| Subject: | Re: [socialcredit] ecology of knowledge | | Date: | Wednesday, June 7, 2006 15:35:58 (-0600) | | From: | Martin Hattersley <hattersleyjm @.........com>
|
Hi, Keith -
In connection with the economic effects of implementing a Social Credit monetary
system, I do believe that one of them will be to reduce the immense amount of
resources spent in our current world on effort that does no good to anyone - wars
and armaments being a prime example, and advertising, "planned obsolescence" of
products, being another. There's a lot of room for improving our use of the
world's resources in that direction.
Martin Hattersley
1970-10123-99 St.,
EDMONTON AB CANADA
Phone (780)423-4081;Fax(780)425-5247
e-mail: hattersleyjm@interbaun.com
----- Original Message -----
From: keith wilde
To: socialcredit@elistas.com
Cc: Michael Caley
Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2006 4:45 PM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] ecology of knowledge
OK Michael, I believe it is appropriate to infer from your comments that we
agree that Cultural Heritage and the Knowledge Construct are not the same thing.
The difference is that Cultural Heritage is purified by the elimination of
putative knowledge. And I agree that to impose that condition would change the
pictographs. I hope to ask the question directly of Wojciechowski, but I suspect
that he made a deliberate choice in not restricting the designation of knowledge
to ideas or creations that are truthful, beautiful and virtuous. It is the notion
that such a housecleaning of the noosphere could be successfully undertaken that
I call utopian.
By contrast, your description below of the necessary housecleaning to allow
benign human nature to shine through suggests that the primary obstacle is the
financial system. I would designate the financial system as part of the KC, and
even allow that it is an aspect of "social" capital, but I infer that you would
exclude it from Cultural Heritage?
Regardless, it is the Social Credit analysis of the financial system that is
of interest to me, as it relates to my much more lengthy immersion in issues of
population, resources and environment. I am anxious to have it represented in
the papers that the editor hopes to assemble in a dedicated issue of The
Trumpeter. I didn't need much persuasion to believe that the root of
contemporary problems lies in the monetary and financial system. The problematic
element in Social Credit analysis (to my limited understanding) concerns the
FAITH that sovereign consumers will choose benign products, production methods
and to curb personal waste if the system is corrected so that they can relax from
jobs anxiety and rely on their share of income from the Cultural Heritage. You
say I am wrong to say it is WE who have chosen to engineer the earth, because we
have lacked sovereign power. To a degree, yes, but it also seems that persons
bitten by the bug of engineering have their own visions of what to invent or
improve next, and the outcome of their individual efforts to exert power over
nature (from almost purely intellectual motivation in many cases) is often a
pleasant surprise to consumers who may employ it unwisely but selfishly with
collectively quite malignant effects. And then there are the merchants, like
Wal-Mart, who constantly titillate consumers with the prospect of more junk at
lower prices. What does Social Credit have to buttress faith in the wise and
modest consumer, and how does it compare to other studies of human behavior (and
human nature)?
That is the kind of stuff I am hoping for as reinforcement for my assertion to
engineers and philosophers (and economists) of the pessimistic variety that they
should focus on the financial system if they want to find an effective leverage
point.
Keith
Triumphofthepast@aol.com wrote:
I'm sorry, Keith, that I just can't possibly respond to this call for
papers. However, I want to continue this discussion with you.
First of all, in saying Wojciechowski concept of knowledge excludes
CONSIDERATIONS of "truthfulness, efficacy, or moral and aesthetic value," I am
saying the same thing you are. Most people think that knowledge means what is
truthful, otherwise it is not knowledge but ignorance. A better way to make the
point, then, would be to say that there is so much PUTATIVE knowledge that, as
you say, it is hard to separate the wheat from the chaff. For example, I was
very fortunate to discover Social Credit at all. With this way of putting it I
would agree, but it would change the pictographs.
Obviously, social crediters are keenly aware of the negative aspects of our
situation but reserve the term Cultural Heritage (not "Inheritance") for the
positive. For example, the idea that "money is wealth" is not an addition to our
Culture Heritage but, rather, a diminishment of it.
"To engineer Nature to OUR liking WE have created . . ." (Keith)
"We" have done no such thing, because "we" were never given the choice. The
statement assumes a true consumer-driven economy, but in absense of a National
Dividend, we do not have a consumer-driven economy. I think Keith's concerns are
implicitly included in the Douglas analysis, in that if you produce with true
EFFICIENCY and calibrate production to authentic expression of needs by people,
instead of sabotaging production to satisfy incentives set by Finance, then we
will live lightly on this planet. At the bottom of Social Credit is FAITH in
human nature. It is arrogant to say that human nature is the problem and we will
force it into a tolerable mold. Our duty is rather the more humble one of
clearing away the obstacles that choke human nature, so that it can have a
chance. If that is what Keith calls "utopian," I plead guilty.
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 kwilde@tc-biodiversity.org 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 hattersleyjm@interbaun.com
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/358 - Release Date: 07/06/2006
------=_NextPart_000_005E_01C68A48.12CD7150
Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2873" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Georgia size=2>Hi, Keith -</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Georgia size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Georgia size=2>In connection with the economic effects of
implementing a Social Credit monetary system, I do believe that one of them will
be to reduce the immense amount of resources spent in our current world on
effort that does no good to anyone - wars and armaments being a prime example,
and advertising, "planned obsolescence" of products, being another. There's a
lot of room for improving our use of the world's resources in that direction.
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Georgia size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>Martin Hattersley<BR>1970-10123-99 St., <BR>EDMONTON AB CANADA<BR>Phone
(780)423-4081;Fax(780)425-5247<BR>e-mail: <A
href="mailto:hattersleyjm@interbaun.com">hattersleyjm@interbaun.com</A></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT:
#000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=kwilde@tc-biodiversity.org
href="mailto:kwilde@tc-biodiversity.org">keith wilde</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=socialcredit@elistas.com
href="mailto:socialcredit@elistas.com">socialcredit@elistas.com</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Cc:</B> <A title=shanshui@shaw.ca
href="mailto:shanshui@shaw.ca">Michael Caley</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, June 06, 2006 4:45
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [socialcredit] ecology of
knowledge</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>OK Michael, I believe it is appropriate to infer from your comments that
we agree that Cultural Heritage and the Knowledge Construct are not the same
thing. The difference is that Cultural Heritage is purified by the
elimination of <EM>putative</EM> knowledge. And I agree that
to impose that condition would change the pictographs. I hope to ask
the question directly of Wojciechowski, but I suspect that he made a
deliberate choice in not restricting the designation of knowledge to ideas or
creations that are truthful, beautiful and virtuous. It is the notion
that such a housecleaning of the noosphere could be successfully undertaken
that I call utopian. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>By contrast, your description below of the necessary housecleaning to
allow benign human nature to shine through suggests that the primary obstacle
is the financial system. I would designate the financial system as
part of the KC, and even allow that it is an aspect of "social" capital, but
I infer that you would exclude it from Cultural Heritage? </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Regardless, it is the Social Credit analysis of the financial system that
is of interest to me, as it relates to my much more lengthy immersion in
issues of population, resources and environment. I am anxious to have it
represented in the papers that the editor hopes to assemble in a dedicated
issue of <EM>The Trumpeter</EM>. I didn't need much persuasion to
believe that the root of contemporary problems lies in the monetary and
financial system. The problematic element in Social Credit analysis (to
my limited understanding) concerns the FAITH that sovereign consumers will
choose benign products, production methods and to curb personal waste if the
system is corrected so that they can relax from jobs anxiety and rely on their
share of income from the Cultural Heritage. You say I am wrong to say it
is WE who have chosen to engineer the earth, because we have lacked sovereign
power. To a degree, yes, but it also seems that persons bitten by the bug of
engineering have their own visions of what to invent or improve next, and the
outcome of their individual efforts to exert power over nature (from almost
purely intellectual motivation in many cases) is often a pleasant surprise to
consumers who may employ it unwisely but selfishly with collectively quite
malignant effects. And then there are the merchants, like Wal-Mart, who
constantly titillate consumers with the prospect of more junk at lower
prices. What does Social Credit have to buttress faith in the wise
and modest consumer, and how does it compare to other studies of human
behavior (and human nature)?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>That is the kind of stuff I am hoping for as reinforcement for my
assertion to engineers and philosophers (and economists) of the pessimistic
variety that they should focus on the financial system if they want to find an
effective leverage point.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Keith<BR><BR><B><I>Triumphofthepast@aol.com</I></B> wrote:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px
solid"><FONT
face=arial,helvetica><FONT lang=0 face="Goudy Old Style" size=3 PTSIZE="12"
FAMILY="SERIF">I'm sorry, Keith, that I just can't possibly respond to this
call for papers. However, I want to continue this discussion with
you.<BR><BR>First of all, in saying Wojciechowski concept of knowledge
excludes CONSIDERATIONS of "truthfulness, efficacy, or moral and aesthetic
value," I am saying the same thing you are. Most people think that
knowledge means what is truthful, otherwise it is not knowledge but
ignorance. A better way to make the point, then, would be to say that
there is so much PUTATIVE knowledge that, as you say, it is hard to separate
the wheat from the chaff. For example, I was very fortunate to
discover Social Credit at all. With this way of putting it I would
agree, but it would change the pictographs.<BR><BR>Obviously, social
crediters are keenly aware of the negative aspects of our situation but
reserve the term Cultural Heritage (not "Inheritance") for the
positive. For example, the idea that "money is wealth" is not an
addition to our Culture Heritage but, rather, a diminishment of
it.<BR><BR>"To engineer Nature to OUR liking WE have created . . ."
(Keith)<BR><BR>"We" have done no such thing, because "we" were never given
the choice. The statement assumes a true consumer-driven economy, but
in absense of a National Dividend, we do not have a consumer-driven
economy. I think Keith's concerns are implicitly included in the
Douglas analysis, in that if you produce with true EFFICIENCY and calibrate
production to authentic expression of needs by people, instead of sabotaging
production to satisfy incentives set by Finance, then we will live lightly
on this planet. At the bottom of Social Credit is FAITH in human
nature. It is arrogant to say that human nature is the problem and we
will force it into a tolerable mold. Our duty is rather the more
humble one of clearing away the obstacles that choke human nature, so that
it can have a chance. If that is what Keith calls "utopian," I plead
guilty.<BR><BR>Michael</FONT>
<DIV><PRE>---------------------------------------------------------------------
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 kwilde@tc-biodiversity.org For more information,
visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit <DIV></DIV></PRE>
<DIV></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE><BR></FONT><BR><BR>
<P><PRE>---------------------------------------------------------------------
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 hattersleyjm@interbaun.com
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
<P></P></PRE>
<P>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>No virus found in this incoming message.<BR>Checked by AVG Free
Edition.<BR>Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/358 - Release Date:
07/06/2006<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_005E_01C68A48.12CD7150--
--=======AVGMAIL-4487518E516E======Content-Type: text/plain; x-avgÎrt;
charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Description: "AVG certification"
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/358 - Release Date: 07/06/2006
|
Re: [socialcredit]
Reply to this message