Self determining relationships

It has been suggested that there is such a thing as absolute truth,
and I am not in a position at this time to deny that assertion, but
from my point of view, in a practical way, absolute truth represents
the situation where mathematicians stop asking questions, and
that is a situation that I do not see happening any time soon.

But,  it is really difficult for me to drop this liberal / conservative
paradigm and perhaps consider some of the implications of
it's rigid operation, for one being how it affects a defacto
moral compass which we utilize in formulating actions, based
on a curios dichotomy which is practically generated
by a peculiarly emotional response of one ( liberal ) to
the other ( conservative ).  We really might get somewhere
if we had the relationship x^^2=e, but we have this much more
bizarre notion created by liberal conservative of xy = e, and
the unending concern about |x| and |y| which appears
to change randomly, but it has been asserted that these
orders are affected by communication or media.  And this
is the manner in which we organize our social affairs.

The most likely approach to sorting this out is to view
as previously what  kinds of problems can be most
successfully approached from the point of view of
a liberal perspective and which is most effectively
approached from  a conservative bent.  Unfortunately
the situation we find ourselves in is the notions from
the conservative perspective that the cause or origin of problems
arise from liberal solutions of problems and of course from liberal
point of view that problems arise equally from conservative
solutions.

So how are we proceed effectively from this situation where
the order of ( or the perception of the order of ) the
conservative element is judged against the order ( meaning
size of ) liberal element?

Unfortunately, at this point I have NO CLUE how...
but I'd like to think there is an answer to this darn confusing
pickle we must face.  My guess is we need to proceed by
reducing prejudice and superstition, an effort which might
open up the possibility of more effective solutions
to all problems and as well  to recognize the common
( ) humanity which we all share.

More on Reason and Enlightenment

One of the more curious and for me difficult issues in history is the transition
from the Age of Reason to the Age of Enlightenment,  which in my mind refers to
the transition from the time of

René Descartes       and  Isaac Newton  +  Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz

What happened?

The problem I have is did we abandon reason for something which
we thought better that reason?  And what was that we achieved at that
point convinced us that it was in some way superior to " Reason " /// ???? ////

To put it another way, in that transition did we gain some superior insight or
did we simply take on an unacceptable degree of hubris?  ( for those
unacquainted with the theory of degrees of hubris ( there are 360 ) )..

I spent a bit of time considering this issue, and for me the jury is not
only out but it doesn't look like the jury is coming back any time soon.

So to put it simply,,, enlightenment to me is about giving up prejudice
and superstition.....

Did that really happen between the lives Descartes and Newton?  And more
important  ,,,,  has that happened yet?

Mother's Day & other stuff

I don't think I have ever blogged on Mother's Day and so I felt I needed to add the
following links that connects me and maybe you to this day...

Crosby Stills : Teach The Children 

Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young - Teach Your Children

Don't cry....

But what's on my mind is other stuff, stuff about moral compasses,

stuff about liberal and conservative, but I guess I need to make this

short....

If there really is such a thing as " liberal " , or "conservative",

as far a people are concerned it must be little bits and

pieces, because I think people can be more conservative

on a particular day and less conservative and therefore

 " liberal " on another.   

But when we have a problem it does not arrive to us labeled as liberal

or conservation...  For example, a flat tire is neither liberal or

conservative, but we perhaps might respond more liberal or more

conservatively to it.

And so back to moral compass , the so called defacto compass, based on 

liberal conservative polarization, until we have one that can clearly

determine how to respond to a flat tire,,,,, accurately,,, then it's

not so good,,, really for practical things.  

baby steps, giant steps

So, looking into the eye of the crisis, what is the next step/steps.

Well back to the original arguments that this blog begins with is,
what possible benefit can it realistically be imagined that dividing
this country ( U.S.A. ) into two -- incredibly -- arbitrary groups, and
continuing to make that division more pronounced and more
meaningless all the time can be beneficial for our country or
our people.  Decision by confrontation and anger is not a
good method for clear, and insightful solutions.

We must realize that we must act collectively as well as individually,
so it's not that hard for us to have great confidence in the
directions we are moving.  One principal that is really necessary
to adsorb in making that process work is.... if you have a small
group of honest people, they can often see things clearly, but
as you expand that clarity can increase, because as more and
more harmonious action and insight develops, more and
better information accumulates which in turn leads to
improved actions.

And sometimes, it seems like we are too few, or this process
is taking to long. Patience and persistence, are great qualities
and a light to themselves.

So we are taking steps, but we know we must see clearly,
and we must see beyond ourselves and into the future.