Saturday, May 26, 2012
Find here a piece of news that when I read it the other day it had me to stop and think about what many perceive so often as the gender wars. First let me state that in terms of general equality between men and women I’ve never had any difficulty with the concept, as in fact rather wondering what’s taking the world so long to get over itself in such regard. However that’s from the perspective of a rational person, thinking about a rational world and yet that just isn’t the way the world is; especially one that still finds it necessary for nations to war on nations when reason fails them. So here we find two women who are suing the US government to have the military to lift the restrictions on women being permitted to engage in full blown battlefield combat.
Now perhaps you might think that this is where I jump in to say that I don’t agree with such restrictions or alternately to say this is one place women just don’t belong. The fact is personally I don’t think this is a place any human being should belong, with me being no exception. Now I will get to the point, first as stated here war is not a rational enterprise, so unlike other occupations of the world it’s employees are not in the position to simply opt in or opt out and as such this change that's being asked for can’t just be had to stand for only those who wish to be so involved. So now this is the time I ask the women of the world, being does equality for each of them extend to how these two women define it as such? If yes, than are they prepared for the day when this choice might have themselves forced to serve in such a role rather than it being an option? Now you might wonder what I think, well I can honestly say that I don’t know what I think, which is what so often happens when what it is I’m forced to think about simply can’t be resolved with reason.
Tuesday, February 14, 2012
Sunday, October 30, 2011
In a recent dialogue in which I was engaged I concluded by stating that in terms of the human condition I’ve long found it better when it comes to such matters to attempt to empathize rather than sympathize; that being as sympathy relates to the goodness of one’s heart while empathy stems from the goodness of one’s mind. This might sound as nothing more than a philosophically based preference and I would admit that for me it’s always been primarily that.
However, it should be noted that such a hypothesis has been put forth in recent years which over the last decade to be grounded in a scientific discovery as to the nature of the brains found in humans, some primates and even birds in the study of what’s referred to as Mirror Neurons. This research appears to indicate how it is that we are able to know the mind of others. I thus offer this linked paper which synopsises the investigation of this. All this then has me to wonder, how what could be called that little voice which suggests what might be right and wrong can be better heard, or perhaps just better listened to.
Friday, October 21, 2011
Sunday, October 16, 2011
(Mladen Antonov/AFP/Getty Images)
In respect to these “Occupy” protests my greatest hope is they never become a movement as found to be formed out of some individual’s or factional group’s vision for the world, yet simply remain the unified final recognition that things are in need of change and to admit each is seeking what that is while not as yet knowing what that would end up to be. So if this is truly to be the counter to being an ideology such as the Tea Party or that of any other group which presents as the same, it must be first understood the need for a true and open dialogue is what’s required and not an ordinary discussion, as to have found created not what we simply feel and think as wanted and needed, yet rather what can work to have this to be.
Just as a final thought, as perhaps as to add to the dialogue, is simply to remind that a total solution never is found with considering only 99%, even if it be greater than 1%.
"[Thought] seems to have some inertia, a tendency to continue. It seems to have a necessity that we keep on doing it. However ... we often find that we cannot easily give up the tendency to hold rigidly to patterns of thought built up over a long time. We are then caught up in what may be called absolute necessity. This kind of thought leaves no room at all intellectually for any other possibility, while emotionally and physically, it means we take a stance in our feelings, in our bodies, and indeed, in our whole culture, of holding back or resisting. This stance implies that under no circumstances whatsoever can we allow ourselves to give up certain things or change them."
-David Bohm & Mark Edwards, "Changing Consciousness"_, p. 15
"A key difference between a dialogue and an ordinary discussion is that, within the latter people usually hold relatively fixed positions and argue in favor of their views as they try to convince others to change. At best this may produce agreement or compromise, but it does not give rise to anything creative."
-David Bohm & David Peat, "Science Order, and Creativity"_, p. 241