John Hewitt wrote:
[snip]
> Actually, in BSE, I don't see much evidence of outright lying and I am a
> real Brit.  Lying is generally seen as a falsehood uttered with knowledge of
> its falsity.  I see evidence of ignorance, of a political imperative to
> appear knowledgeable.  In situations like that "I don't know" is simply not
> what the paymasters of science want to hear.  As a result, once a cockeyed
> direction is taken, it is very difficult to change.

I once read somewhere that "one should not impute malicious intent
where the phenomena can be explained by simple ignorance/stupidity".

I believe most of us (certainly myself!) were childreared to
*not notice* a lot of things, especially the things our
[previously benighted] parents and school tor-mentors did to us.

But blinding a person to one area of things does not help their
vision in other areas.  Therefore, I think it is possible
that, in many situations, people "really don't notice" [whatever].
And I would include here many PhD graduates of prestige
universities, not just Archie Bunker and any remaining
"Neanderthals" who are still among us (I think at least part of
my own "lineage" is of this latter derivation, alas, for, as
I "like" to put it: the retreat of the glaciers after the
last Ice Age was not uniform... Then there was the effects
on these people of infection with the semiotic virus of
1950s American "middle class" advertising, resulting in, e.g.,
what Julian Jaynes did not call "the split-level mind"...).

I really work hard to try to see "the obvious", but I'm still at age 54
not yet very good at it.  Souls whose growth is stunted at an
early age have a hard time compensating for the damage, and
they can never be "whole" like a child, who from birth, is
encouraged to be true to his or her true self, as was the case
with one person I know.  His parents
were unschooled people dealing with a child who was
close to genius, and who they certainly could not "understand".
The way they managed to raise this little creature
whom God entrusted to their care, who was, as if
of a different and higher species than themselves, is exemplary.
They could not show him his way in life, but they did
what they could do, nor did they ever try to shrink him to their
own level.  They told him, as a small child, and they meant it:

   "Tom, do what you believe is right.
   You will make mistakes.
   We stand behind you."

>
> One final comment.  I now realise that Brad is a Hegelian.
[snip]

In terms of the dialectical structure of
consciousness which Hegel described in the Introduction
to his _Phenomenology_, I think that is true.  "Systematically",
however, I consider myself more of a "follower" or
Husserl (in the sense
of genetic phenomenology, !NOT! that of obedience to a Leader,
hero, guru...).

"Yours in [trying to build...] discourse..."

+\brad mccormick

--
  Let your light so shine before men,
              that they may see your good works.... (Matt 5:16)

  Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thes 5:21)

<![%THINK;[SGML+APL]]> Brad McCormick, Ed.D. / [log in to unmask]
  914.238.0788 / 27 Poillon Rd, Chappaqua NY 10514-3403 USA
-----------------------------------------------------------------
  Visit my website ==> http://www.users.cloud9.net/~bradmcc/