourgeoisie could
entertain themselves laughing at the loonies.. My point here is that
to presuppose the sort of limitation that you seem to take as given
insures that such limitation will prove to be what you think it is,
at least for you
So, the only positive idea that I can draw from these pessimistic
posts of yours is that you want us to help you get past your own fear
of death. I read a cry that says, "Convince me. Show me that I am
wrong." But nobody can do that for you. There are some here, I know,
who have overcome there fear of death, and who know that their
meaning does not die with them. So iif you are frightened, maybe you
ought to gather up your courage and ask for help.
don
From kirstenschneide at hotmail.com Sat Sep 23 02:40:30 2006
From: kirstenschneide at hotmail.com (kirsten schneide)
Date: Sun Sep 24 03:34:23 2006
Subject: AW: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Risky"
In-Reply-To: <0MKwtQ-1GQrY10qHY-0003Ph@mrelayeu.kundenserver.de>
Message-ID: <BAY107-F18BC24F6ADC57E6A5E9849A8260@phx.gbl>
William, Dear
You never fail to blow
Me
Mind ;-!
[Didont know you 're part
Of this posse] :::
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/images/B0006IUDB2/ref=dp_image_0/104-9701710-7463917?ie=UTF8&n=130&s=dvd
Ok, time for seating for a real
Flick
Salute
Love & (Hit)single, Kbot
--------------------------
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld
WWWilliam: We can not escape being part of the
>world. If we continue doing the same thing then the world will continue to
>be the same, if we do something else then the world will be something else.
>The state of the world depends on us; we are the wwworld.
_________________________________________________________________
Try the new Live Search today!
http://imagine-windowslive.com/minisites/searchlaunch/?locale=en-us&FORM=WLMTAG
From Matti.Vaittinen at uta.fi Sat Sep 23 12:58:56 2006
From: Matti.Vaittinen at uta.fi (Matti Vaittinen)
Date: Sun Sep 24 13:53:02 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Risky"
In-Reply-To: <BAY107-F32DD05AFDDBBDDE53768C5A8210@phx.gbl>
References: <BAY107-F32DD05AFDDBBDDE53768C5A8210@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <20060923135856.zd6h3dltok08s4og@imp1.uta.fi>
Peter, you forgot to mention this ;-) ::
http://www.thingk.net/TT/
as a "tool" ...
Best,
matti
Lainaus kirsten schneide <kirstenschneide@hotmail.com>:
> Dear Zoe, did you read how Donf keeps drooling about his (Chat group
> going): Laser-thinkg;-? It all ways cracks me up. Mon Cheri Donf,
> how many decades have you taken care of (by) now by 'doing'
> (Bohm)Dialog? And? Any Lasers in sight? In-sights?? Any "fresh"
> stuff? O Boy! At any 'rate', Zoe, this 'all' brings up the great
> problem raised by the therapeutic revolution, namely::: " So
> What?".... Even with numerous (chat) groups of really liberated
> people, at their best, we can't imagine that the world will be any
> pleasanter or less tragic a place. It may even be worse in still
> unknown ways. As Tillich warned us, and Donl likes to make-up
> himselves a bit here&there with T, New Being, under the conditions
> and limitations of existence, will only bring into play new and
> sharper paradoxes, new tensions, and more painful disharmonies?a
> "more intense demonism." Reality is remorseless because gods do not
> walk upon the earth; and if men could become noble repositories of
> great gulfs of nonbeing,
> they would have even less peace than we oblivious and driven madmen
> have today. Besides, can any ideal of therapeutic revolutions touch the
> vast masses of this globe, the modern mechanical men in Russia, the
> near-billion sheeplike followers in China, the brutalized and ignorant
> populations of almost every continent? When one lives in the liberation
> atmosphere of Berkeley, California, or in the intoxications of small
> doses of unconstriction in a therapeutic group in one's home town, one
> is living in a hothouse atmosphere that shuts out the reality of the
> rest of the planet, the way things really are in this world. It is this
> therapeutic megalomania that must quickly been seen through if we are
> not to be perfect fools. The empirical facts of the world will not fade
> away because one has analyzed his Oedipus complex, as Freud so well
> knew, or because one can make love with tenderness, as so many now
> believe. Forget it. In this sense again it is Freud's somber pessimism,
> especially of his later writings such as "Civilization and Its
> Discontents", that keeps him so contemporary. Us human animals are
> doomed, doomed to live&die in an overwhelmingly tragic and demonic
> world. Enough said, it's good to have you on board .... of this ship of
> fools.
>
>
>
>
> Love & Nuts, Kirsten
>
>
>
>> From: Zoe Chu <zoechuzero@yahoo.com>
>> Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Risky"
>> Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 10:28:58 -0700 (PDT)
>>
>> Kirsten - You seem to be a real nut --- just the kind of humans I
>> cherish! Glad M told me about this list.
>>
>> The brains of creative people appear to be more open to incoming
>> stimuli from the surrounding environment. Other people's brains
>> might shut out this same information through a process called
>> "latent inhibition" - defined as an animal's unconscious capacity
>> to ignore stimuli that experience has shown are irrelevant to its
>> needs. Through psychological testing, the researchers showed that
>> creative individuals are much more likely to have low levels of
>> latent inhibition.
>>
>> "This means that creative individuals remain in contact with the
>> extra information constantly streaming in from the environment,"
>> says Jordan Peterson. "The normal person classifies an object, and
>> then forgets about it, even though that object is much more complex
>> and interesting than he or she thinks. The creative person, by
>> contrast, is always open to new possibilities."
>>
>> Previously, scientists have associated failure to screen out
>> stimuli with psychosis. However, researchers hypothesized that it
>> might also contribute to original thinking, especially when
>> combined with high IQ.
>>
>> The authors hypothesize that latent inhibition may be positive
>> when combined with high intelligence and good working memory - the
>> capacity to think about many things at once - but negative
>> otherwise. Peterson states: "If you are open to new information,
>> new ideas, you better be able to intelligently and carefully edit
>> and choose. If you have 50 ideas, only two or three are likely to
>> be good. You have to be able to discriminate or you'll get swamped."
>>
>> "Scientists have wondered for a long time why madness and
>> creativity seem linked," says Carson. "It appears likely that low
>> levels of latent inhibition and exceptional flexibility in thought
>> might predispose to mental illness under some conditions and to
>> creative accomplishment under others."
>>
>> For example, during the early stages of diseases such as
>> schizophrenia, which are often accompanied by feelings of deep
>> insight, mystical knowledge and religious experience, chemical
>> changes take place in which latent inhibition disappears.
>>
>> "We are very excited by the results of these studies," says
>> Peterson. "It appears that we have not only identified one of the
>> biological bases of creativity but have moved towards cracking an
>> age-old mystery: the relationship between genius, madness and the
>> doors of perception."
>>
>> Zoe
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> kirsten schneide <kirstenschneide@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> Dear Zoe, Hans Eysenck proposed that extraversion was caused by variability
>> in cortical arousal; "introverts are characterized by higher levels of
>> activity than extraverts and so are chronically more cortically aroused than
>> extraverts". While it seems counterintuitive to suppose that introverts are
>> more aroused than extraverts, the putative effect this has on behaviour is
>> such that the introvert seeks lower levels of stimulation. Conversely, the
>> extravert seeks to heighten their arousal to a more optimal level ~ ~ as
>> predicted by the Yerkes-Dodson Law) ~ ~ by increased activity, social
>> engagement and other stimulation-seeking behaviours.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Love & Drugsl, Kirsten
>> --------------------------
>> Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Hi Kristen -
>>>
>>> Funny. I currently read some of that stuff for class. What do you make
>>> of that? Do you see co-relations? Anyone?
>>>
>>> Warwick's claims that robots that can program themselves to avoid each
>>> other while operating in a group raises the issue of self-organization, and
>>> as such might be the major impetus in following developments in this area.
>>> In particular, the works of Fransisco Varela and Humberto Maturana, once in
>>> the province of pure speculation now have become immediately relevant with
>>> respect to synthetic intelligence. Cyborg-type systems not only are
>>> homeostatic (meaning that they are abe to preserve stable internal
>>> conditions in various environments) but adaptive, if they are to survive.
>>> Testing the claims of Varela and Maturana via synthetic devices is the
>>> larger and more serious concern in the discussion about Warwick and those
>>> involved in similar research. "Pulling the plug" on independent devices
>>> cannot be as simple as it appears, for if the device displays sufficient
>>> intelligence and assumes a diagnostic and prognostic stature, we may
>>> ultimately one day be forced to decide
>>> between what it could be telling us as counterintuitive (but correct) and
>>> our impulse to disconnect because of our limited and "intuitive"
>>> perceptions. Warwick's robots seemed to have exhibited behavior not
>>> anticipated by the research, one such robot "committing suicide" because it
>>> could not cope with its environment. In a more complex setting, it may be
>>> asked whether a "natural selection" may be possible, neural networks being
>>> the major operative.
>>>
>>> Thinking about the implications of Warwick's research is not confined to
>>> device implantation or automatons. Researching websites on the U.S.
>>> Department of Defense's (DoD) development of a simulated international
>>> battlespace. It is no secret that the DoD foresees the day when not only
>>> all military systems are interoperable, but can be coordinated globally in
>>> a real-time war. Ultimately, simulations not only are to be used for
>>> assessing alternative outcomes in wargaming settings but also are to be
>>> used as diagnostic "tools" interactive with a real time battlefield
>>> situation. If this happens, we must consider self-organization in these
>>> synthetic systems operating in critical environments. That is, if allowed
>>> to operate with minimal or no human intervention, what of the character of
>>> the system, itself and its evolution? Hence, Warwick should be a starting
>>> point for a more serious discussion than the popular media seems to be
>>> capable of maintaining. In the worst case scenario,
>>> Warwick is deemed a proponent of science fiction, but it may be said that
>>> it is great science fiction, as it is based upon the plausible, rather than
>>> the impossible. In the best case scenario, Warwick, indeed has given us
>>> ample notice to humanity to concern itself with the choice of thinking
>>> about ourselves and our place in the universe or abnegate in favor of
>>> another consciousness. A return to Aristotle and Plato is in order.
>>>
>>> -- Zoe
>>>
>>> kirsten schneide wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Dear habituated Susbcribers
>>>
>>> The study of group polarization began with an unpublished 1961 Master?s
>>> thesis by MIT student James Stoner, who observed the so-called "risky
>>> shift", meaning that a group?s decisions are riskier than the average of
>>> the individual decisions of members before the group met. The discovery of
>>> the risky shift was considered surprising and counterintuitive, especially
>>> since earlier work in the 1920s and 1930s by Allport and other researchers
>>> suggested that individuals made more extreme decisions than did groups,
>>> leading to the expectation that groups would make decisions that would
>>> conform to the average risk level of its members. The seemingly
>>> counterintuitive findings of Stoner led to a flurry of research around the
>>> risky shift, which was originally thought to be a special case exception to
>>> the standard decision-making practice. By the late 1960s, however, it had
>>> become clear that the risky shift was just one type of many attitudes that
>>> became more extreme in groups, leading Moscovici and Zavalloni to term the
>>> overall phenomenon "group polarization".
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Love & Shiftstick, Kirsten
>>> --------------------------
>>> Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld
>>>
>>> >From: "kirsten schneide"
>>> >Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>> >To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>> >Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Welt*Bild
>>> >Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2006 18:15:38 -0400
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >Oh William, I like your
>>> >
>>> >Attitude/s
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >Love & Dress, Kirsten
>>> >
>>> >PS:
>>> >
>>> >There is a pervasive sense of rootlessness and disorientation that causes
>>> >many people to avoid contemplating their place in the universe and to
>>> focus
>>> >instead on the trivial concerns of consumerism.
>>> >
>>> >The lack of social consensus on cosmology in the modern world has caused
>>> >many people to close off their thinking to large issues and long time
>>> >scales, so that small matters dominate their consciousness.
>>> >
>>> >In most traditional cultures, people's sense of identity and codes of
>>> >behavior are grounded in a cosmology that provides a picture of who they
>>> >are, where they come from, and what their personal relationship to the
>>> >larger world should be. For more than 300 years, however, scientific
>>> >advances have tended to undermine traditional cosmologies while offering
>>> an
>>> >image of the cosmos bereft of spiritual or mythic dimensions.
>>> >
>>> >Are you looking for an image of the cosmos consistent with what
>>> scientists
>>> >understand about the universe today. That symbol, known to the ancient
>>> >Greeks as a "uroboros," is the snake swallowing its tail. This: symbol :
>>> >represents the universe as a continuity of vastly different size scales,
>>> >with the swallowing of the tail representing the hoped-for unification of
>>> >theories governing the largest and smallest scales.
>>> >
>>> >The size scales in the known universe encompass about 60 orders of
>>> >magnitude, from the vastness of the cosmic horizon to the subatomic
>>> Planck
>>> >scale, the smallest size allowed by relativity and quantum physics. Yet
>>> >people asked to visualize "the universe" tend to think of endless space
>>> and
>>> >uncountable stars and galaxies, while the human scale shrinks into
>>> >insignificance.
>>> >
>>> >Gute Nacht!
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >> >I would love to know what anyone here thinks
>>> >> >about the Deikmans' piece.
>>> >>
>>> >>Not much; as much nonsense as ever
>>> >>
>>> >>William
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>_______________________________________________
>>> >>info:
>>> >>www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>>> >>
>>> >>post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>>> >>
>>> >>dialogue facilitator:
>>> >>facilitator@david-bohm.net
>>> >>
>>> >>Administrator of the mailing list:
>>> >>admin@david-bohm.net
>>> >>
>>> >>_______________________________________________
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> >_________________________________________________________________
>>> >Add fun gadgets and colorful themes to express yourself on Windows Live
>>> >Spaces
>>>
>>> http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwsp0070000001msn/direct/01/?href=http://www.get.live.com/spaces/features
>>> >
>>> >_______________________________________________
>>> >info:
>>> >www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>>> >
>>> >post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>>> >
>>> >dialogue facilitator:
>>> >facilitator@david-bohm.net
>>> >
>>> >Administrator of the mailing list:
>>> >admin@david-bohm.net
>>> >
>>> >_______________________________________________
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>> Express yourself - download free Windows Live Messenger themes!
>>> http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwme0020000001msn/direct/01/?href=http://imagine-msn.com/themes/vibe/default.aspx?locale=en-us&source=hmtagline
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> info:
>>> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>>>
>>> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>>>
>>> dialogue facilitator:
>>> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>>>
>>> Administrator of the mailing list:
>>> admin@david-bohm.net
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------
>>> Stay in the know. Pulse on the new Yahoo.com. Check it out.
>>
>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> info:
>>> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>>>
>>> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>>>
>>> dialogue facilitator:
>>> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>>>
>>> Administrator of the mailing list:
>>> admin@david-bohm.net
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Express yourself - download free Windows Live Messenger themes!
>> http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwme0020000001msn/direct/01/?href=http://imagine-msn.com/themes/vibe/default.aspx?locale=en-us&source=hmtagline
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> info:
>> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>>
>> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>>
>> dialogue facilitator:
>> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>>
>> Administrator of the mailing list:
>> admin@david-bohm.net
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------
>> Get your email and more, right on the new Yahoo.com
>
>
>> _______________________________________________
>> info:
>> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>>
>> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>>
>> dialogue facilitator:
>> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>>
>> Administrator of the mailing list:
>> admin@david-bohm.net
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Share your special moments by uploading 500 photos per month to Windows
> Live Spaces
> http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwsp0070000001msn/direct/01/?href=http://www.get.live.com/spaces/features
>
> _______________________________________________
> info:
> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>
> dialogue facilitator:
> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>
> Administrator of the mailing list:
> admin@david-bohm.net
>
> _______________________________________________
From Matti.Vaittinen at uta.fi Sat Sep 23 13:15:10 2006
From: Matti.Vaittinen at uta.fi (Matti Vaittinen)
Date: Sun Sep 24 14:09:05 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Risky", correction
In-Reply-To: <20060923135856.zd6h3dltok08s4og@imp1.uta.fi>
References: <BAY107-F32DD05AFDDBBDDE53768C5A8210@phx.gbl>
<20060923135856.zd6h3dltok08s4og@imp1.uta.fi>
Message-ID: <20060923141510.iqtg0p9u4oplw80w@imp1.uta.fi>
Oops, I meant this (if it works)::
http://www.thinkg.net/TT/
> Peter, you forgot to mention this ;-) ::
>
> http://www.thingk.net/TT/
>
>
> as a "tool" ...
>
>
> Best,
>
>
>
> matti
>
>
>
> Lainaus kirsten schneide <kirstenschneide@hotmail.com>:
>
>> Dear Zoe, did you read how Donf keeps drooling about his (Chat
>> group going): Laser-thinkg;-? It all ways cracks me up. Mon Cheri
>> Donf, how many decades have you taken care of (by) now by
>> 'doing' (Bohm)Dialog? And? Any Lasers in sight? In-sights?? Any
>> "fresh" stuff? O Boy! At any 'rate', Zoe, this 'all' brings up
>> the great problem raised by the therapeutic revolution,
>> namely::: " So What?".... Even with numerous (chat) groups of
>> really liberated people, at their best, we can't imagine that
>> the world will be any pleasanter or less tragic a place. It may
>> even be worse in still unknown ways. As Tillich warned us, and
>> Donl likes to make-up himselves a bit here&there with T, New
>> Being, under the conditions and limitations of existence, will
>> only bring into play new and sharper paradoxes, new tensions,
>> and more painful disharmonies?a "more intense demonism." Reality
>> is remorseless because gods do not walk upon the earth; and if
>> men could become noble repositorie
>> s of great gulfs of nonbeing,
>> they would have even less peace than we oblivious and driven madmen
>> have today. Besides, can any ideal of therapeutic revolutions touch the
>> vast masses of this globe, the modern mechanical men in Russia, the
>> near-billion sheeplike followers in China, the brutalized and ignorant
>> populations of almost every continent? When one lives in the liberation
>> atmosphere of Berkeley, California, or in the intoxications of small
>> doses of unconstriction in a therapeutic group in one's home town, one
>> is living in a hothouse atmosphere that shuts out the reality of the
>> rest of the planet, the way things really are in this world. It is this
>> therapeutic megalomania that must quickly been seen through if we are
>> not to be perfect fools. The empirical facts of the world will not fade
>> away because one has analyzed his Oedipus complex, as Freud so well
>> knew, or because one can make love with tenderness, as so many now
>> believe. Forget it. In this sense again it is Freud's somber pessimism,
>> especially of his later writings such as "Civilization and Its
>> Discontents", that keeps him so contemporary. Us human animals are
>> doomed, doomed to live&die in an overwhelmingly tragic and demonic
>> world. Enough said, it's good to have you on board .... of this ship of
>> fools.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Love & Nuts, Kirsten
>>
>>
>>
>>> From: Zoe Chu <zoechuzero@yahoo.com>
>>> Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Risky"
>>> Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 10:28:58 -0700 (PDT)
>>>
>>> Kirsten - You seem to be a real nut --- just the kind of humans I
>>> cherish! Glad M told me about this list.
>>>
>>> The brains of creative people appear to be more open to incoming
>>> stimuli from the surrounding environment. Other people's brains
>>> might shut out this same information through a process called
>>> "latent inhibition" - defined as an animal's unconscious capacity
>>> to ignore stimuli that experience has shown are irrelevant to
>>> its needs. Through psychological testing, the researchers
>>> showed that creative individuals are much more likely to have
>>> low levels of latent inhibition.
>>>
>>> "This means that creative individuals remain in contact with the
>>> extra information constantly streaming in from the environment,"
>>> says Jordan Peterson. "The normal person classifies an object,
>>> and then forgets about it, even though that object is much more
>>> complex and interesting than he or she thinks. The creative
>>> person, by contrast, is always open to new possibilities."
>>>
>>> Previously, scientists have associated failure to screen out
>>> stimuli with psychosis. However, researchers hypothesized that it
>>> might also contribute to original thinking, especially when
>>> combined with high IQ.
>>>
>>> The authors hypothesize that latent inhibition may be positive
>>> when combined with high intelligence and good working memory - the
>>> capacity to think about many things at once - but negative
>>> otherwise. Peterson states: "If you are open to new information,
>>> new ideas, you better be able to intelligently and carefully edit
>>> and choose. If you have 50 ideas, only two or three are likely
>>> to be good. You have to be able to discriminate or you'll get
>>> swamped."
>>>
>>> "Scientists have wondered for a long time why madness and
>>> creativity seem linked," says Carson. "It appears likely that low
>>> levels of latent inhibition and exceptional flexibility in
>>> thought might predispose to mental illness under some conditions
>>> and to creative accomplishment under others."
>>>
>>> For example, during the early stages of diseases such as
>>> schizophrenia, which are often accompanied by feelings of deep
>>> insight, mystical knowledge and religious experience, chemical
>>> changes take place in which latent inhibition disappears.
>>>
>>> "We are very excited by the results of these studies," says
>>> Peterson. "It appears that we have not only identified one of the
>>> biological bases of creativity but have moved towards cracking
>>> an age-old mystery: the relationship between genius, madness
>>> and the doors of perception."
>>>
>>> Zoe
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> kirsten schneide <kirstenschneide@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> Dear Zoe, Hans Eysenck proposed that extraversion was caused by variability
>>> in cortical arousal; "introverts are characterized by higher levels of
>>> activity than extraverts and so are chronically more cortically
>>> aroused than
>>> extraverts". While it seems counterintuitive to suppose that introverts are
>>> more aroused than extraverts, the putative effect this has on behaviour is
>>> such that the introvert seeks lower levels of stimulation. Conversely, the
>>> extravert seeks to heighten their arousal to a more optimal level ~ ~ as
>>> predicted by the Yerkes-Dodson Law) ~ ~ by increased activity, social
>>> engagement and other stimulation-seeking behaviours.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Love & Drugsl, Kirsten
>>> --------------------------
>>> Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Hi Kristen -
>>>>
>>>> Funny. I currently read some of that stuff for class. What do you make
>>>> of that? Do you see co-relations? Anyone?
>>>>
>>>> Warwick's claims that robots that can program themselves to avoid each
>>>> other while operating in a group raises the issue of
>>>> self-organization, and
>>>> as such might be the major impetus in following developments in this area.
>>>> In particular, the works of Fransisco Varela and Humberto
>>>> Maturana, once in
>>>> the province of pure speculation now have become immediately relevant with
>>>> respect to synthetic intelligence. Cyborg-type systems not only are
>>>> homeostatic (meaning that they are abe to preserve stable internal
>>>> conditions in various environments) but adaptive, if they are to survive.
>>>> Testing the claims of Varela and Maturana via synthetic devices is the
>>>> larger and more serious concern in the discussion about Warwick and those
>>>> involved in similar research. "Pulling the plug" on independent devices
>>>> cannot be as simple as it appears, for if the device displays sufficient
>>>> intelligence and assumes a diagnostic and prognostic stature, we may
>>>> ultimately one day be forced to decide
>>>> between what it could be telling us as counterintuitive (but correct) and
>>>> our impulse to disconnect because of our limited and "intuitive"
>>>> perceptions. Warwick's robots seemed to have exhibited behavior not
>>>> anticipated by the research, one such robot "committing suicide"
>>>> because it
>>>> could not cope with its environment. In a more complex setting, it may be
>>>> asked whether a "natural selection" may be possible, neural networks being
>>>> the major operative.
>>>>
>>>> Thinking about the implications of Warwick's research is not confined to
>>>> device implantation or automatons. Researching websites on the U.S.
>>>> Department of Defense's (DoD) development of a simulated international
>>>> battlespace. It is no secret that the DoD foresees the day when not only
>>>> all military systems are interoperable, but can be coordinated globally in
>>>> a real-time war. Ultimately, simulations not only are to be used for
>>>> assessing alternative outcomes in wargaming settings but also are to be
>>>> used as diagnostic "tools" interactive with a real time battlefield
>>>> situation. If this happens, we must consider self-organization in these
>>>> synthetic systems operating in critical environments. That is, if allowed
>>>> to operate with minimal or no human intervention, what of the character of
>>>> the system, itself and its evolution? Hence, Warwick should be a starting
>>>> point for a more serious discussion than the popular media seems to be
>>>> capable of maintaining. In the worst case scenario,
>>>> Warwick is deemed a proponent of science fiction, but it may be said that
>>>> it is great science fiction, as it is based upon the plausible,
>>>> rather than
>>>> the impossible. In the best case scenario, Warwick, indeed has given us
>>>> ample notice to humanity to concern itself with the choice of thinking
>>>> about ourselves and our place in the universe or abnegate in favor of
>>>> another consciousness. A return to Aristotle and Plato is in order.
>>>>
>>>> -- Zoe
>>>>
>>>> kirsten schneide wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dear habituated Susbcribers
>>>>
>>>> The study of group polarization began with an unpublished 1961 Master?s
>>>> thesis by MIT student James Stoner, who observed the so-called "risky
>>>> shift", meaning that a group?s decisions are riskier than the average of
>>>> the individual decisions of members before the group met. The discovery of
>>>> the risky shift was considered surprising and counterintuitive, especially
>>>> since earlier work in the 1920s and 1930s by Allport and other researchers
>>>> suggested that individuals made more extreme decisions than did groups,
>>>> leading to the expectation that groups would make decisions that would
>>>> conform to the average risk level of its members. The seemingly
>>>> counterintuitive findings of Stoner led to a flurry of research around the
>>>> risky shift, which was originally thought to be a special case
>>>> exception to
>>>> the standard decision-making practice. By the late 1960s, however, it had
>>>> become clear that the risky shift was just one type of many attitudes that
>>>> became more extreme in groups, leading Moscovici and Zavalloni to term the
>>>> overall phenomenon "group polarization".
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Love & Shiftstick, Kirsten
>>>> --------------------------
>>>> Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld
>>>>
>>>>> From: "kirsten schneide"
>>>>> Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>>>> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>>>> Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Welt*Bild
>>>>> Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2006 18:15:38 -0400
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Oh William, I like your
>>>>>
>>>>> Attitude/s
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Love & Dress, Kirsten
>>>>>
>>>>> PS:
>>>>>
>>>>> There is a pervasive sense of rootlessness and disorientation that causes
>>>>> many people to avoid contemplating their place in the universe and to
>>>> focus
>>>>> instead on the trivial concerns of consumerism.
>>>>>
>>>>> The lack of social consensus on cosmology in the modern world has caused
>>>>> many people to close off their thinking to large issues and long time
>>>>> scales, so that small matters dominate their consciousness.
>>>>>
>>>>> In most traditional cultures, people's sense of identity and codes of
>>>>> behavior are grounded in a cosmology that provides a picture of who they
>>>>> are, where they come from, and what their personal relationship to the
>>>>> larger world should be. For more than 300 years, however, scientific
>>>>> advances have tended to undermine traditional cosmologies while offering
>>>> an
>>>>> image of the cosmos bereft of spiritual or mythic dimensions.
>>>>>
>>>>> Are you looking for an image of the cosmos consistent with what
>>>> scientists
>>>>> understand about the universe today. That symbol, known to the ancient
>>>>> Greeks as a "uroboros," is the snake swallowing its tail. This: symbol :
>>>>> represents the universe as a continuity of vastly different size scales,
>>>>> with the swallowing of the tail representing the hoped-for unification of
>>>>> theories governing the largest and smallest scales.
>>>>>
>>>>> The size scales in the known universe encompass about 60 orders of
>>>>> magnitude, from the vastness of the cosmic horizon to the subatomic
>>>> Planck
>>>>> scale, the smallest size allowed by relativity and quantum physics. Yet
>>>>> people asked to visualize "the universe" tend to think of endless space
>>>> and
>>>>> uncountable stars and galaxies, while the human scale shrinks into
>>>>> insignificance.
>>>>>
>>>>> Gute Nacht!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> >I would love to know what anyone here thinks
>>>>>> >about the Deikmans' piece.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Not much; as much nonsense as ever
>>>>>>
>>>>>> William
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> info:
>>>>>> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>>>>>>
>>>>>> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>>>>>>
>>>>>> dialogue facilitator:
>>>>>> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Administrator of the mailing list:
>>>>>> admin@david-bohm.net
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>>>> Add fun gadgets and colorful themes to express yourself on Windows Live
>>>>> Spaces
>>>>
>>>> http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwsp0070000001msn/direct/01/?href=http://www.get.live.com/spaces/features
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> info:
>>>>> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>>>>>
>>>>> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>>>>>
>>>>> dialogue facilitator:
>>>>> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>>>>>
>>>>> Administrator of the mailing list:
>>>>> admin@david-bohm.net
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>>> Express yourself - download free Windows Live Messenger themes!
>>>> http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwme0020000001msn/direct/01/?href=http://imagine-msn.com/themes/vibe/default.aspx?locale=en-us&source=hmtagline
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> info:
>>>> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>>>>
>>>> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>>>>
>>>> dialogue facilitator:
>>>> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>>>>
>>>> Administrator of the mailing list:
>>>> admin@david-bohm.net
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------
>>>> Stay in the know. Pulse on the new Yahoo.com. Check it out.
>>>
>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> info:
>>>> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>>>>
>>>> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>>>>
>>>> dialogue facilitator:
>>>> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>>>>
>>>> Administrator of the mailing list:
>>>> admin@david-bohm.net
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>> Express yourself - download free Windows Live Messenger themes!
>>> http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwme0020000001msn/direct/01/?href=http://imagine-msn.com/themes/vibe/default.aspx?locale=en-us&source=hmtagline
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> info:
>>> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>>>
>>> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>>>
>>> dialogue facilitator:
>>> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>>>
>>> Administrator of the mailing list:
>>> admin@david-bohm.net
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------
>>> Get your email and more, right on the new Yahoo.com
>>
>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> info:
>>> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>>>
>>> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>>>
>>> dialogue facilitator:
>>> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>>>
>>> Administrator of the mailing list:
>>> admin@david-bohm.net
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Share your special moments by uploading 500 photos per month to Windows
>> Live Spaces
>> http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwsp0070000001msn/direct/01/?href=http://www.get.live.com/spaces/features
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> info:
>> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>>
>> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>>
>> dialogue facilitator:
>> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>>
>> Administrator of the mailing list:
>> admin@david-bohm.net
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> info:
> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>
> dialogue facilitator:
> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>
> Administrator of the mailing list:
> admin@david-bohm.net
>
> _______________________________________________
From donfactor at donfactor.demon.co.uk Sat Sep 23 14:02:10 2006
From: donfactor at donfactor.demon.co.uk (Don Factor)
Date: Sun Sep 24 14:56:06 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Risky"
In-Reply-To: <20060923141510.iqtg0p9u4oplw80w@imp1.uta.fi>
References: <BAY107-F32DD05AFDDBBDDE53768C5A8210@phx.gbl>
<20060923135856.zd6h3dltok08s4og@imp1.uta.fi>
<20060923141510.iqtg0p9u4oplw80w@imp1.uta.fi>
Message-ID: <6AFCC5DA-D1EC-4A89-87D3-D626C05ADDD5@donfactor.demon.co.uk>
"....during the past few decades, modern technology, with radio, tv,
air travel, and satellites, has woven a network of communication
which puts each part of the world in to almost instant contact with
all the other parts. yet, in spite of this world-wide system of
linkages, there is, at this very moment, a general feeling that
communication is breaking down everywhere, on an unparalleled scale...."
david bohm in "On Dialogue"
The question that was never asked, is "Is this perception accurate?"
On the surface it would seem so. But I wonder if it isn't a result of
the vast number of communications reaching more and more of us at
increasing speed. Too much information may be no information at all.
Looking back in history, we might notice that for well over a
thousand years, Europeans were fighting each other in an almost
constant string of wars. Peace was defined as the intervals between
them. Baronies and Princedoms were endlessly warring against each
other. There were even wars between opposing Popes, not to mention
different Christian sects. This didn't end until very recently as
the European Union has expanded. Maybe it won't last, but so far it
has given every indication that it will. Latin America was also a
place of constant warfare dating back into pre-history but today that
no longer appears to be the case. Africa and the middle East are
still riddled with warfare as are parts of Asia. But in total I think
you will find that the world is a much more peaceful place than ever
before even with the rise of militant religions. Terrorism during the
last few years, by the way, has been somewhat less worldwide than it
was back in the 70's and 80's according to media reports. So, the
sense that communication is breaking down everywhere may be an
artefact of the vast increase in communication.
It would be fairer to propose that there is an increase in
miscommunication, of so much noise that meaningful signals get
drowned out. But what seems obvious to me, is that not all of them
are getting drowned out somethings are changing, and for the better.
don
From Rodger.Hyodo at dialogos.com Sat Sep 23 14:17:49 2006
From: Rodger.Hyodo at dialogos.com (Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com)
Date: Sun Sep 24 15:11:55 2006
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Risky"
In-Reply-To: <20060924100003.84A3A2307A@web.internal.van-den-heuvel.org>
Message-ID: <OF32AF1AAC.F25D7637-ON852571F2.00434C08-852571F2.00438CB1@dialogos.com>
Rodger __whose voice is speaking? _R
.
From: "kirsten schneide" <kirstenschneide@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Risky"
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
.
Good old Freud saw right away what they did with it: they simply became
dependent children again,
blindly following the inner voice of their parents, which now came from
them under the hypnotic spell of the leader.
.
.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20060923/f0c4f3de/attachment.html
From kirstenschneide at hotmail.com Sat Sep 23 14:48:48 2006
From: kirstenschneide at hotmail.com (kirsten schneide)
Date: Sun Sep 24 15:42:49 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Risky"
In-Reply-To: <F8532FE1-D62D-4519-96C5-69FB7A06C0F4@donfactor.demon.co.uk>
Message-ID: <BAY107-F3464789CD902DCC2C13046A8260@phx.gbl>
Dear Animalfactor ~ if this fear were as constantly conscious,
we should be unable to function normally. It must be properly
repressed to keep us living with any modicum of
comfort. We know very well that to repress means more than to
put away and to forget that which was put away and the place
where we put it. It means also to maintain a constant
psychological effort to keep the lid on and inwardly never
relax our watchfulness.
Therefore in normal times we move about actually
without ever believing in our own death, as if we fully
believed in our own corporeal immortality. We are intent on
mastering death....A man will say, of course, that he knows
he will die some day, but he does not really care. He is
having a good time with living, and he does not think about
death and does not care to bother about it - but this is a
purely intellectual, verbal admission. The affect of fear is
repressed.
In general this kind of fear is defensive, in the sense that
it is a protection of our self-esteem, of our love and
respect for ourselves. We tend to be afraid of any knowledge
that could cause us to despise ourselves or to make us feel
inferior, weak, worthless, evil, shameful. We protect
ourselves and our ideal image of ourselves by repression and
similar defenses, which are essentially techniques by which
we avoid becoming conscious of unpleasant or dangerous
truths..... at any 'rate': keep on wet & dreaming, dear.
Love & Nailpolishremover, Kbot
--------------------------
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld
>>Reality is remorseless because gods do not walk upon the earth; and if
>>men could become noble repositories of great gulfs of nonbeing, they
>>would have even less peace than we oblivious and driven madmen have
>>today. Besides, can any ideal of therapeutic revolutions touch the vast
>>masses of this globe, the modern mechanical men in Russia, the
>>near-billion sheeplike followers in China, the brutalized and ignorant
>>populations of almost every continent?
>
>
>I know you are fond of quoting Ernest Becker's pessimism, and actually
>doing the sort of stuff he wrote about - cannibalising and plagiarising
>his texts, for your own purposes. But Becker for some reason had a very
>rough time of it, even after writing his masterpiece, The Denial of Death,
>he couldn't hold a job. He died of cancer at a very young age. Pity. But
>this was one man's experience. I figure we have a choice. The laws of
>human nature are not fixed nor are they final. And if there is a limit,
>then it is yet to be discovered.
>
>Amongst the animals we are unique in that we can imagine and we can
>communicate abstract concepts. We can, or some of us can, experience love
>without the necessity of it leading to reproduction or orgasms or power.
>Simple things like this hold out possibilities for something beyond what
>you might call our biological necessities.
>
>You choose to take the path of pessimism which reveals your own fear of
>death and meaningless. I am happier with optimism seasoned lightly with a
>bit of scepticism. Remember there was a time when humans had no idea how
>to cook food and that was that. They knew nothing of domesticating animals
>and were prey to the bigger and faster predators. There was also a time
>when a consensus of the experts agreed on ideas such as nobody can travel
>faster than a mile a minute and that space travel was a physical
>impossibility. They also agreed that, before Einstein came along that
>physics was finished. pretty well all wrapped up. Nobody should be advised
>to become a physicist because there was nothing left to learn. And there
>was also a time when people with psychological disorders ended up in mad
>houses that served mainly as places where the bourgeoisie could entertain
>themselves laughing at the loonies.. My point here is that to presuppose
>the sort of limitation that you seem to take as given insures that such
>limitation will prove to be what you think it is, at least for you
>
>So, the only positive idea that I can draw from these pessimistic posts of
>yours is that you want us to help you get past your own fear of death. I
>read a cry that says, "Convince me. Show me that I am wrong." But nobody
>can do that for you. There are some here, I know, who have overcome there
>fear of death, and who know that their meaning does not die with them. So
>iif you are frightened, maybe you ought to gather up your courage and ask
>for help.
>
>don
>
>_______________________________________________
>info:
>www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>
>dialogue facilitator:
>facilitator@david-bohm.net
>
>Administrator of the mailing list:
>admin@david-bohm.net
>
>_______________________________________________
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Be seen and heard with Windows Live Messenger and Microsoft LifeCams
http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwme0020000001msn/direct/01/?href=http://www.microsoft.com/hardware/digitalcommunication/default.mspx?locale=en-us&source=hmtagline
From kirstenschneide at hotmail.com Sat Sep 23 14:52:10 2006
From: kirstenschneide at hotmail.com (kirsten schneide)
Date: Sun Sep 24 15:46:09 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Risky", correction
In-Reply-To: <20060923141510.iqtg0p9u4oplw80w@imp1.uta.fi>
Message-ID: <BAY107-F2848877664621B4A22BFC4A8260@phx.gbl>
Dear Tvmatti ~ ~
http://www.tivi.de/imperia/md/images/pur/p_1er_160x170/peinlich_cool.jpg
Love & Streber, Kirsten
--------------------------
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld
>From: Matti Vaittinen <Matti.Vaittinen@uta.fi>
>Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Risky", correction
>Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2006 14:15:10 +0300
>
>Oops, I meant this (if it works)::
>
>http://www.thinkg.net/TT/
>
>>Peter, you forgot to mention this ;-) ::
>>
>>http://www.thingk.net/TT/
>>
>>
>>as a "tool" ...
>>
>>
>>Best,
>>
>>
>>
>>matti
>>
>>
>>
>>Lainaus kirsten schneide <kirstenschneide@hotmail.com>:
>>
>>>Dear Zoe, did you read how Donf keeps drooling about his (Chat group
>>>going): Laser-thinkg;-? It all ways cracks me up. Mon Cheri Donf, how
>>>many decades have you taken care of (by) now by 'doing' (Bohm)Dialog?
>>>And? Any Lasers in sight? In-sights?? Any "fresh" stuff? O Boy! At
>>>any 'rate', Zoe, this 'all' brings up the great problem raised by the
>>>therapeutic revolution, namely::: " So What?".... Even with numerous
>>>(chat) groups of really liberated people, at their best, we can't
>>>imagine that the world will be any pleasanter or less tragic a place.
>>>It may even be worse in still unknown ways. As Tillich warned us, and
>>> Donl likes to make-up himselves a bit here&there with T, New Being,
>>>under the conditions and limitations of existence, will only bring
>>>into play new and sharper paradoxes, new tensions, and more painful
>>>disharmonies—a "more intense demonism." Reality is remorseless
>>>because gods do not walk upon the earth; and if men could become
>>>noble repositorie
>>>s of great gulfs of nonbeing,
>>>they would have even less peace than we oblivious and driven madmen
>>>have today. Besides, can any ideal of therapeutic revolutions touch the
>>>vast masses of this globe, the modern mechanical men in Russia, the
>>>near-billion sheeplike followers in China, the brutalized and ignorant
>>>populations of almost every continent? When one lives in the liberation
>>>atmosphere of Berkeley, California, or in the intoxications of small
>>>doses of unconstriction in a therapeutic group in one's home town, one
>>>is living in a hothouse atmosphere that shuts out the reality of the
>>>rest of the planet, the way things really are in this world. It is this
>>>therapeutic megalomania that must quickly been seen through if we are
>>>not to be perfect fools. The empirical facts of the world will not fade
>>>away because one has analyzed his Oedipus complex, as Freud so well
>>>knew, or because one can make love with tenderness, as so many now
>>>believe. Forget it. In this sense again it is Freud's somber pessimism,
>>>especially of his later writings such as "Civilization and Its
>>>Discontents", that keeps him so contemporary. Us human animals are
>>>doomed, doomed to live&die in an overwhelmingly tragic and demonic
>>>world. Enough said, it's good to have you on board .... of this ship of
>>>fools.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Love & Nuts, Kirsten
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>From: Zoe Chu <zoechuzero@yahoo.com>
>>>>Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>>>To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>>>Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] "Risky"
>>>>Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 10:28:58 -0700 (PDT)
>>>>
>>>>Kirsten - You seem to be a real nut --- just the kind of humans I
>>>>cherish! Glad M told me about this list.
>>>>
>>>>The brains of creative people appear to be more open to incoming
>>>>stimuli from the surrounding environment. Other people's brains
>>>>might shut out this same information through a process called
>>>>"latent inhibition" - defined as an animal's unconscious capacity to
>>>>ignore stimuli that experience has shown are irrelevant to its
>>>>needs. Through psychological testing, the researchers showed that
>>>>creative individuals are much more likely to have low levels of
>>>>latent inhibition.
>>>>
>>>>"This means that creative individuals remain in contact with the
>>>>extra information constantly streaming in from the environment,"
>>>>says Jordan Peterson. "The normal person classifies an object, and
>>>>then forgets about it, even though that object is much more complex
>>>>and interesting than he or she thinks. The creative person, by
>>>>contrast, is always open to new possibilities."
>>>>
>>>>Previously, scientists have associated failure to screen out stimuli
>>>>with psychosis. However, researchers hypothesized that it might
>>>>also contribute to original thinking, especially when combined with
>>>>high IQ.
>>>>
>>>>The authors hypothesize that latent inhibition may be positive when
>>>>combined with high intelligence and good working memory - the
>>>>capacity to think about many things at once - but negative
>>>>otherwise. Peterson states: "If you are open to new information, new
>>>>ideas, you better be able to intelligently and carefully edit and
>>>>choose. If you have 50 ideas, only two or three are likely to be
>>>>good. You have to be able to discriminate or you'll get swamped."
>>>>
>>>>"Scientists have wondered for a long time why madness and creativity
>>>>seem linked," says Carson. "It appears likely that low levels of
>>>>latent inhibition and exceptional flexibility in thought might
>>>>predispose to mental illness under some conditions and to creative
>>>>accomplishment under others."
>>>>
>>>>For example, during the early stages of diseases such as
>>>>schizophrenia, which are often accompanied by feelings of deep
>>>>insight, mystical knowledge and religious experience, chemical
>>>>changes take place in which latent inhibition disappears.
>>>>
>>>>"We are very excited by the results of these studies," says
>>>>Peterson. "It appears that we have not only identified one of the
>>>>biological bases of creativity but have moved towards cracking an
>>>>age-old mystery: the relationship between genius, madness and the
>>>>doors of perception."
>>>>
>>>>Zoe
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>kirsten schneide <kirstenschneide@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>Dear Zoe, Hans Eysenck proposed that extraversion was caused by
>>>>variability
>>>>in cortical arousal; "introverts are characterized by higher levels of
>>>>activity than extraverts and so are chronically more cortically
>>>>aroused than
>>>>extraverts". While it seems counterintuitive to suppose that introverts
>>>>are
>>>>more aroused than extraverts, the putative effect this has on behaviour
>>>>is
>>>>such that the introvert seeks lower levels of stimulation. Conversely,
>>>>the
>>>>extravert seeks to heighten their arousal to a more optimal level ~ ~ as
>>>>predicted by the Yerkes-Dodson Law) ~ ~ by increased activity, social
>>>>engagement and other stimulation-seeking behaviours.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Love & Drugsl, Kirsten
>>>>--------------------------
>>>>Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Hi Kristen -
>>>>>
>>>>>Funny. I currently read some of that stuff for class. What do you make
>>>>>of that? Do you see co-relations? Anyone?
>>>>>
>>>>>Warwick's claims that robots that can program themselves to avoid each
>>>>>other while operating in a group raises the issue of
>>>>>self-organization, and
>>>>>as such might be the major impetus in following developments in this
>>>>>area.
>>>>>In particular, the works of Fransisco Varela and Humberto Maturana,
>>>>>once in
>>>>>the province of pure speculation now have become immediately relevant
>>>>>with
>>>>>respect to synthetic intelligence. Cyborg-type systems not only are
>>>>>homeostatic (meaning that they are abe to preserve stable internal
>>>>>conditions in various environments) but adaptive, if they are to
>>>>>survive.
>>>>>Testing the claims of Varela and Maturana via synthetic devices is the
>>>>>larger and more serious concern in the discussion about Warwick and
>>>>>those
>>>>>involved in similar research. "Pulling the plug" on independent devices
>>>>>cannot be as simple as it appears, for if the device displays
>>>>>sufficient
>>>>>intelligence and assumes a diagnostic and prognostic stature, we may
>>>>>ultimately one day be forced to decide
>>>>>between what it could be telling us as counterintuitive (but correct)
>>>>>and
>>>>>our impulse to disconnect because of our limited and "intuitive"
>>>>>perceptions. Warwick's robots seemed to have exhibited behavior not
>>>>>anticipated by the research, one such robot "committing suicide"
>>>>>because it
>>>>>could not cope with its environment. In a more complex setting, it may
>>>>>be
>>>>>asked whether a "natural selection" may be possible, neural networks
>>>>>being
>>>>>the major operative.
>>>>>
>>>>>Thinking about the implications of Warwick's research is not confined
>>>>>to
>>>>>device implantation or automatons. Researching websites on the U.S.
>>>>>Department of Defense's (DoD) development of a simulated international
>>>>>battlespace. It is no secret that the DoD foresees the day when not
>>>>>only
>>>>>all military systems are interoperable, but can be coordinated globally
>>>>>in
>>>>>a real-time war. Ultimately, simulations not only are to be used for
>>>>>assessing alternative outcomes in wargaming settings but also are to be
>>>>>used as diagnostic "tools" interactive with a real time battlefield
>>>>>situation. If this happens, we must consider self-organization in these
>>>>>synthetic systems operating in critical environments. That is, if
>>>>>allowed
>>>>>to operate with minimal or no human intervention, what of the character
>>>>>of
>>>>>the system, itself and its evolution? Hence, Warwick should be a
>>>>>starting
>>>>>point for a more serious discussion than the popular media seems to be
>>>>>capable of maintaining. In the worst case scenario,
>>>>>Warwick is deemed a proponent of science fiction, but it may be said
>>>>>that
>>>>>it is great science fiction, as it is based upon the plausible,
>>>>>rather than
>>>>>the impossible. In the best case scenario, Warwick, indeed has given us
>>>>>ample notice to humanity to concern itself with the choice of thinking
>>>>>about ourselves and our place in the universe or abnegate in favor of
>>>>>another consciousness. A return to Aristotle and Plato is in order.
>>>>>
>>>>>-- Zoe
>>>>>
>>>>>kirsten schneide wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Dear habituated Susbcribers
>>>>>
>>>>>The study of group polarization began with an unpublished 1961 Master’s
>>>>>thesis by MIT student James Stoner, who observed the so-called "risky
>>>>>shift", meaning that a group’s decisions are riskier than the average
>>>>>of
>>>>>the individual decisions of members before the group met. The discovery
>>>>>of
>>>>>the risky shift was considered surprising and counterintuitive,
>>>>>especially
>>>>>since earlier work in the 1920s and 1930s by Allport and other
>>>>>researchers
>>>>>suggested that individuals made more extreme decisions than did groups,
>>>>>leading to the expectation that groups would make decisions that would
>>>>>conform to the average risk level of its members. The seemingly
>>>>>counterintuitive findings of Stoner led to a flurry of research around
>>>>>the
>>>>>risky shift, which was originally thought to be a special case
>>>>>exception to
>>>>>the standard decision-making practice. By the late 1960s, however, it
>>>>>had
>>>>>become clear that the risky shift was just one type of many attitudes
>>>>>that
>>>>>became more extreme in groups, leading Moscovici and Zavalloni to term
>>>>>the
>>>>>overall phenomenon "group polarization".
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Love & Shiftstick, Kirsten
>>>>>--------------------------
>>>>>Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld
>>>>>
>>>>>>From: "kirsten schneide"
>>>>>>Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>>>>>To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>>>>>Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Welt*Bild
>>>>>>Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2006 18:15:38 -0400
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Oh William, I like your
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Attitude/s
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Love & Dress, Kirsten
>>>>>>
>>>>>>PS:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>There is a pervasive sense of rootlessness and disorientation that
>>>>>>causes
>>>>>>many people to avoid contemplating their place in the universe and to
>>>>>focus
>>>>>>instead on the trivial concerns of consumerism.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The lack of social consensus on cosmology in the modern world has
>>>>>>caused
>>>>>>many people to close off their thinking to large issues and long time
>>>>>>scales, so that small matters dominate their consciousness.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>In most traditional cultures, people's sense of identity and codes of
>>>>>>behavior are grounded in a cosmology that provides a picture of who
>>>>>>they
>>>>>>are, where they come from, and what their personal relationship to the
>>>>>>larger world should be. For more than 300 years, however, scientific
>>>>>>advances have tended to undermine traditional cosmologies while
>>>>>>offering
>>>>>an
>>>>>>image of the cosmos bereft of spiritual or mythic dimensions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Are you looking for an image of the cosmos consistent with what
>>>>>scientists
>>>>>>understand about the universe today. That symbol, known to the ancient
>>>>>>Greeks as a "uroboros," is the snake swallowing its tail. This: symbol
>>>>>>:
>>>>>>represents the universe as a continuity of vastly different size
>>>>>>scales,
>>>>>>with the swallowing of the tail representing the hoped-for unification
>>>>>>of
>>>>>>theories governing the largest and smallest scales.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The size scales in the known universe encompass about 60 orders of
>>>>>>magnitude, from the vastness of the cosmic horizon to the subatomic
>>>>>Planck
>>>>>>scale, the smallest size allowed by relativity and quantum physics.
>>>>>>Yet
>>>>>>people asked to visualize "the universe" tend to think of endless
>>>>>>space
>>>>>and
>>>>>>uncountable stars and galaxies, while the human scale shrinks into
>>>>>>insignificance.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Gute Nacht!
&g