On 22 Nov 99, at 11:48, John Gunkler wrote:
> Count me proudly with the "everydots." Yes, Barry, there are
> "transcendent" experiences that change our ways of thinking about the
> world. But I, for one, don't believe that society's problem is
> unwillingness to recognize them. Quite the opposite. I believe society's
> problem is being too willing to recognize any outrageous, unsubstantiated
> claim.
Breaking general vow of silence because this is a "way cool" thread. On
the nose, John. To map on...
[Host's Note: Welcome back, Robert. ..Rick]
I don't believe it is society's problem but an individual level problem
conditioned by a society gone so complex that individuals search for
simple solutions so as not to be overwhelmed. What has struck me over the
last decade or two is the general move for individuals to move away from
any objectively based, data driven conclusions to the principle: "If it
works for me, therefore it is valid (and perhaps for everyone). Not only
have we moved away from institutionalized faith in religions, but also
away from intellect, critical thinking and recourse to the thinking of
others and the data of others.
It's an exceedingly self-centred position - and one where everyone becomes
an instant expert about everything, since true expertise is often
minimalized or trivialized.
But even worse, this anti-intellectual, self-centred move comes along with
an effort to dress up what is basically personal experience in the
language of pseudo-science, and the invention of new meanings and new
language when the things refered to are simply not new.
> We are inundated, daily, by hundreds of claims of transcendent experiences
> (for want of a better word -- by which I mean "transcending current
> scientific ability to explain") -- mostly by quacks trying to "sell" us
> something or by deluded, ignorant people who want to have their 15 minutes
> of fame.
Perhaps the more accurate term is not transcendence but things where there
is NO proof at all, except for each person's experience with the "thing".
But we still add some pseudo-science to "back up" the conclusions.
I see this all the time with testing, MBTI, personality, desire to
compartmentalize, and in every case it's an effort to baffle people.
> Every day we have claims of health benefits beyond our wildest
> dreams from taking some new-found dietary supplement, claims of ESP
> abilities, claims of "X-files" conspiracies, claims of ways to avoid the
> coming apocalypse, claims of rides in alien space ships, claims of
> abilities to teach us to [fill in your favorite dream], etc., etc. We
> have claims of innocence by the likes of O.J. Simpson -- who, I truly
> think, now really believes he didn't do it (because delusion is the only
> way his mind can allow him to continue to live with himself.)
I think most people here would recognize that the examples you use are
good ones. I would bet that most people here are quite willing to reject
the ones above, while embracing the usefulness of let's say, the MBTI.
This despite the fact that most will not have read a single article or
piece of proper research on the MBTI.
> I'm sorry -- but I cannot believe everything that I am asked to believe;
> it would be self-contradictory to do so in many cases and, in others, it
> would require that I undergo a weekly (or daily) Kuhnian paradigm shift in
> my fundamental ways of dealing with the universe, which is too disruptive
> to seriously contemplate.
For many it only requires ONE paradigm shift. A paradigm generally maps
out the acceptable areas of inquiry and delineates the levels of evidence
required to support the hypotheses. Most people have made that shift -
from relying on data, objectivity, research, etc, to : Does it make sense
to me personally (even though I have only my perceptual goggles to use).
You refuse to move your paradigm to accept anything and everything. So do
I. Many others don't and have made the one significant shift in their
paradigms, and then insist on imposing their beliefs on others.
In short. We have no shared religions in which to believe. We find science
overwhelming. So we believe what we want to believe - generally
superficial, quick fixes and perceptions about life. It is the ultimate
triumph of the selfish, self-centred spirit (or lack thereof).
Bookmark the search for anything page - websites, email addresses, books,newsgroups, lists.
http://www.escape.ca/~rbacal/search.htm
--Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>