Friday, May 10, 2013
Toddler Guns/Bill Edelen on Dogs, etc/Jack Crimmins & Rebecca del Rio/
(P1) Political
About Crickett Rifles For Toddlers
From Mother Jones May 1 2013
On Tuesday, inside a rural Kentucky home, a five-year-old boy accidentally shot and killed his two-year-old sister. The boy had been playing with a .22 caliber single-shot Crickett rifle made and marketed for kids. The children's mother was reportedly outside the house when the shooting took place, and apparently didn't know that the gun contained a shell.
(P2) Philosophical
Edelen At 91
Poetry, Puppies, and Pleasure
by William Edelen
On the 17th of July, coming up fast, I will have been on this earth 91 years. On that date in the West Texas town of Stephenville a star danced and I made my entrance into this world in 1922. That city is known today as ‘the cowboy capital of the world.’” Those lazy, hazy days of summer for me will be filled with the pleasure of poetry and my two four legged soul mates who share my home with me… I named them TAI and CHI. Brown and white Shih-Tzu’s, litter mates, brothers. Abundant joy and the celebration of life is constant in their presence.
They will compliment my other hours relishing good poetry and poets who, to me, are the language and breath of life. It is as Octavio Paz has written “there is more truth to be found in poetry than in all the philosophy ever written” …and again “when you say ‘life is marvelous, you are saying a banality.’ But to make life a marvel, that is the role of poetry.” That opinion from a Nobel Prize winner in Literature and Poetry, from a poet called “the soul of Mexico” touches my mind and heart and receives from me a solid YES in affirmation.
Or my being totally absorbed in almost everything written by United States Poet Laureate Stanley Kunitz, who was twice appointed to that distinguished position. When he died a few years ago, at age 100, he was given full page treatment in both the LA Times and the NY Times.
His poetry is breath-taking and his essays on life and writing and meaning and reality are as stimulating as anything I have read in years. When I read his poem on “The Layers” to my Sunday Symposium the response was without precedent. Everyone wanted a copy and we printed about 200 copies to pass out the next week. When I started reading to them “The Wellfleet Whale” about a 63 foot finback whale foundered on the beach, gasping for life, I could not finish the poem I was so choked up. Kunitz received the Pulitzer and the Bollingen Prizes, the National Medal of the Arts, Chancellor of the Academy of American Poets and where would the listing of honors end?
What puts my brain into overdrive are his insights into life and words, language and meaning. Listen to this: “poetry is language surprised in the act of changing into meaning.” Kunitz wrote much about animals, nature, plants and his beloved garden. In my study is an extensive library. My favorite section is my shelves of heroes and role models of brilliant poets and their equally brilliant writing. Emerson, Whitman, Sandburg, Frost, e.e.cummings, Mary Oliver, Neruda, Neihardt, Paz. Rumi, Merwin, Gary Snyder, Marquez, Jim Harrison, Billy Collins, Maya Angelou, Rita Dove… and where would it end?…the monumental influence on my life of the vision, thoughts, and ideas of writers of the language of the soul and life.
They will be filling my lazy and hazy days of my birthday summer, along with the sensational new poet, Sherman Alexie, a Spokane Indian born on the Spokane Indian Reservation. I suggest “Blasphemy” and “The Business of Fancydancing”
And always around to remind me to live in the NOW, and enjoy the moments as they come to me, one by one, are my two bouncing and joyful four legged puppies, Tai and Chi, offering me their “unconditional love” even if I am late on feeding them. Science today is confirming what many of us have long known. The relationship between animals and the human animal is psychic, mystical, and mind boggling. Mark Twain said it well: “man is the only animal that blushes, or needs too.” Think of this and weep: other than humans, no other animal runs torture experiments on other animals. There is a spiritual and protoplasmic relationship between all living organisms. Nobel Prize scientists are writing today using that kind of language. Of course, the American Indian has known that for thousands of years.
Remember, the little chipmunk is of the same dust as we, He drinks the same waters, breathes the same air, needs the same oxygen, is warmed by the same sun and was created by the same first source. “A human is ethical only when he considers every living cell, plant or animal, sacred and divine” wrote that giant scholar and humanitarian Dr. Albert Schweitzer.
What a beautiful 91st summer I will
have this year, filled with fairly good health, joy, love, writing, my
Sunday Symposium, surrounded in my library study by profound and
brilliant poets… with two little four-legged bouncing Shih-Tzu’s filling
every room with the message “this moment… NOW… is all we have… this is
IT …now enjoy…”
Meister Eckhart gives me my final word for this column and this day and this life. “IF THE ONLY PRAYER YOU SAY IN YOUR LIFETIME IS ‘THANK YOU’… THAT WILL SUFFICE.”
So to the cosmic Mystery… THANK YOU.
~~
(P3) Poetical
Dialogue:
Spirit
spirit calls out your name
when lightning flashes
spirit makes a trail
and okay sometimes we catch a glimpse
Yeats' wife begins dictation
on the train outside San Bernardino
years later we listen and
fall inward to
silence
your life is gold within
sun behind clouds
still gives off light
is it too easy to say
life is blessed
and has freedom gone hidden
what is death
except
dark stone in the center of the path
- Jack Crimmins
The Dark Stone
for Jack Crimmins
There in the path, it waits
The dark stone, in the center–
The place we hoped never to arrive.
Life is littered with so many losses,
Dark stones, scattered in the fields and paths,
Betrayals by death, dishonesty, disappointment.
What happens if we meet that stone with wonder,
Walk to its cruel center, sit in its
Sorrowful presence?
Here, yes here, in the heart of
Fear, disillusion, chaos and
Confusion, peace arrives, a soft surprise.
- Rebecca del Rio
About Crickett Rifles For Toddlers
From Mother Jones May 1 2013
On Tuesday, inside a rural Kentucky home, a five-year-old boy accidentally shot and killed his two-year-old sister. The boy had been playing with a .22 caliber single-shot Crickett rifle made and marketed for kids. The children's mother was reportedly outside the house when the shooting took place, and apparently didn't know that the gun contained a shell.
"Just one of those crazy accidents," said the Cumberland County coroner, according to the Lexington
Herald-Leader.
The Pennsylvania-based maker of Crickett rifles, Keystone
Sporting Arms, markets its guns with the slogan "My First Rifle."
They are available with different barrel and stock designs, including some made
in hot pink to appeal to young girls.
Comment or Read Comments Here on any of the above or below. If you do not have a Google account, then log in by checking "Name/URL," (it's easy). Just the name (don't worry about the URL). Actual name is best, but use what you like. Or email me at edcoletti@sbcglobal.net, and I can post it.
(P2) PhilosophicalEdelen At 91
Poetry, Puppies, and Pleasure
by William Edelen
On the 17th of July, coming up fast, I will have been on this earth 91 years. On that date in the West Texas town of Stephenville a star danced and I made my entrance into this world in 1922. That city is known today as ‘the cowboy capital of the world.’” Those lazy, hazy days of summer for me will be filled with the pleasure of poetry and my two four legged soul mates who share my home with me… I named them TAI and CHI. Brown and white Shih-Tzu’s, litter mates, brothers. Abundant joy and the celebration of life is constant in their presence.
They will compliment my other hours relishing good poetry and poets who, to me, are the language and breath of life. It is as Octavio Paz has written “there is more truth to be found in poetry than in all the philosophy ever written” …and again “when you say ‘life is marvelous, you are saying a banality.’ But to make life a marvel, that is the role of poetry.” That opinion from a Nobel Prize winner in Literature and Poetry, from a poet called “the soul of Mexico” touches my mind and heart and receives from me a solid YES in affirmation.
Or my being totally absorbed in almost everything written by United States Poet Laureate Stanley Kunitz, who was twice appointed to that distinguished position. When he died a few years ago, at age 100, he was given full page treatment in both the LA Times and the NY Times.
His poetry is breath-taking and his essays on life and writing and meaning and reality are as stimulating as anything I have read in years. When I read his poem on “The Layers” to my Sunday Symposium the response was without precedent. Everyone wanted a copy and we printed about 200 copies to pass out the next week. When I started reading to them “The Wellfleet Whale” about a 63 foot finback whale foundered on the beach, gasping for life, I could not finish the poem I was so choked up. Kunitz received the Pulitzer and the Bollingen Prizes, the National Medal of the Arts, Chancellor of the Academy of American Poets and where would the listing of honors end?
What puts my brain into overdrive are his insights into life and words, language and meaning. Listen to this: “poetry is language surprised in the act of changing into meaning.” Kunitz wrote much about animals, nature, plants and his beloved garden. In my study is an extensive library. My favorite section is my shelves of heroes and role models of brilliant poets and their equally brilliant writing. Emerson, Whitman, Sandburg, Frost, e.e.cummings, Mary Oliver, Neruda, Neihardt, Paz. Rumi, Merwin, Gary Snyder, Marquez, Jim Harrison, Billy Collins, Maya Angelou, Rita Dove… and where would it end?…the monumental influence on my life of the vision, thoughts, and ideas of writers of the language of the soul and life.
They will be filling my lazy and hazy days of my birthday summer, along with the sensational new poet, Sherman Alexie, a Spokane Indian born on the Spokane Indian Reservation. I suggest “Blasphemy” and “The Business of Fancydancing”
And always around to remind me to live in the NOW, and enjoy the moments as they come to me, one by one, are my two bouncing and joyful four legged puppies, Tai and Chi, offering me their “unconditional love” even if I am late on feeding them. Science today is confirming what many of us have long known. The relationship between animals and the human animal is psychic, mystical, and mind boggling. Mark Twain said it well: “man is the only animal that blushes, or needs too.” Think of this and weep: other than humans, no other animal runs torture experiments on other animals. There is a spiritual and protoplasmic relationship between all living organisms. Nobel Prize scientists are writing today using that kind of language. Of course, the American Indian has known that for thousands of years.
Remember, the little chipmunk is of the same dust as we, He drinks the same waters, breathes the same air, needs the same oxygen, is warmed by the same sun and was created by the same first source. “A human is ethical only when he considers every living cell, plant or animal, sacred and divine” wrote that giant scholar and humanitarian Dr. Albert Schweitzer.
A New York Times article on the
“animal connection “recently was on the health benefits of having a dog
or cat. I loved this paragraph: “Don’t worry about cardiovascular
workouts, oat bran, or an aspirin. To live longer and heal faster, lower
blood pressure and cholesterol and have a far better chance of
surviving a heart attack, get a dog. Dogs should be making house calls
and making the rounds of wards.”
Meister Eckhart gives me my final word for this column and this day and this life. “IF THE ONLY PRAYER YOU SAY IN YOUR LIFETIME IS ‘THANK YOU’… THAT WILL SUFFICE.”
So to the cosmic Mystery… THANK YOU.
~~
Comment or Read Comments Here on any of the above or below. If you do not have a Google account, then log in by checking "Name/URL," (it's easy). Just the name (don't worry about the URL). Actual name is best, but use what you like. Or email me at edcoletti@sbcglobal.net, and I can post it.
(P3) Poetical
Dialogue:
Spirit
spirit calls out your name
when lightning flashes
spirit makes a trail
and okay sometimes we catch a glimpse
Yeats' wife begins dictation
on the train outside San Bernardino
years later we listen and
fall inward to
silence
your life is gold within
sun behind clouds
still gives off light
is it too easy to say
life is blessed
and has freedom gone hidden
what is death
except
dark stone in the center of the path
- Jack Crimmins
The Dark Stone
for Jack Crimmins
There in the path, it waits
The dark stone, in the center–
The place we hoped never to arrive.
Life is littered with so many losses,
Dark stones, scattered in the fields and paths,
Betrayals by death, dishonesty, disappointment.
What happens if we meet that stone with wonder,
Walk to its cruel center, sit in its
Sorrowful presence?
Here, yes here, in the heart of
Fear, disillusion, chaos and
Confusion, peace arrives, a soft surprise.
- Rebecca del Rio
Comment or Read Comments Here on any of the above or below. If you do not have a Google account, then log in by checking "Name/URL," (it's easy). Just the name (don't worry about the URL). Actual name is best, but use what you like. Or email me at edcoletti@sbcglobal.net, and I can post it.
Monday, April 01, 2013
Emily D. 435/Susan Lamont Meets Sandy Weill/New Pope Praying/Get the Money Out!/
(P1) Poetical
Emily Dickinson Like Yeats Re. Politics?
435
Much madness is divinest Sense—
To a discerning Eye—
Much sense—the starkest Madness—
‘Tis the Majority
In this, as All, prevail—
Assent—and you are sane—
Demur—you’re straightaway dangerous—
And handled with a Chain—
Comment or Read Comments Here on any of the above or below. If you do not have a Google account, then log in by checking "Name/URL," (it's easy). Just the name (don't worry about the URL). Actual name is best, but use what you like. Or email me at edcoletti@sbcglobal.net, and I can post it.
(P2) Political (a.)
Comment or Read Comments Here on any of the above or below. If you do not have a Google account, then log in by checking "Name/URL," (it's easy). Just the name (don't worry about the URL). Actual name is best, but use what you like. Or email me at edcoletti@sbcglobal.net, and I can post it.
(P3) Philosophical
New Pope Praying (watercolor by Ed Coletti
For some reason, I did this watercolor of the new pope praying the day he was elected.
Comment or Read Comments Here on any of the above or below. If you do not have a Google account, then log in by checking "Name/URL," (it's easy). Just the name (don't worry about the URL). Actual name is best, but use what you like. Or email me at edcoletti@sbcglobal.net, and I can post it.
(P2) Political (b.)
I ran this back in September of last year. Since then, my concern has grown to the extent that I can think of nothing else politically and economically that is more important. Legalized bribery is the uber-evil that accounts for everything congress refuses to do in support of a middle class in this country.
Get the Money Out of Politics
"No person, corporation or business entity of any type, domestic or foreign, shall be allowed to contribute money, directly or indirectly, to any candidate for Federal office or to contribute money on behalf of or opposed to any type of campaign for Federal office. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, campaign contributions to candidates for Federal office shall not constitute speech of any kind as guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution or any amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Congress shall set forth a federal holiday for the purposes of voting for candidates for Federal office."
Unfortunately, the mechanisms for amending the Constitution may be too cumbersome and untenable to make this happen during this particular political time. Additionally, everybody and his brother or sister, seems to be proposing constitutional amendments, and the result is distraction.
So, at this particular juncture, I ask that you watch the following two or so minute announcement of a new method through a law called the American Anti-Corruption Act. You will then be guided toward steps to be taken. Initially, however, just watch the short movie.
Emily Dickinson Like Yeats Re. Politics?
435Much madness is divinest Sense—
To a discerning Eye—
Much sense—the starkest Madness—
‘Tis the Majority
In this, as All, prevail—
Assent—and you are sane—
Demur—you’re straightaway dangerous—
And handled with a Chain—
Comment or Read Comments Here on any of the above or below. If you do not have a Google account, then log in by checking "Name/URL," (it's easy). Just the name (don't worry about the URL). Actual name is best, but use what you like. Or email me at edcoletti@sbcglobal.net, and I can post it.
(P2) Political (a.)
Can It Be Called Philanthropy?
By Susan Lamont
Two years ago, I posed the question, “Can it be philanthropy
if it was made possible by ill-gotten gains?” I was talking about Sandy Weill,
architect of Citigroup, destroyer of the Glass-Steagall economic protections,
and creator of the mainstream toxic subprime mortgage market.
You’ll remember that Weill gave $12.5 million to Sonoma State
University for the Green Music
Center. I called him on
it, pointing out that he’d stolen our money and had decided, on his own, how it
should be spent. If we’d been asked if we wanted our money spent on a music
center, we might have said “yes.” Who knows? But we weren’t asked and there’s
the little matter of the extra he kept for himself.
Well, this March the North
Bay Business Journal held its annual conference on the state of the economy
in Sonoma County. The theme was “Game-Changers:
Innovations and Leaders Transforming the North Bay Economy.” The keynote
speaker was Sandy Weill (investor in the Press
Democrat, Argus-Courier, Sonoma
Index-Times and the North Bay
Business Journal). That’s enough to make one’s head spin! Sandy Weill knows
a little something about game-changing all right, but not for the better.
Subprime mortgages and the end of Glass-Steagall were fundamental to the
economic crash.
I just had to hear this, so I got myself a ticket. That
morning, traffic into Sonoma
State was really backed
up because of the conference and I was worried I’d be late. But as luck would
have it, I wasn’t the only one. As I walked in, Sandy Weill walked in with me.
So I turned to him, shook his hand, and introduced myself. He knew who I was.
And then I surprised even myself and told him I wanted to
ask him a question. I asked him if they were being ironic when they chose him
to speak on game-changers. He said that he didn’t know what I meant. I
explained that given the negative influence he’d had on the economy…….He
immediately told me that he’d done nothing wrong.
Just then SSU president Ruben Armiňana strode up to greet
Weill. Upon seeing me, he hissed to Sandy,
“She’s the one who wrote that article.” Sandy
said he knew that. Armiňana then turned to me and said, “I have only two words
for you: 'mean and nasty'.” I told him that I thought what had happened to people
in the crash was “mean and nasty.” Again, Weill squawked that he’d done nothing
wrong and they both turned away.
So, apparently both Weill and Armiňana believe there’s
nothing wrong with crashing an economy, causing people to lose their homes, or
gutting the funding for the very university of which Armiňana is president.
It’s no problem for them that the crash has made it more difficult to pay for a
college education, causing students to go into greater debt than ever before in
the hopes that there will be a decent-paying job when they leave.
I’m going to guess that Weill really believes he’s done
nothing wrong. After all, we’ve been encouraged to believe that there’s no
right or wrong about money. But I have no problem saying that the world would
be a better place if Sandy Weill had never set foot in the business world.
Most economic thinking is done inside a little box by people
who couldn’t think their way out of it if it were set on fire. How do I know?
Because it’s on fire now and we’re hearing the same old blather!
I want a world in which the wealth is spread more equitably
– to the workers in the factories or the implementers of great ideas or the
mothers and fathers who raised them or the people who harvested the food that
helped them thrive. I want a world with no need for “philanthropy.”
Comment or Read Comments Here on any of the above or below. If you do not have a Google account, then log in by checking "Name/URL," (it's easy). Just the name (don't worry about the URL). Actual name is best, but use what you like. Or email me at edcoletti@sbcglobal.net, and I can post it.
(P3) Philosophical
New Pope Praying (watercolor by Ed Coletti
For some reason, I did this watercolor of the new pope praying the day he was elected.
Comment or Read Comments Here on any of the above or below. If you do not have a Google account, then log in by checking "Name/URL," (it's easy). Just the name (don't worry about the URL). Actual name is best, but use what you like. Or email me at edcoletti@sbcglobal.net, and I can post it.
(P2) Political (b.)
I ran this back in September of last year. Since then, my concern has grown to the extent that I can think of nothing else politically and economically that is more important. Legalized bribery is the uber-evil that accounts for everything congress refuses to do in support of a middle class in this country.
Get the Money Out of Politics
"No person, corporation or business entity of any type, domestic or foreign, shall be allowed to contribute money, directly or indirectly, to any candidate for Federal office or to contribute money on behalf of or opposed to any type of campaign for Federal office. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, campaign contributions to candidates for Federal office shall not constitute speech of any kind as guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution or any amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Congress shall set forth a federal holiday for the purposes of voting for candidates for Federal office."
Unfortunately, the mechanisms for amending the Constitution may be too cumbersome and untenable to make this happen during this particular political time. Additionally, everybody and his brother or sister, seems to be proposing constitutional amendments, and the result is distraction.
So, at this particular juncture, I ask that you watch the following two or so minute announcement of a new method through a law called the American Anti-Corruption Act. You will then be guided toward steps to be taken. Initially, however, just watch the short movie.
Saturday, January 26, 2013
Sandy Hook, Guns, and Politics Cartoons/Jim Carroll/8 Philosophical Unanswerables/
(P1) Political
Comment or Read Comments Here on
any of the above or below. If you do not have a Google account, then log in by checking "Name/URL," (it's
easy). Just the name (don't worry about the URL). Actual name
is best, but use what you like. Or email me at edcoletti@sbcglobal.net, and I can post it.
(P2) Poetical
I came across Jim Carrol after his death when my son, NYC poet John Coletti invited me to the Jim Carroll Memorial Reading at The Poetry Project at St. Mark's in the Village. That night, in addition to readings and performances by the likes of Anne Waldman and Thurston Moore, I had the distinct pleasure of watching, listening to and speaking with Patti Smith or at least with her famed guitarist Lenny Kaye. I may briefly have brushed against Patti who performed a memorable version of Jim Carroll's people who died. She changed the names of the dead to those of poets, mostly Beat. Here are 2 You Tube cuts of the Jim Carroll Band, one "People Who Died" and the other "Catholic Boy" both of which I admire greatly. The photo below is a sad one (because he'd been such a vital beautiful young man) taken in shortly before his death of a heart attack. He was working at his desk when he died - Ed
Watch an listen to "People Who Died" and "Catholic Boy"
Untitled
We are very much a part of the boredom
of early Spring of planning the days shopping
of riding down Fifth on a bus terrified by easter.
but here we are anyway, surviving like a wet street in August
and keeping our eye on each other as we “do it,” well
you do west on 8th St. and buy something mystical to wear
and I’ll simply tuck my hands into my corduroy pockets
and whistle over to Carter’s for the poster he promised me.
I like the idea of leaving you for a while
knowing I’ll see you again while boring books
W.H. Auden, and movie schedules sustain my isolation
and all the while my mind’s leaning on you like my body
would like to lean on you below some statue in Central Park
in the lion house at the Bronx Zoo on a bed in Forest Hills on a
bus.
I reach 3rd avenue, its blue traffic, I knew I would sooner
or later and there you are in the wind of Astor Place reading
a book and breathing in the air every few seconds
you’re so consistent.
Isn’t the day so confetti-like? pieces of warm flesh tickling
my face on St. Mark’s Place and my heart pounding like a negro youth
while depth is approaching everywhere in the sky and in your
touch.
(P2) Poetical
| Jim Carroll | |
|---|---|
 Carroll in Seattle in 2000 |
|
| Born | James Dennis Carroll August 1, 1949 United States |
| Died | September 11, 2009 (aged 60) New York, New York, United States |
| Nationality | American |
| Occupation | Author, poet, musician, autobiographer. Published in Poetry Magazine and Paris Review. |
| Years active | 1967–2009 |
| Known for | The Basketball Diaries, Fear of Dreaming (Penguin Books), etc. |
| Influenced by | Rainer Maria Rilke, Frank O'Hara, John Ashbery, James Schuyler,[1] Allen Ginsberg, William S. Burroughs[2] |
| Influenced | Irvine Welsh, Danny Sugarman, James O'Barr, Harmony Korine, Pete Townshend[3] |
I came across Jim Carrol after his death when my son, NYC poet John Coletti invited me to the Jim Carroll Memorial Reading at The Poetry Project at St. Mark's in the Village. That night, in addition to readings and performances by the likes of Anne Waldman and Thurston Moore, I had the distinct pleasure of watching, listening to and speaking with Patti Smith or at least with her famed guitarist Lenny Kaye. I may briefly have brushed against Patti who performed a memorable version of Jim Carroll's people who died. She changed the names of the dead to those of poets, mostly Beat. Here are 2 You Tube cuts of the Jim Carroll Band, one "People Who Died" and the other "Catholic Boy" both of which I admire greatly. The photo below is a sad one (because he'd been such a vital beautiful young man) taken in shortly before his death of a heart attack. He was working at his desk when he died - Ed
Watch an listen to "People Who Died" and "Catholic Boy"
Untitled
We are very much a part of the boredom
of early Spring of planning the days shopping
of riding down Fifth on a bus terrified by easter.
but here we are anyway, surviving like a wet street in August
and keeping our eye on each other as we “do it,” well
you do west on 8th St. and buy something mystical to wear
and I’ll simply tuck my hands into my corduroy pockets
and whistle over to Carter’s for the poster he promised me.
I like the idea of leaving you for a while
knowing I’ll see you again while boring books
W.H. Auden, and movie schedules sustain my isolation
and all the while my mind’s leaning on you like my body
would like to lean on you below some statue in Central Park
in the lion house at the Bronx Zoo on a bed in Forest Hills on a
bus.
I reach 3rd avenue, its blue traffic, I knew I would sooner
or later and there you are in the wind of Astor Place reading
a book and breathing in the air every few seconds
you’re so consistent.
Isn’t the day so confetti-like? pieces of warm flesh tickling
my face on St. Mark’s Place and my heart pounding like a negro youth
while depth is approaching everywhere in the sky and in your
touch.
Comment or Read Comments Here on
any of the above or below. If you do not have a Google account, then log in by checking "Name/URL," (it's
easy). Just the name (don't worry about the URL). Actual name
is best, but use what you like. Or email me at edcoletti@sbcglobal.net, and I can post it.
(P3) Philosophical
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
8 Great Philosophical Questions That We’ll Never Solve
- George Dvorsky -
Philosophy goes where hard science can't, or won't. Philosophers have a license to speculate about everything from metaphysics to morality, and this means they can shed light on some of the basic questions of existence. The bad news? These are questions that may always lay just beyond the limits of our comprehension.
Here are eight mysteries of philosophy that we'll probably never resolve.
1. Why is there something rather than nothing?
Our presence in the universe is something too bizarre for words. The mundaneness of our daily lives cause us take our existence for granted — but every once in awhile we're cajoled out of that complacency and enter into a profound state of existential awareness, and we ask: Why is there all this stuff in the universe, and why is it governed by such exquisitely precise laws? And why should anything exist at all? We inhabit a universe with such things as spiral galaxies, the aurora borealis, and SpongeBob Squarepants. And as Sean Carroll notes, "Nothing about modern physics explains why we have these laws rather than some totally different laws, although physicists sometimes talk that way — a mistake they might be able to avoid if they took philosophers more seriously." And as for the philosophers, the best that they can come up with is the anthropic principle — the notion that our particular universe appears the way it does by virtue of our presence as observers within it — a suggestion that has an uncomfortably tautological ring to it.
2. Is our universe real?
This the classic Cartesian question. It essentially asks, how do we know that what we see around us is the real deal, and not some grand illusion perpetuated by an unseen force (who René Descartes referred to as the hypothesized ‘evil demon')? More recently, the question has been reframed as the "brain in a vat" problem, or the Simulation Argument. And it could very well be that we're the products of an elaborate simulation. A deeper question to ask, therefore, is whether the civilization running the simulation is also in a simulation — a kind of supercomputer regression (or simulationception). Moreover, we may not be who we think we are. Assuming that the people running the simulation are also taking part in it, our true identities may be temporarily suppressed, to heighten the realness of the experience. This philosophical conundrum also forces us to re-evaluate what we mean by "real." Modal realists argue that if the universe around us seems rational (as opposed to it being dreamy, incoherent, or lawless), then we have no choice but to declare it as being real and genuine. Or maybe, as Cipher said after eating a piece of "simulated" steak in The Matrix, "Ignorance is bliss."
3. Do we have free will?
Also called the dilemma of determinism, we do not know if our actions are controlled by a causal chain of preceding events (or by some other external influence), or if we're truly free agents making decisions of our own volition. Philosophers (and now some scientists) have been debating this for millennia, and with no apparent end in sight. If our decision making is influenced by an endless chain of causality, then determinism is true and we don't have free will. But if the opposite is true, what's called indeterminism, then our actions must be random — what some argue is still not free will. Conversely, libertarians (no, not political libertarians, those are other people), make the case for compatibilism — the idea that free will is logically compatible with deterministic views of the universe. Compounding the problem are advances in neuroscience showing that our brains make decisions before we're even conscious of them. But if we don't have free will, then why did we evolve consciousness instead of zombie-minds? Quantum mechanics makes this problem even more complicated by suggesting that we live in a universe of probability, and that determinism of any sort is impossible. And as Linas Vepstas has said, "Consciousness seems to be intimately and inescapably tied to the perception of the passage of time, and indeed, the idea that the past is fixed and perfectly deterministic, and that the future is unknowable. This fits well, because if the future were predetermined, then there'd be no free will, and no point in the participation of the passage of time."
4. Does God exist?
Simply put, we cannot know if God exists or not. Both the atheists and believers are wrong in their proclamations, and the agnostics are right. True agnostics are simply being Cartesian about it, recognizing the epistemological issues involved and the limitations of human inquiry. We do not know enough about the inner workings of the universe to make any sort of grand claim about the nature of reality and whether or not a Prime Mover exists somewhere in the background. Many people defer to naturalism — the suggestion that the universe runs according to autonomous processes — but that doesn't preclude the existence of a grand designer who set the whole thing in motion (what's called deism). And as mentioned earlier, we may live in a simulation where the hacker gods control all the variables. Or perhaps the gnostics are right and powerful beings exist in some deeper reality that we're unaware of. These aren't necessarily the omniscient, omnipotent gods of the Abrahamic traditions — but they're (hypothetically) powerful beings nonetheless. Again, these aren't scientific questions per se — they're more Platonic thought experiments that force us to confront the limits of human experience and inquiry.
5. Is there life after death?
Before everyone gets excited, this is not a suggestion that we'll all end up strumming harps on some fluffy white cloud, or find ourselves shoveling coal in the depths of Hell for eternity. Because we cannot ask the dead if there's anything on the other side, we're left guessing as to what happens next. Materialists assume that there's no life after death, but it's just that — an assumption that cannot necessarily be proven. Looking closer at the machinations of the universe (or multiverse), whether it be through a classical Newtonian/Einsteinian lens, or through the spooky filter of quantum mechanics, there's no reason to believe that we only have one shot at this thing called life. It's a question of metaphysics and the possibility that the cosmos (what Carl Sagan described as "all that is or ever was or ever will be") cycles and percolates in such a way that lives are infinitely recycled. Hans Moravec put it best when, speaking in relation to the quantum Many Worlds Interpretation, said that non-observance of the universe is impossible; we must always find ourselves alive and observing the universe in some form or another. This is highly speculative stuff, but like the God problem, is one that science cannot yet tackle, leaving it to the philosophers.
6. Can you really experience anything objectively?
There's a difference between understanding the world objectively (or at least trying to, anyway) and experiencing it through an exclusively objective framework. This is essentially the problem of qualia — the notion that our surroundings can only be observed through the filter of our senses and the cogitations of our minds. Everything you know, everything you've touched, seen, and smelled, has been filtered through any number of physiological and cognitive processes. Subsequently, your subjective experience of the world is unique. In the classic example, the subjective appreciation of the color red may vary from person to person. The only way you could possibly know is if you were to somehow observe the universe from the "conscious lens" of another person in a sort of Being John Malkovich kind of way — not anything we're likely going to be able to accomplish at any stage of our scientific or technological development. Another way of saying all this is that the universe can only be observed through a brain (or potentially a machine mind), and by virtue of that, can only be interpreted subjectively. But given that the universe appears to be coherent and (somewhat) knowable, should we continue to assume that its true objective quality can never be observed or known? It's worth noting that much of Buddhist philosophy is predicated on this fundamental limitation (what they call emptiness), and a complete antithesis to Plato's idealism.
7. What is the best moral system?
Essentially, we'll never truly be able to distinguish between "right" and "wrong" actions. At any given time in history, however, philosophers, theologians, and politicians will claim to have discovered the best way to evaluate human actions and establish the most righteous code of conduct. But it's never that easy. Life is far too messy and complicated for there to be anything like a universal morality or an absolutist ethics. The Golden Rule is great (the idea that you should treat others as you would like them to treat you), but it disregards moral autonomy and leaves no room for the imposition of justice (such as jailing criminals), and can even be used to justify oppression (Immanuel Kant was among its most staunchest critics). Moreover, it's a highly simplified rule of thumb that doesn't provision for more complex scenarios. For example, should the few be spared to save the many? Who has more moral worth: a human baby or a full-grown great ape? And as neuroscientists have shown, morality is not only a culturally-ingrained thing, it's also a part of our psychologies (the Trolly Problem is the best demonstration of this). At best, we can only say that morality is normative, while acknowledging that our sense of right and wrong will change over time.
8. What are numbers?
We use numbers every day, but taking a step back, what are they, really — and why do they do such a damn good job of helping us explain the universe (such as Newtonian laws)? Mathematical structures can consist of numbers, sets, groups, and points — but are they real objects, or do they simply describe relationships that necessarily exist in all structures? Plato argued that numbers were real (it doesn't matter that you can't "see" them), but formalists insisted that they were merely formal systems (well-defined constructions of abstract thought based on math). This is essentially an ontological problem, where we're left baffled about the true nature of the universe and which aspects of it are human constructs and which are truly tangible.
Comment or Read Comments Here on any of the above or below. If you do not have a Google account, then log in by checking "Name/URL," (it's easy). Just the name (don't worry about the URL). Actual name is best, but use what you like. Or email me at edcoletti@sbcglobal.net, and I can post it.
(P3) Philosophical
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
8 Great Philosophical Questions That We’ll Never Solve
- George Dvorsky -
Philosophy goes where hard science can't, or won't. Philosophers have a license to speculate about everything from metaphysics to morality, and this means they can shed light on some of the basic questions of existence. The bad news? These are questions that may always lay just beyond the limits of our comprehension.
Here are eight mysteries of philosophy that we'll probably never resolve.
1. Why is there something rather than nothing?
Our presence in the universe is something too bizarre for words. The mundaneness of our daily lives cause us take our existence for granted — but every once in awhile we're cajoled out of that complacency and enter into a profound state of existential awareness, and we ask: Why is there all this stuff in the universe, and why is it governed by such exquisitely precise laws? And why should anything exist at all? We inhabit a universe with such things as spiral galaxies, the aurora borealis, and SpongeBob Squarepants. And as Sean Carroll notes, "Nothing about modern physics explains why we have these laws rather than some totally different laws, although physicists sometimes talk that way — a mistake they might be able to avoid if they took philosophers more seriously." And as for the philosophers, the best that they can come up with is the anthropic principle — the notion that our particular universe appears the way it does by virtue of our presence as observers within it — a suggestion that has an uncomfortably tautological ring to it.
2. Is our universe real?
This the classic Cartesian question. It essentially asks, how do we know that what we see around us is the real deal, and not some grand illusion perpetuated by an unseen force (who René Descartes referred to as the hypothesized ‘evil demon')? More recently, the question has been reframed as the "brain in a vat" problem, or the Simulation Argument. And it could very well be that we're the products of an elaborate simulation. A deeper question to ask, therefore, is whether the civilization running the simulation is also in a simulation — a kind of supercomputer regression (or simulationception). Moreover, we may not be who we think we are. Assuming that the people running the simulation are also taking part in it, our true identities may be temporarily suppressed, to heighten the realness of the experience. This philosophical conundrum also forces us to re-evaluate what we mean by "real." Modal realists argue that if the universe around us seems rational (as opposed to it being dreamy, incoherent, or lawless), then we have no choice but to declare it as being real and genuine. Or maybe, as Cipher said after eating a piece of "simulated" steak in The Matrix, "Ignorance is bliss."
3. Do we have free will?
Also called the dilemma of determinism, we do not know if our actions are controlled by a causal chain of preceding events (or by some other external influence), or if we're truly free agents making decisions of our own volition. Philosophers (and now some scientists) have been debating this for millennia, and with no apparent end in sight. If our decision making is influenced by an endless chain of causality, then determinism is true and we don't have free will. But if the opposite is true, what's called indeterminism, then our actions must be random — what some argue is still not free will. Conversely, libertarians (no, not political libertarians, those are other people), make the case for compatibilism — the idea that free will is logically compatible with deterministic views of the universe. Compounding the problem are advances in neuroscience showing that our brains make decisions before we're even conscious of them. But if we don't have free will, then why did we evolve consciousness instead of zombie-minds? Quantum mechanics makes this problem even more complicated by suggesting that we live in a universe of probability, and that determinism of any sort is impossible. And as Linas Vepstas has said, "Consciousness seems to be intimately and inescapably tied to the perception of the passage of time, and indeed, the idea that the past is fixed and perfectly deterministic, and that the future is unknowable. This fits well, because if the future were predetermined, then there'd be no free will, and no point in the participation of the passage of time."
4. Does God exist?
Simply put, we cannot know if God exists or not. Both the atheists and believers are wrong in their proclamations, and the agnostics are right. True agnostics are simply being Cartesian about it, recognizing the epistemological issues involved and the limitations of human inquiry. We do not know enough about the inner workings of the universe to make any sort of grand claim about the nature of reality and whether or not a Prime Mover exists somewhere in the background. Many people defer to naturalism — the suggestion that the universe runs according to autonomous processes — but that doesn't preclude the existence of a grand designer who set the whole thing in motion (what's called deism). And as mentioned earlier, we may live in a simulation where the hacker gods control all the variables. Or perhaps the gnostics are right and powerful beings exist in some deeper reality that we're unaware of. These aren't necessarily the omniscient, omnipotent gods of the Abrahamic traditions — but they're (hypothetically) powerful beings nonetheless. Again, these aren't scientific questions per se — they're more Platonic thought experiments that force us to confront the limits of human experience and inquiry.
5. Is there life after death?
Before everyone gets excited, this is not a suggestion that we'll all end up strumming harps on some fluffy white cloud, or find ourselves shoveling coal in the depths of Hell for eternity. Because we cannot ask the dead if there's anything on the other side, we're left guessing as to what happens next. Materialists assume that there's no life after death, but it's just that — an assumption that cannot necessarily be proven. Looking closer at the machinations of the universe (or multiverse), whether it be through a classical Newtonian/Einsteinian lens, or through the spooky filter of quantum mechanics, there's no reason to believe that we only have one shot at this thing called life. It's a question of metaphysics and the possibility that the cosmos (what Carl Sagan described as "all that is or ever was or ever will be") cycles and percolates in such a way that lives are infinitely recycled. Hans Moravec put it best when, speaking in relation to the quantum Many Worlds Interpretation, said that non-observance of the universe is impossible; we must always find ourselves alive and observing the universe in some form or another. This is highly speculative stuff, but like the God problem, is one that science cannot yet tackle, leaving it to the philosophers.
6. Can you really experience anything objectively?
There's a difference between understanding the world objectively (or at least trying to, anyway) and experiencing it through an exclusively objective framework. This is essentially the problem of qualia — the notion that our surroundings can only be observed through the filter of our senses and the cogitations of our minds. Everything you know, everything you've touched, seen, and smelled, has been filtered through any number of physiological and cognitive processes. Subsequently, your subjective experience of the world is unique. In the classic example, the subjective appreciation of the color red may vary from person to person. The only way you could possibly know is if you were to somehow observe the universe from the "conscious lens" of another person in a sort of Being John Malkovich kind of way — not anything we're likely going to be able to accomplish at any stage of our scientific or technological development. Another way of saying all this is that the universe can only be observed through a brain (or potentially a machine mind), and by virtue of that, can only be interpreted subjectively. But given that the universe appears to be coherent and (somewhat) knowable, should we continue to assume that its true objective quality can never be observed or known? It's worth noting that much of Buddhist philosophy is predicated on this fundamental limitation (what they call emptiness), and a complete antithesis to Plato's idealism.
7. What is the best moral system?
Essentially, we'll never truly be able to distinguish between "right" and "wrong" actions. At any given time in history, however, philosophers, theologians, and politicians will claim to have discovered the best way to evaluate human actions and establish the most righteous code of conduct. But it's never that easy. Life is far too messy and complicated for there to be anything like a universal morality or an absolutist ethics. The Golden Rule is great (the idea that you should treat others as you would like them to treat you), but it disregards moral autonomy and leaves no room for the imposition of justice (such as jailing criminals), and can even be used to justify oppression (Immanuel Kant was among its most staunchest critics). Moreover, it's a highly simplified rule of thumb that doesn't provision for more complex scenarios. For example, should the few be spared to save the many? Who has more moral worth: a human baby or a full-grown great ape? And as neuroscientists have shown, morality is not only a culturally-ingrained thing, it's also a part of our psychologies (the Trolly Problem is the best demonstration of this). At best, we can only say that morality is normative, while acknowledging that our sense of right and wrong will change over time.
8. What are numbers?
We use numbers every day, but taking a step back, what are they, really — and why do they do such a damn good job of helping us explain the universe (such as Newtonian laws)? Mathematical structures can consist of numbers, sets, groups, and points — but are they real objects, or do they simply describe relationships that necessarily exist in all structures? Plato argued that numbers were real (it doesn't matter that you can't "see" them), but formalists insisted that they were merely formal systems (well-defined constructions of abstract thought based on math). This is essentially an ontological problem, where we're left baffled about the true nature of the universe and which aspects of it are human constructs and which are truly tangible.
Comment or Read Comments Here on any of the above or below. If you do not have a Google account, then log in by checking "Name/URL," (it's easy). Just the name (don't worry about the URL). Actual name is best, but use what you like. Or email me at edcoletti@sbcglobal.net, and I can post it.
Friday, November 02, 2012
Drones Come Home/Calvin Trillin's 47% Blues/Larry Ronbinson Poem/Einstein On "God" Definitively The Year Before He Died/
(P1) Political
Future Face of American Law Enforcement, No It's Now
(Sung by three members of the 47 percent)
Well, I work two jobs, and that makes for a kinda long day.
And the boss deducts the payroll tax that I’ve gotta pay.
With sales tax too, I kinda thought I was paying my dues.
I’ve got the Mitt thinks I’m a moocher, a taker not a maker, blues.
Well, the wife and I took retirement some years ago.
And Social Security accounts for most of our dough.
Though we contributed to that so we’d have it there to use.
I’ve got the Mitt thinks I’m a moocher, a taker not a maker, blues.
Well, I went to Nam while Mitt went on his mission to France.
A buddy needed rescuin’ and I thought, “Well, I’ll take a chance.”
A wounded-vet pension’s not the salary that I would choose.
I’ve got the Mitt thinks I’m a moocher, a taker not a maker, blues.
(All, in chorus)
Yes, he thinks we’re bums, and work is something we would refuse.
Entitlements, he says, are what we just live to abuse.
With his fat-cat friends, what he says about us is J’accuse.
So some of us moochers would sure like to see him lose.
We’ve got the Mitt thinks that we’re moochers, takers and not makers, blues.
Comment or Read Comments Here on any of the above or below. If you do not have a Google account, then log in by checking "Name/URL," (it's easy). Just the name (don't worry about the URL). Actual name is best, but use what you like. Or email me at edcoletti@sbcglobal.net, and I can post it.
Comment or Read Comments Here on any of the above or below. If you do not have a Google account, then log in by checking "Name/URL," (it's easy). Just the name (don't worry about the URL). Actual name is best, but use what you like. Or email me at edcoletti@sbcglobal.net, and I can post it.
Future Face of American Law Enforcement, No It's Now
 |
| Members of the Montgomery County, Texas, SWAT team stand with a
ShadowHawk drone in this September 2011 photo provided by Vanguard
Defense Industries. (THE ASSOCIATED PRESS) Comment or Read Comments Here on any of the above or below. If you do not have a Google account, then log in by checking "Name/URL," (it's easy). Just the name (don't worry about the URL). Actual name is best, but use what you like. Or email me at edcoletti@sbcglobal.net, and I can post it.
I've Got the Mitt Thinks I'm a Moocher, a Taker Not a Maker, Blues
|
by Calvin Trillin in The
Nation October 15,2012
(Sung by three members of the 47 percent)
Well, I work two jobs, and that makes for a kinda long day.
And the boss deducts the payroll tax that I’ve gotta pay.
With sales tax too, I kinda thought I was paying my dues.
I’ve got the Mitt thinks I’m a moocher, a taker not a maker, blues.
Well, the wife and I took retirement some years ago.
And Social Security accounts for most of our dough.
Though we contributed to that so we’d have it there to use.
I’ve got the Mitt thinks I’m a moocher, a taker not a maker, blues.
Well, I went to Nam while Mitt went on his mission to France.
A buddy needed rescuin’ and I thought, “Well, I’ll take a chance.”
A wounded-vet pension’s not the salary that I would choose.
I’ve got the Mitt thinks I’m a moocher, a taker not a maker, blues.
(All, in chorus)
Yes, he thinks we’re bums, and work is something we would refuse.
Entitlements, he says, are what we just live to abuse.
With his fat-cat friends, what he says about us is J’accuse.
So some of us moochers would sure like to see him lose.
We’ve got the Mitt thinks that we’re moochers, takers and not makers, blues.
Comment or Read Comments Here on any of the above or below. If you do not have a Google account, then log in by checking "Name/URL," (it's easy). Just the name (don't worry about the URL). Actual name is best, but use what you like. Or email me at edcoletti@sbcglobal.net, and I can post it.
(P2) Poetical
Cave Painting At Font du Gaume
Of course, even his bones
are now dust,
his flowing mane
taken by the wind,
those sturdy hooves
and solid flesh consumed
and reborn in endless forms.
Even so, through two hundred centuries
of darkness and lamplight
he is still running free
across that vast savannah of time.
And the hand that captured,
in a few spare lines
on the limestone wall,
that wild grace,
sending it down through the years -
hand of my ancestor,
hand of our ancestor -
has long since returned
to the formless.
A day will come,
certainly,
when all this
will be gone:
you and I,
the painting,
even the wall,
carved by ages of
drip and flow,
through uplifted memories
of countless tiny beings
who spent their short lives
in that primordial sea.
And yet this beauty -
this grace -
offers itself to us
in this moment,
the only time we have.
- Larry Robinson
Comment or Read Comments Here on any of the above or below. If you do not have a Google account, then log in by checking "Name/URL," (it's easy). Just the name (don't worry about the URL). Actual name is best, but use what you like. Or email me at edcoletti@sbcglobal.net, and I can post it.
(P3) Philosophical
EINSTEIN AND GOD
"The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weakness, the Bible a collection of honorable, but still purely primitive, legends which are nevertheless pretty childish."
~ Albert Einstein In January of 1954, just a year before his death, Albert Einstein wrote the following letter to philosopher Erik Gutkind after reading his book, Choose Life: The Biblical Call to Revolt. Apparently Einstein had only read the book due to repeated recommendation by their mutual friend Luitzen Egbertus Jan Brouwer. The letter was bought at auction in May 2008, for £170,000.
Some have pointed to Einstein's quote that God "does not play
dice" with the universe (his rejection of the randomness of the universe)
as proof of his belief in a higher being. Others have said that the quote
does not advocate a belief in God and have referred to other letters written
by Einstein.
"I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but
have expressed it clearly,” he wrote in another letter in 1954. "If something
is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration
for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it."
Comment or Read Comments Here on any of the above or below. If you do not have a Google account, then log in by checking "Name/URL," (it's easy). Just the name (don't worry about the URL). Actual name is best, but use what you like. Or email me at edcoletti@sbcglobal.net, and I can post it.
"The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weakness, the Bible a collection of honorable, but still purely primitive, legends which are nevertheless pretty childish."
~ Albert Einstein In January of 1954, just a year before his death, Albert Einstein wrote the following letter to philosopher Erik Gutkind after reading his book, Choose Life: The Biblical Call to Revolt. Apparently Einstein had only read the book due to repeated recommendation by their mutual friend Luitzen Egbertus Jan Brouwer. The letter was bought at auction in May 2008, for £170,000.
| Translated Transcript: Princeton, 3. 1. 1954
Dear Mr Gutkind,
Inspired by Brouwer’s repeated suggestion, I read a great deal in your book, and thank you very much for lending it to me ... With regard to the factual attitude to life and to the human community we have a great deal in common. Your personal ideal with its striving for freedom from ego-oriented desires, for making life beautiful and noble, with an emphasis on the purely human element ... unites us as having an “American Attitude.” Still, without Brouwer’s suggestion I would never have gotten myself to engage intensively with your book because it is written in a language inaccessible to me. The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weakness, the Bible a collection of honorable, but still purely primitive, legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this. ... For me the Jewish religion like all other religions is an incarnation of the most childish superstition. And the Jewish people to whom I gladly belong ... have no different quality for me than all other people. As far as my experience goes, they are also no better than other human groups, although they are protected from the worst cancers by a lack of power. Otherwise I cannot see anything “chosen” about them. In general I find it painful that you claim a privileged position and try to defend it by two walls of pride, an external one as a man and an internal one as a Jew. As a man you claim, so to speak, a dispensation from causality otherwise accepted, as a Jew of monotheism. But a limited causality is no longer a causality at all, as our wonderful Spinoza recognized with all incision... Now that I have quite openly stated our differences in intellectual convictions it is still clear to me that we are quite close to each other in essential things, i.e. in our evaluation of human behavior ... I think that we would understand each other quite well if we talked about concrete things. With friendly thanks and best wishes, Yours, A. Einstein |
Comment or Read Comments Here on any of the above or below. If you do not have a Google account, then log in by checking "Name/URL," (it's easy). Just the name (don't worry about the URL). Actual name is best, but use what you like. Or email me at edcoletti@sbcglobal.net, and I can post it.
Saturday, September 15, 2012
Coletti in China/Size of the Universe/Dead Triolet
(P1) Political
Here are a few photos from Joyce's and my recent trip to China (Aug. 31-Sept. 13, 2012) which blew away so many preconceptions that I hardly can know where to begin, so I won't except to attempt to explain the affluence, cleanliness, and friendliness alongside the rigid, though almost invisible control, by mentioning Deng Xiao Ping's goals to move China (1) From Planning to Market economy and (2) From Dictatorship to Democracy, BUT to accomplish the latter very slowly in order to obviate the chaos which occurred in Russia's attempt. So now scroll down for the photos and what follows.
(P2) Philosophical
Discover the Size of the Universe (from the very smallest to the very largest). This will blow your mind.
Comment or Read Comments Here on any of the above or below. If you do not have a Google account, then log in by checking "Name/URL," (it's easy). Just the name (don't worry about the URL). Actual name is best, but use what you like. Or email me at edcoletti@sbcglobal.net, and I can post it.
(P3) Poetical
Triolet On A Line From The Grateful Dead
Paint by number morning, sky looks
so phony.
Toss away the mold, fracture and
destroy it.
All that’s derivative, merest
baloney.
Paint by number morning, sky looks
so phony.
Who follows instruction ends up the
lonely
On oft-traveled paths dotted with
bullshit.
Paint by number morning, sky looks
so phony.
Toss away the mold, fracture and
destroy it.
-ed coletti august 2012-
Comment or Read Comments Here on
any of the above or below. If you do not have a Google account, then log in by checking "Name/URL," (it's
easy). Just the name (don't worry about the URL). Actual name
is best, but use what you like. Or email me at edcoletti@sbcglobal.net, and I can post it.
Comment or Read Comments Here on any of the above or below. If you do not have a Google account, then log in by checking "Name/URL," (it's easy). Just the name (don't worry about the URL). Actual name is best, but use what you like. Or email me at edcoletti@sbcglobal.net, and I can post it.
+5-8-10.JPG)
.JPG){kind=link}