Posts
It's Saturday morning. I slept well and arose at 7:00 My morning plan was to lounge in bed and continue reading Shaw's, "Man and Superman." I decided to go down to my computer and check my lottery ticket first. Much to my amazement, I hadn't won! I couldn't believe it – I felt so lucky about that one!
Oh, well! I thought I'd just check a few news headlines before going back to bed. I'm not an informed citizen of the planet and it's starting to gnaw away at my conscience. On CBC.ca I watched a video of Afghanistan's "New Year's" celebrations...
Here you get a quick glimpse of normal people defying chaos in a brief but joyous and exuberant celebration. I find it very sad; very poignant.
{My caffeine level had become dangerously low at this time so I went to make a cup of coffee to bring to my desk and continue my digressions...}
The Middle East crisis swirls around in my head. I can't fix on the issues, the geography and the history. It seems an incredible tangle to unravel, but I tried to acquire a measure of insight on Simon Fraser University's Human Security Report Project and then on to The International Crisis Group Web Page There I read about Afghanistan's Conflict history
The International Crisis Group Web Page lays-out in clear, logical terms and sequence the history of the conflicts in Afghanistan.
It's now almost 2 hours since I got up to check my lottery tickets. I just made my 2nd coffee and a fruit salad.
**NOTE**
We constantly use words and phrases learned contextually. The word "pragmatic" for instance; I've backed-up and forwarded my browser but haven't found the page upon which it jumped out at me but before proceeding, I chose another digression to obtain its definition:
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The pragmatic maxim, also known as the maxim of pragmatism or the maxim of pragmaticism, is a maxim of logic formulated by Charles Sanders Peirce. Serving as a normative recommendation or a regulative principle in the normative science of logic, its function is to guide the conduct of thought toward the achievement of its purpose, advising on an optimal way of "attaining clearness of apprehension". Here is its original 1878 statement in English[1] when it was not yet named:
It appears, then, that the rule for attaining the third grade of clearness of apprehension is as follows: Consider what effects, which might conceivably have practical bearings, we conceive the object of our conception to have. Then, our conception of these effects is the whole of our conception of the object
Pragmatism is a philosophical movement that includes those who claim that an ideology or proposition is true if it works satisfactorily, that the meaning of a proposition is to be found in the practical consequences of accepting it, and that unpractical ideas are to be rejected. Pragmatism, in William James' eyes, was that the truth of an idea needed to be tested to prove its validity. Pragmatism began in the late nineteenth century with Charles Sanders Peirce and his pragmatic maxim.
Contemporary pragmatism is divided into a strict analytic tradition, a more relativistic strand (in the wake of Rorty), and "neo-classical" pragmatism (such as Susan Haack) that adheres to the work of Peirce, James, and Dewey
Then, I wondered "what is the opposite of pragmatism?" Googling that thought lead me to an answer of, "idealism" which, in turn, led me to read a web article:Although he does bring the concept of pragmatism into philosophical relief by presenting an opposing state of idealism, I found one Lodbill's most compelling statements was about the training our children receive in team sports to become the future pragmatists of their corporate, political society:
"Children in our society are conditioned early to fit in through participation in team sports. The game is a benign activity in which the score has no importance other than the conveyance of bragging rights and the pleasures of posturing and celebration. But no one gets hurt, and there is no need for concern about the losing team. They will play again another day, and all teams have their successes and failures to deal with. Losses teach "good sportsmanship"-, another term for complacent acceptance of loss of goals regardless of any consideration of the justice of the score. This childhood learning leads to adult pragmatism."
Although he expounds with apparent logic, I can't help wondering if Lodbill's assessment springs from failed childhood experiences with team sports and "fitting in." Team sports are not for everyone. The physical world is dominated by extroverts. There are other planes upon which to exist that are equally rewarding though not, necessarily as commanding of attention and adulation as those of the sports hero. Play and sports activities provide forums for healthy conflict. Conflict produces change. Change is the way of life and progress. Are children – boys especially – not programmed to engage in contests of physical prowess? Most of our institutions effectively beat nature out of us by the time we reach our teens. I think Lodbill is decidedly wrong to attack team sports and beat out from us one of the last vestiges of our human nature.
Lodbill also Mentions "The Tragedy of the Commons" therefore; another digression led me to find out what was behind that phrase. It is a concept that can be employed to advantage in arguments of crisis and conflict resolution; however, fraught with loopholes it doesn't stand up well to logical, factual scrutiny so I dismissed it.
It is now just over 3 hours since I woke up with the intention of grabbing the play I'd left beside my bed the night before. As usual, I've indulged myself in my digressions, but this time I decided; additionally, to document those digressions. It has been an amusing exercise! Now, I'm going back to bed to languish for an hour with Shaw!
No comments:
Post a Comment