Glen - I appreciate the complex candor here... at least what I parsed out while trampling all over the text of your post , as it were (nod to EricS). But is the garden a Labyrinth, a Maze or a Fukuokan One-Straw Revolution <https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/976905.The_One_Straw_Revolution>?
SteveS On 9/17/21 5:41 PM, ⛧ glen wrote: > Well, as always, some of us who are steeped and invested in some ideology > will say something different from this. But pragmatic implies a set of > actions, an artifact, a thing manipulated. So the million dollar question is > whether any of us actually intend some outcome, and then act to obtain that > outcome via busyness. To the extent that all our intentions are, at least in > part, illusory, we can't be entirely pragmatic. (Or, i.e., the mindless > amongst us are entirely pragmatic, their lives nothing but busyness. To be > pragmatic is to be gloriously idiotic.) We will always be [ab]used tools. Do > ants have their own objectives? Or are they tools of the colony? > > My preferred metaphysics is that awareness comprises reflectivity. And to the > extent we can interfere with our overlords' plans, we retain our agency. Even > if our only interference comes in the form of psychosis or idiopathic > irritability, our individuality requires it. Of course, some of us > [coughmarcus] are deeply strategic in their interference. 8^D > > > On September 17, 2021 1:54:25 PM PDT, Steve Smith <sasm...@swcp.com> wrote: >> I agree that to the degree we might be tools in any context, it >> undermines the efficacy of our pragmatism, not matter what our >> aspirations might be. >> >> Is "toolism" or "being a tool" formulable in terms of co-option or >> (voluntary) deference of personal agency? Is there an ad-hoc formula to >> describe the relationship between toolism, agency, pragmatism (+ what else)? >> >> >> On 9/17/21 10:45 AM, uǝlƃ ☤>$ wrote: >>> Yes, if the extremism is taken on as the mechanism implementing the >>> function (e.g. fighting advantage). But if the extremism is accidental, >>> like most preemptive registration is, then No. Where one accidentally >>> stumbles into an extremist position, it's not pragmatic at all. >>> >>> Now, if you're a tool like our conservative SCOTUS Justices and your >>> registration is a result of your manipulation by *others*, then we have an >>> interesting question. As a mere pawn in the larger game, which we all are >>> to some extent, which is more pragmatic on your (the tool's) part: >>> >>> 1) resist your overlords from effectively and efficiently using you for >>> your pragmatic purpose, or >>> 2) or grease the skids, play along, allow your overlords to use you well? >>> >>> In either case, the tool who doesn't know she's a tool cannot be a >>> pragmatist. >>> >>> >>> On 9/17/21 9:32 AM, Steve Smith wrote: >>>> Glen - >>>> >>>>> IDK. Maybe this is simply the inescapable optimum for some people. Rosen >>>>> is a great example, ostracized and ridiculed as vitalist for so long, >>>>> causing him to be reactionary and retreat further into his own game, >>>>> followed only by a few brilliant acolytes and open-minded domain hoppers. >>>>> And maybe little p pragmatists are simply lazy or cowardly, not willing >>>>> to tilt windmills long enough to push through a paradigm shift, >>>>> compromising away the baby, happy enough with the bath water. I have no >>>>> hill to die on. Maybe that makes me pathetic. >>>> What a great medley of colorful idioms... >>>> >>>> I was acutely taken by "I have not hill to die on" and your >>>> characterization of the "small p pragmatist"... >>>> >>>> I can't find (in my fragmented associative memory, aided only by my >>>> flimsy google fu) the historical/mythological reference >>>> (Scythians/Parthians/Greeks) to the small band of warriors who >>>> deliberately trapped themselves on a ledge or a blind canyon (or their >>>> leader contrived it), knowing that having no other option than fighting >>>> their way out, they gained an advantage over the larger force who could >>>> always retreat to avoid individual self-extinction, supporting a >>>> collective will to yield to a smaller force? >>>> >>>> I believe this is one of the charms/seductions of extremism... and in >>>> the historical anecdote above, is that not a highly pragmatic >>>> tactic/strategy? >>>> >>>> If we think of ourselves as cartographers/naturalists/archaeologists, >>>> mapping a landscape, rather than trying to control it, perhaps the >>>> strategies shift?
.-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
