Random Access Memory
My Thoughts on 2012
Sun, April 27, 2008 - 8:39 PMThe Final Days, by Benjamin Anastas (New York Times Magazine, 7/1/07)
www.nytimes.com/2007/07/01...orld-t.html
Five Years: 2012 and The End of the World As We Know It, by Tom King (Lawrence.com, 12/10/07)
www.lawrence.com/news/2007...ive_years/
The 2012 Meme: An Interview With Dr. John Hoopes, by Jan Irvin (Gnostic Media, 11/10/08)
gnosticmedia.podomatic.com/entr...08_00
I think it's critical to realize that the hyping of 2012 is best understood within the larger context of Mayanism:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mayanism
Sun, April 27, 2008 - 8:39 PM -
permalink -
7 Comments
7 Comments |
add a comment |
|
Mon, April 28, 2008 - 11:19 AM
What do I think?
Well, you'll find it in these articles (especially the second one), both of which quote me directly.
|
|
Mon, April 28, 2008 - 11:36 AM
ah, dang those avitar names that are actually real names. Thanks for dressing dow Pinchbeck or is that Pinchcheck? I Originally stopped reading immediately after I saw the words "Pinchbeck promoting book on Cobert"
|
|
Mon, April 28, 2008 - 11:40 AM
"...John Hoopes, a self-professed debunker..." lol, so true...
|
|
Mon, April 28, 2008 - 1:58 PM
And debunking is a bad thing?
When and how did debunking get a bad rap?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debunk Harry Houdini will always be one of my heros! |
|
Tue, April 29, 2008 - 5:53 AM
Speaking of Pinchbeck
He tells a story about losing it at Burning Man 2005. I contributed a bit more on (as Paul Harvey liked to say) "the rest of the story". Flackmaster was there, so he knows.
www.realitysandwich.com/underd...olution |
|
Wed, July 27, 2011 - 1:17 AM
Apocalyse
Hi,
I follow and understand the remarks from both sides. Debunking is too easy because it fixates on facts supported by current interpretations. The other side, often not very anchored, is basically coming from an intuitive posture. So, in a ridiculous but easy enough summary, the scientific approach debunks based on facts that "disprove" via some pretty non-standard logical methods the rather flightly, often absolutely hard-to-follow (at best) points of view of those seeking their knowledge through non-conventional means. All that is nice.. BUT... the "open question(s)" are WHY do humans have this desire-fear-apprehension-strange attractor (issuing from their mental appreciations of a bunch of related-unrelated "facts") toward apocalyse? I mean are you going to reduce it all to psychoanalytical, psychological explanations about Death? If so, you can't explain the power & meaningfulness of ancient rituals for humans-as-they-were. If you seek only 3rd party, scientifically corroborated accounts based on facts & statistics .... BTW, there is NOTHING LESS FACTUAL than statistical analysis ! It DEPENDS on mental activities at a very "high" level to assimilate, synthesize, correlate, and well, because Stats are taught in school, they are also part of an indoctrination-legitimation machine that has a sinistre epistemological "bent" in that if you can't see the "pattern" suggested by the "stats", then you are not seeing things rightly. or are we? Has the war of the hippies & shamans not shifted abit from the reductive explanations to those based on the selection of variables for "focus" of the analysis and the facile interpretations that come from that ? Back to apocalypse. The shaman is trying to SEE because he/She has a desire to help, or in a perverse form, venge oneself via one's "visions". Put aside the "pathological" case of those who are trying to venge themselves via interpretations that predict immanent world collapse. That still leaves the very reasoned approaches of the Jared Diamond school of synthetic fact, from more robust reasoning, and the interesting if less catastrophic "visions" of this kind of writing. Where is the Apocalyse there? In the fact that these people are trying to "alert" humanity to the problems that we CAN ALL SEE are not going to go away and NEED quickly some kind of resolution, or modifications? The shaman has always sociologically served the PURPOSE as a role of OUTSIDER in a society that lacked scientific methods for doing a kind of "forecasting" activity for the tribe. Where is this "forecast" today? Situated in the temples of the Economics schools and workmanship of the Citi and NYC financial trade companies? In debunking, you'd do better to one-up the shamans with their misaligned, impoverished "visions" and reorient the discussion to how the normalizing institutions and mental behaviors are very quickly, in an accelerated manner, driving our world, societies, and cultures toward ways of life that our genes are resisting through the mental "minds" (behaviors of a sort) they are creating. Debunking, if it's not to be an academians "gamemanship", one-uping those who aren't experts, must try to get their feet wet and link the activities via interpretations (not simply numbering blocks and calling that facts) which make THEIR research PERTINENT to the Modern human quests for MEANING which are ultimately "behind" the visions of apocalyse cheers |
Advertisement
