Dear Squeers,

The following website may be of interest:

http://www.webster.edu/~corbetre/philosophy/existentialism/dostoevsky/grand-analysis.html

The totalitarian exaggerates the wickedness and weaknesses of
man, in order to provide self-justification.

By the way have you read, Solzhenitsyn's,
"One Day In the Life of Ivan Denisovich?"

Squeers

This topic is far from lame.

Had a look at some others that were approved for General Discussion lately? I'm not going name them.

I am not schooled in literature at all and maybe others feel that their contributions may not be worthy, to which I say everything is worthy, just look at some of the bullsh..... Maybe some people are just shy.

Reading continues to be a source of inspiration, discovery and learning; primarily, it remains my escape from stress. I don't drink, smoke or do drugs any more, if I can't pick up a John Connolly, Iain Banks or dare I confess my latest fad, Charlaine Harris (True Blood) series, I would be in the deepest throes of anxiety.

Now that said, I am bookmarking yours and Foxy's links and probably I'm not the only one, in which case your thread is a huge success. Which is more than can be said for "proving gods existence" - ooops I didn't mean to say that. But ya know what I mean?

its ok we are unique
its not that easy to read/without visualisation
but later in the massive pdf..there are specific articles

there is also a keyword search function..so search for key words
thats how i found the writings on empathy..

text chapter 16
keyword
true empathy..thats a lot easier to read
we musnt forget/that the teachers intro...was written last
so assumes more comprehention,..

like teacher/student..are the same thing
jesus gives common characteristics..of teachers[section 4]
despite saying all teachers are not alike..

this seems confusing at first glance...[like his statement]

their specialness,is of course.only temporary;
set in time..as a means of leading out of time

[what it means...out/of time=is the eternity,..
,not just here/now..ie not just time]

section 4 is an interesting read..
it dosnt say so..but it gives the qualities
we all shall in time-[lessness]..attain

i find taking notes helps
from my notes re..charactor of good/teacher[student]
trust/knowing..recognising of value/like the value of good-works

honesty..consists of giving good value..[grace/mercy/love]

tolerance;..not judging..feaerlessness..joy..patience

gentleness;..awarness/holding peace..trusting/allowances/tollerance

joy..sharing with equal's..joy of discovery/learning

other qualities included...;defensiflessness/generosity/patience/faithfullness/openmindedness/living in gods moment.now..not yesterday...not tomorrow,..,content to enjoy each moment/in communion with the oneness[teaching by learning]

he then explains the path to trust...a period of undoing/
the true lack of value of material things is recognised

period/of sorting-out;..chosing..between the value[good]..and the valueless[not good]..[the real..[good]..the not-real...[evil]

period of relinquishment;..giving-up/letting go of that that holds no value for you

period of/settlement;..giving-away..that you dont want/keeping that you do

period of/respite;..resting till ready/to move-on..with nmore true values

period of/unsettling..;learning to/set-aside judgments..on the things that have no value/arnt real..[ie not good][not true]

period of/achievment;passing beyond shadiows..[ie values/judgments]past fear...past/hate.past spite..past/ego//beyond the self..past defending/past offending..past is now..future is now..now is now

anyhow sorry/you didnt enjoy it

im reading it very slow..each word is a vision..

this could-well/take me..years to..fully read...its timeless/cant simply be read/with the eyes..must be read with the heart/love

Foxy: <The totalitarian exaggerates the wickedness and weaknesses of
man, in order to provide self-justification.>
I don't think he exaggerates, he only exaggerates his own superiority.

Dear Foxy,
I'm not sure if you're implying anything about the "inevitability" of leftist thought..?
I read the link you provided with interest; the central problem of the tens of thousands and the thousands of thousands has been reiterated again and again. For Arnold the mass of "philistines" were opposed by those Leavis later called the "clerisy", and for Lenin avant gardism had to precede communism, rather than await Marx's dialectic (Lenin meant well, I think, and we tend to forget that the Tzarist aristocracy was tyrannous). Historically, all self-elected elites seem to fall into tyranny. One wants to condemn the very premise the grand inquisitor sets up; that a few are capable of transcendence but the majority are not; it encourages a dubious elitism (and aestheticism); and yet the vast majority do seem untroubled by their glaringly unconscionable lives (theist and atheist alike).
There is no doubt in my mind that wise and ethical government is achievable, and would be conducive to more fulfilling lives for everyone (as nurture is a sizeable part of human iniquity); the problem of course is how to prevent corruption cum tyranny creeping in.
What stuns me is that defenders of the faith (of capitalist democracy) don't indulge in "immanent critique" and see their own corrupt system for what it is. But this is the Grand Inquisitor's whole point, isn't it? What's good for me "must" be good per se!
The wonderful thing about the Buddha's example is that he didn't see his freedom as "superior", nor did he want to impose it willy-nilly on others. He led by example. ..But he was defeatist qua worldliness. For the Buddha that's the final hurdle, accepting the unsatisfactoriness of life.
I would advocate more appreciation of "this" life, tempered by existential compassion.
No essays spring to mind..

Dear Squeers

you say :

//What stuns me is that defenders of the faith (of capitalist democracy) don't indulge in "immanent critique" and see their own corrupt system for what it is.//

I had to look up "Immanent" to be sure of my reply....

[[Immanent critique is the philosophical or sociological strategy that analyzes cultural forms by locating contradictions in the rules and systems necessary to the production of those forms.]]

Err Squerzy.. r u suggesting that your main mantra is without contradictions ? and that 'Democratic Capitalism' alone has them ?

Let me give you a beaudy... for Socialism.

I read an artible by Joel E Rogers.. regarding how the advances of 'workers rights' and conditions can only work in a closed system where the impact of competitive outside economic forces are withheld from that closed system.

I thought I'd write to the dude, because after all..HE is the man who's thinking predominates in the white house now... never in my wildest dreams did I think he would respond to lil old mangy me...but he did... the same day.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b84fGcs-byQ It's the Joel Rogers that Van Jones is bragging about in that Vid.

Well.. I posed a question in a most polite way because I was genuinely curious about his answer given what he said in the article.

His response:

"This is, I think, a really good question, but I'm not sure I've got it right. Is the worry that all industries will eventually go the way of commodity production, with labor costs a critical competitive differential, and that given free flows of labor and capital there's no way a national movement can get ahead of that?

I followed that up with anothe..and again.. he responded.
Basically he pointed to the problem of 'Politics/culture' and said there is no real right or wrong... and this is an old debate between liberals and conservatives.

This enquiry came out of an essay he wrote :)

Dear Squeers,

To me the main feature of "The Grand Inquisitor,"
is totalitarianism because he considers himself and
the church as a form of government/state which aims
in absolute and centralized control over the society.
His intentions are good, utilitarian in principles
but the actions in achieving "universal happiness"
are not sound. "Only the church will bring peace of
mind to all men..." "Only the church has saved all
mankind..." "Freedom puts a torment on men's souls,"
and so on.

I loved your previous post and your take on things.
You write so beautifully.

You may be interested in the following website:

http://www.buddhistethics.org/1/white1.html

It's an essay by James Whitehill on
"Buddhist Ethics in Western Context: The Virtues approach."