|
This is NOT an interjection into the argument
between Peter and John, but rather a request for commentary on an article that
appears in the current (April) issue of Harper's Magazine. "The Tragedy of
Human Effort" is integral to the author's thesis, which leans heavily on
Thoreau and R.W. Emerson. I hope for comments especially from Michael and
Wally, for I could not get phrases I have seen from them out of mind while I was
reading the article this morning. The title is "The Spirit of
Disobedience" and the author is Curtis White. I am particularly interested
to know how closely these ideas are in spirit to the Douglas concepts of
Christianity and philosophy.
(To Wally: When I can manage to get a
photocopy and am in the right neighborhood, I will trot it down to brother Bob
and hope that he can find an afternoon or evening to spend with me to the same
end.)
Keith
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 5:45
AM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] Tragedy of
Human Effort
The original issue is in fact related to the
writings of Douglas in particular as to whether he has talked about
Christianity in a such a way that justifies your first response. If you
cant show that then you are merely arguing hypathetically as would be the case
if he did. ( that's it in a nutshell)
Secondly ( to answer what you have said but
getting away from the nutshell) Douglas addressed his own country first and
the English speaking world second ( out of popular demand ) and there is
actually no clear indicated responsibility to try and 'convert' the world to
the social credit philosophy or one of the areas of its policy such as
economics.
Similarly there is no grounds to imagine any
implications intended towards the churches, it was addressed to the rank and
file, still then generally considered 'Christian'-in-the-main public. I
can only assume you havent read the material since you seem clearly unfamiliar
with its content and refer to anything but it.
Any Muslim who wanted to explain the Sharia law
and its subsidiary details and how it would be used in practice ( as
in Iran which supposedly makes it evil) like social credit is claimed to be
practical Christianity, I would be an attentive and interested audience not an
offended closed minded bigot.
The issue of Bush is as extreme as suicide
bombers which offfends many Muslims just as Bush Christians, or the executing
of kidnapped persons alleged to be committed by Muslims. I think this is
way off the map. Social credit isnt anything more to blush about than
the American constitution which is commonly considered an expression of the
christian values. Ever noted how many Muslims have migrated from Islam
to live under that embarasing constitution? Did the
constitution writers expect all the churches to formally acknowledge it or the
state set out to evangelise the world so every other nation adopted
it?
Reason? Leave the constitution to
those interested ( Bush said it was just a piece of paper)? The
philosophy is the social credit constitution.
"...let those
who are interested form their own appreciation" exactly
and let them not be hindered by those not interested.
Peter H
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 3:16
PM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] Tragedy of
Human Effort
I think we just antagonise the churches by trying to prove, or in their
eyes, pretend, that they have a duty to support our particular way of
thinking.
And I wouldn't want to "put off" other groups, such as particularly the
Muslims, whose financial ideas are close to ours. But who have a very
low opinion of Christianity, particularly when a man who claims to be a
devout believer has been responsible for the slaughter of tens of thousands
of their civilians. After first antagonising them by using the term
"crusade".
Let's stick to reason, and let those who are interested form their own
appreciation.
Regards. John R.
From: "Peter Haines" <cymric@xtra.co.nz>
Reply-To:
socialcredit@elistas.com
To:
<socialcredit@elistas.com>
Subject: Re: [socialcredit]
Tragedy of Human Effort
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 07:22:43
+1300
John R said: I think this is an
unfortuate side.
Binding back to reality cannot ever be
unfortunate. Its a ship without a rudder if you dont.
Secondly I answered a question about the
relationship between Social Credit and Christianity.
I think the issue that prompted that comment
is the old one that people repeated-
'one shouldnt argue about
religion'
But that was also accompanied by the same not
to argue about politics. Perhaps we shouldnt argue about money and
economics either because people do get offended from time to time as
well.
Anyone who has read Douglas knows he doesnt
define Christianity in terms of the church doctrines and scripture.
He appeals to the broader principles that have been involved in the build
up of the law and constitutionalism to which economics and politics (
business of the state ) are inter-related. All this should have been
in preserved in our education system. The Fabians and others have
been very successfulI at rooting this out
and replacing it with their own dumbing down conditioning.
I would suggest that the two main reasons
people who dont understand Social Credit or never accept it premises and
conclusion even if they do prefer another way is because they dont
appreciate the philosophy and secondly they seperate economics out from
the other aspects they are directly related to while Social Credit
doesnt. In effect they separate it out from its true context and
thus there is a block to full reality.
All policy derives from a philosophy.
If any people ignore/lose one they will be taken over by those who do and
that is the situation of the world right now. We are not just fighting arithmatic we are fighting a
philosophy. The first principle regards engaging an enemy is the
know the enemy.
If society wants Social Credit policy it will
have to first appreciate the philosophy that will produce and sustain
it. So lets not talk about it? Is this why people wont talk
about it?
Peter H
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 9:41
AM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] Tragedy
of Human Effort
I think this is a rather unfortunate aside.
I think that, because of my Christian beliefs, therefore I look for
the most moral approach to economics and politics, which, by
luck, I found as Social Credit. Had I not been aware of it,
probably I would have been taken in by the simple minded "Poor are poor
because the rich are rich" approach of Socialism, which immediately
heads off the need to think further anyway.
But without knowing too much about Islam, I suspect true believers in
that field might well accept it also. Perhaps more
readily than us.
But if we are going to link SC with Christianity, then it is
necessary to define the latter. The teachings of Christ or the
vastly different approach of some established churches? (Including
mine at times.) The work of Mother Teresa, or the uncouth Crusaders
rampaging through the Middle East destroying anything civilised they
found? The Salvation Army or the Spanish Inquisition? (To
avoid offence, I leave out modern examples.)
I suggest we treat SC on its own merits logically and morally, so
that those with fixed moral anchors such as Christianity, Islam and
other beliefs including pure love of humanity can see how well it fits
their approach. To me it most certainly fits closely with the
teachings of Christ.
But lets take a caution. So does pure Communism. But
Communism has never been applied in practice without becoming uttterly
corrupted, and I believe its impractical approach demands this to
happen. "The people" had become "The loud and brutal muscle boys".
Let's try to iron out the factual aspects of SC and practical
means of implementing it, something that has never been done in full
detail, so that if it ever comes to be tried it has not then also been
utterly corrupted in the process.
Regards. John R.
From: "Peter Haines" <cymric@xtra.co.nz>
Reply-To:
socialcredit@elistas.com
To:
<socialcredit@elistas.com>
Subject: Re:
[socialcredit] Tragedy of Human Effort
Date: Sat, 11 Mar
2006 20:37:53 +1300
Howdy Keith,
My complements on not leaving this on a
negative note.
I assumed that you would have some idea
of a relationship between Social Credit and Christianity although it
doesnt feature much on this forum. So I stand corrected on
that.
There was an excellent post by Phillip
Butler a few months ago on Social Credit being practical Christianity
but you may not have seen it and then of course it may have produced a
number of questions that may need answering first for some to be
able to appreciate it.
You mentioned the comment/
question by Bill Ryan last year re english being my first or
second language. I wasnt convinced it had anything to do with
discussion as no one on any forum outside of this one has put such an
issue as though it was of any significance. Our supposed
conflict of how we view things for example is more an issue regards
any difficulty in understanding rather than how perfect ones language
is. My native language is English. It was always my
poorest subject at school because outside of spelling and some basic
grammar there was no rhyme or reason or character ever taught that
gave it anything to learn about so I did a lot better at maths.
Today it is a widespread problem at universities in my country.
Perhaps being the normal lanuage it was taken for granted and became a
lazy zone for teachers.
Authority of the scriptures is the
scriptures themselves as they contain a common language/ use of terms
and provide the keys to fathoming them. There
are referrences within that talk about studying and proving and
searching indicating it isnt a an easy come easy lost matter however
the admonition to seek and you will find holds true. Naturally a
casual interest wont get the same returns as an industrious
student. Then of course there is the original words of Hebrew,
Arabic and Greek in concordances that given a more accurate
interpretation which often corrects popular teaching.
Religion, philosophy, science all have
schools of thought. The point I made was that it doesnt matter
how popular any of these schools of though are at any time the actual
real truth remains independant although discovered to any
degree. For example the earth didnt turn flat because everyone
believed it was.
I am glad I now understand that
you have been trying to get your head around Douglas' concepts and
that you have been mystified sometimes by the supposed relationship
between Social Credit and Christianity because you having been around
for so long and seeming very familiar with much of what is discussed
one easily thinks you understood a lot more than you actually
do. But it is typical that Social Crediters prefer to talk about
economics rather than the philosophy that is its policy
foundation.
I suggest you do a bit of reading from
the man himself and those who have a good grasp because much of the
dispute between Social Crediters and others of some other school of
thought are really over the philosophy behind the policy, thus it is
easy for those who differ to think we are narrow and inflexible
etc.
It also needs to be pointed out that
people who claim or talk as Social Crediters may not in fact embrace
the whole conception and those who are only interested in finance and
economics may be a majority. You will have picked up from time
to time responses by those who intimate that others are not really
Social Crediters like they are.
I recommend you to the alor.org library (
Australian League of Rights) where you will find such works by Douglas
as "Nature of Democarcy", "The Approach To Reality", "The Policy of a
Philosophy"and "Realistic Constitutionalism" on line. All short
booklets. The article "Social Credit is as old as Man" would be
a good start.
Others like "Social Credit and Christian
Philosophy", "Essential Christian Heritage" by Eric
Butler obviously link the two as well as link into history and
constitutionalism. This is the background of the Christian
Philosophy in relation to the English or British culture
and Social Credit, the heritage of the English speaking
Protestant peoples in general. The struggle over finance is
not unrealated to that over philosophy, culture and
heritage. Finance and
economics are but one policy section/ concern of what
Douglas embraces.
Peter H
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2006
10:31 AM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit]
Tragedy of Human Effort
OK Peter, I will concede some failure
to comprehend:
You say:
"You know very well the relationship
between Social Credit and Christianity."
In fact, I do not. Since
attempting intermittently to follow these discussions for most
of five years I have been often bewildered and sometimes mystified
by that relationship. If it in fact entails an endorsement of
Biblical mythology then your remarks do take on greater meaning for
me, especially your inferences that science and truth can take
divergent paths and that the authority of scripture is based on
something other than verbal repetition (the technique, incidentally,
of Islamic fundamentalists who promote the Al Qaeda
solution).
If I have understood you correctly
after these efforts, then I have indeed been mistaken in having
spent so much time trying to get my head around the Douglas
concepts.
And it all does prompt me to ask if you
ever did provide the answer to Bill Ryan's question: "Is
English a second language for you?" You may have answered, but
I do not recall what it was.
Keith
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, March 09,
2006 11:40 PM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit]
Tragedy of Human Effort
Howdy Keith,
I liked your comments and the use of
Sherlock Holmes but you aught to know better that when you assume
that evolution is science to everyone and the Bible mythology
likewise you punch yourself in the nose.
You own yourself
an apology. I could say you aught to have done your
post before getting into your beer as well but that would be
childish.
If my comments were incoherent to you
then it is no complement to you as they were in response to
your unwise assumption plus you were unable to
comprehend.
I wont answer your howler question
about what determines scripture, your contempt makes it
pointless.
You know very well the relationship
between Social Credit and Christianity.
Peter
H
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, March 09,
2006 2:10 PM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit]
Tragedy of Human Effort
Peter,
I don't understand the relevance of
your comments.
My evocation of belief that species
breed true must certainly be one of the oldest examples of
inductive reasoning, as demonstrated by its presence in a very
old myth. It is neither anti-Biblical (unless you haven't
awakened to the mythical character of the Bible), nor is it a
sneer on the practice of inferring rules (especially causative
ones) from the repetition of what seem to be cause-effect series
of actions.
Of what relevance, therefore, your
comment about throughbreds?
I did not argue that induction was
necessarily a poor procedure; I asserted that Sherlock Holmes
stories are not a good illustration of induction.
You say that "Science like truth
isnt deterremined by popularity or repetition." Did you
think before writing that, or do you really not understand
the meaning of the words?
Then this utter howler: "Same
thing goes for scripture." If it isn't popularity and
repetition that determine scripture, just what do you imagine
is the determinant?
I' do agree with your judgment this
far: It was an unfortunate choice of example because it
seems to have induced this incoherent reply. Why don't you
try doing your correspondence before getting into the
beer?
Keith
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, March 06,
2006 2:10 PM
Subject: Re:
[socialcredit] Tragedy of Human Effort
Howdy Keith,
I though your choice of a
pro-psuedo-science anti-Bible example was rather unfortunate.
The whole Bible was a detterrent to Marxist theories of the
19th century which was also a more complete understanding of
how mankind should live in this world, so what?
I notice the thoroughbred horse
industry hasnt been put out of stride due to theories that
a horse might breed a catipillar or a fish.
Science like truth isnt
deterremined by popularity or repetition. Same
thing goes for scripture.
I would suggest that the funniest
side of man has been in the way he has handled science and
scripture and theories about them, even funnier than
economics. As I said it was unfortunate you chose
it.
Peter H
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, March
07, 2006 3:03 AM
Subject: Re:
[socialcredit] Tragedy of Human Effort
Since no one else has come
forward to correct John's misconceptions about inductive
versus deductive reasoning, I contradict even though my
resources for carrying through are still a bit
feeble.
I agree with John that just how
Douglas came upon his ideas and analysis is not critical in
evaluating how well they work.
But to say that Sherlock Holmes
represents inductive thinking is to get things in
reverse. The Holmes stories are examples of deductive
logic. Inductive reasoning is of the kind that infers
from repetitive instances a rule that the instances will
continue to recur, because it is a law of nature. It
is the kind of reasoning that led the authors of Genesis to
infer that species breed true because God designed them that
way and therefore needed to save them in the Ark. This
kind of thinking was a deterrent to acceptance of more
complete theories of species and their evolution in the 18th
and 19th centuries.
Keith Wilde
---- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, March
03, 2006 6:59 PM
Subject: RE:
[socialcredit] Tragedy of Human Effort
Believe it or not, the best example of inductive
reasoning comes from the Sherlock Holmes novels.
Collect date, organise it to make it better
understandable, get rid of the obviously wrong answers,
and go and have a good sleep, por play a violin, or
indulge in hectic sport, or... The subconscious mind will
come up with ideas. Treat each destructively to see
if it can be eliminated. The one that can't be is
probably the best, until new data requires it to be
modified. It doesn't matter a stuff where Douglas'
analysis comes from or what are its likely causes.
Treated inductively it remains by far the best explanation
of events last century.
And I believe the various different definitions of
money invented by orthodox economists were attempts to get
away from it, but surprisingly each seems to confirm it
more.
Refgards. John R.
From: Triumphofthepast@aol.com
Reply-To:
socialcredit@elistas.com
To:
socialcredit@elistas.com
Subject:
[socialcredit] Tragedy of Human Effort
Date:
Fri, 3 Mar 2006 08:04:52 EST
"It
can be tested inductively in that it explains events
over the last century that are inexplicable using the
alternative. . . . Nothing is proved by
induction. But the opposite stands clearly
disproved." (Joh n)
That's what I said, I
think. However, I thought it worth taking some
trouble to identify (1) What is the phenomenon to be
explained? and (2) What exactly IS the
hypothesis?
Michael
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are at
http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
You're subscribed to this list with the email johngrawson@hotmail.com
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
Shop ‘til you drop at XtraMSN
Shopping
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are at
http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
You're subscribed to this list with the email nschwartz@cogeco.ca
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are at
http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
You're subscribed to this list with the email cymric@xtra.co.nz
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are at
http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
You're subscribed to this list with the email nschwartz@cogeco.ca
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are at
http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
You're subscribed to this list with the email cymric@xtra.co.nz
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are at
http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
You're subscribed to this list with the email nschwartz@cogeco.ca
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are at
http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
You're subscribed to this list with the email cymric@xtra.co.nz
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
ed
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are at
http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
You're subscribed to this list with the email johngrawson@hotmail.com
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
Find the coolest online games at XtraMSN Games
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are at
http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
You're subscribed to this list with the email cymric@xtra.co.nz
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are at
http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
You're subscribed to this list with the email johngrawson@hotmail.com
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
Need more speed? Get Xtra Broadband!
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are at
http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
You're subscribed to this list with the email cymric@xtra.co.nz
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are at
http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
You're subscribed to this list with the email keithwilde@sympatico.ca
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
|
Re: [socialcredit]
Reply to this message
