Log in

No account? Create an account

October 2017



Powered by LiveJournal.com
reject reality

"This is all well and good, gentlemen, but tell me, what am I supposed to do?

Another, not very fun, book group today. I'm not the only one not having fun.

then I read this post by joculum that I really strongly agree with.
The emphases is mine.
readerships and their assumptions
"The edge of understanding right now is somewhere between the traditional disciplines...the more we know about the material underpinnings of mind, the more peculiar the whole human phenomenon becomes. David Eagleman is painfully naive about a good many things, but at least he understands that the nature-nurture debate is wrongly dualistic: we are neurologically based, socially inflected but not fully socially constructed individuals, who exist in a communal network that preceded and sustains us but does not completely determine our fate or our course of action. Just what does determine our fate and our course of action is being rethought and conceptually renegotiated as the 21st century moves onward.

The fact that a good many decision-makers are operating with scripts formed in 1890 or 1920 or some other earlier date (in drastically different conditions of history) is slightly frightening. It isn't that the rules of the human game weren't understood very long ago, certainly by what used to be called the Axial Age; it's that the variables need to be understood differently, in order to apply the Axial Age's still eminently valid insights intelligently in a moment of global social and environmental crisis. And in that context, the scions of the great counter-narratives of the nineteenth century are of as little use as fundamentalists of any stripe. Nietzsche had very little to say about climate change and the implications of the suspension of the sunspot cycle, even if he had a great deal to say about the reasons why people take the particular attitudes they do towards these phenomena.

And in the end the question is still one that was posed by, I believe, Lyndon Johnson when confronting an issue other than Vietnam (where the best and the brightest...well, we know that story). Convening a session on Middle Eastern issues, he listened to academicians who explicated the historical forces that had led to the then-present impasse (which has been succeeded, of course, by the present impasse). As the room fell silent, Johnson (if it was Johnson) said, "This is all well and good, gentlemen [for they were all male, apparently], but tell me, what am I supposed to do? What am I supposed to do?""


Nicely stated!
What is the point of going if you don't seem to be enjoying yourself very much?
It used to be more fun. At the previous meeting Marge mentioned that I spend a lot of time alone, and all social involvement involves overcoming disagreements and learning to work together.

So, right now, the point of going is: to interact with people (other than store clerks) in person, and to learn how to work through the bad parts of human interaction and get back to the good parts.
I can relate; I regularly have to stop myself from strangling one or another member of the band. Onmes person is so cluelessly abrasive that another musician once punched him in the face after practice. The guy is probably Aspergers or something else diagnosable, and can be extremely irritating. But we all LOVE the way he plays, and he can be really cool. What to do? Take a deep breath,say silently to myself, "I breathe in peace, I breathe out love," and mentally accept that he is always gonna be the same guy. If I want the talent, and the fun we can have together when he is not in dickhead mode, I have to accept that he will sometimes go into dickhead mode.
Hopefully not while I'M in bitch mode!!!!!
I do love the way he says things.