The Wednesday Circle

"There is a time and a place for everything. I just forgot the time and the place."

Wednesday, September 06, 2006

I'm not a cat so....

Is it natural if it's man-made?

I don't mind a bit of 'logic' for this, as I'm curious to see how I will react to any responses.

posted by sleiman @ 8:50 AM  

12 Comments:

  • At 9:42 PM, September 06, 2006, Blogger KH said…

    No

     

  • At 9:42 PM, September 06, 2006, Blogger KH said…

    Yes

     

  • At 9:43 PM, September 06, 2006, Blogger KH said…

    Depends

     

  • At 12:59 PM, September 08, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    "Granted, culture is nature's gift to humans for survival."

    We tend not to look at it this way though, do we but surely survival exists on many levels.

    At what point does culture crystalise? It obviously does as it's brittleness is on constant displaly. Is this something inherent in culture itself or is culture a reflection of the human? I'm inclined to believe that perhaps the chicken doesn't even realise that it's laid an egg...

    I think that the unnatural point begins, not when mistakes, errors or misunderstandings occur, but when they are not recognised as being naturally occurring.

    The paradox behind all of this - that naturally occurring human complication is the source of unnaturalness - is truly an amazing thing.

     

  • At 1:17 AM, September 11, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    One of the few avenues that seem to be available to all cultures, religions and people is self-development. It's probably one of the most difficult and I guess by it's nature, lonely as well. Little wonder then, that choosing to define one's limits within the boundaries of materialism is so common.

    By materialism I also mean the politically, economically and socially influenced trains of thought that are communicated to people on a constant basis. To hear rhetoric is one thing. To believe it is another. More disturbing, I feel, is to believe it at the expense of dignity. I've been using this word a lot recently and I'm finding it difficult to 'explain' it other than to say, it is what connects all peoples.

    Success in a culture may highlight flaws but at the same time, those flaws, I feel, are part of the fabric of the energy that lead TO success. This, I feel, is borne out by Ibn Khladun's view on the nature of dynasties as being based on an initial esprit de corps that sets one apart from everyone else. In other words, it's natural to need to see differences yet, as I have come to believe, real nature begins when we shed that naturally shallow way of thinking.

    Perhaps it's best not to be 'too' successful. Shinobu is important in our budo and I wonder what it must be like for those who have never had to perservere. Success cannot exist without defeat so there is obviously a 'whole' that many of us are missing out on. Perhaps success in culture makes us forget the value of the other...

     

  • At 11:18 AM, September 11, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Ibn Khaldun's work is prehistory? That's a big call. Is that what you meant? Rallying around a tribal leader, a charismatic shaman or a political platform, besides the shape, seem all the same to me. That's why I'm not convinced that humans have 'progressed'.

    For sure technologies have developed yet...

    In anycase, Soke has mentioned 'timeslips'. Interestingly enough for you Danny, he mentioned it in the context of understanding certain movements based on the wearing of armour. One had to 'go back in time' to understand the logic behind the type of materials etc that influenced the movement that we were doing today.

    Now, I'm not talking about time travel in the science-fiction sense. Rather the rhythm. Soke said that what we are doing was a study of feeling, of history, of anthropology.

    As I mentioned earlier, I don't believe for a moment that humans have evolved. We have just changed the way in which we delude oursleves. In the introduction to a book of Japanese short stories that I have, there is the following quote, "...our unromantic comfort in the rule of law - that opiate which has dulled in us the sensitivity required (italics mine) to comprehend medieval superstition that pervaded feudal society...". I think that sudy of culture without that sensitivity is meaningless. I believe that that sensitivity, as I am fond of saying, is directly related to human dignity. Note that I didn't say human equality or equal rights.

    It's true that if a rabbit eats the bad seeds he will die yet funny enough, the trap for humans I think, is our capacity to adapt. Change without the core and we get lost in wherever we think we are.

    I think that this is the danger of success in culture.

     

  • At 11:21 AM, September 11, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Danny, is there any work in anthroplogy that you know of that tries to step outside of the traditional methodologies? I'd be curious to read some of it if it exists.

     

  • At 12:33 AM, September 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    When I wrote about evolving (or not evolving as the cas may be) I'm not refering to physical dimensions or technological capacity. I'm refering to the essence (for want of a better term) that I believe makes one human. I'm refering to that rhythm, that connection between the commonalities, that I believe existed in those who lived before us and those of us who live now. I do not believe that this has changed.

    Ibn Khaldun was a scholar who was born in Tunisia and died in Cairo in 1406. He tried to explain the rise and fall of dynasties in such a way that historical narratives could be realistically judged.

    My own views on the historical is that if a person is unable to remove themselves from their own background, or at the least, cannot find in their background an essence or a link with other cultures and histories, then everything they write will be skewed.

    This is why I requoted that quote on my Japanese short stories book. The context of my usage of that quote I think, left it clear that it had nothing to with Japan per se. Again, I am trying to see the links betwenn everyone, not the differences.

    I'm not really in the habit of regretting things but sometimes I wish I had studied something along the lines of anthropology instead of exercise science. I guess there is still time so I'm curious, in your opinion, where would you recommend beginning?

     

  • At 12:38 AM, September 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    By the way, I don't believe in the rule of law. For me, it's more a matter of expediency.

    Kim, you're 'legally learned'. Would you care to chime in?

     

  • At 3:51 PM, September 12, 2006, Blogger KH said…

    Dude, we've had this chat before.

    Anyway, Danny's been cracking me up with his beautifully simple quotes

    "The world didnt just appear today, designed by some asshole two weeks ago"

    Hahahaha - anyway, time to chime in...

    I gotta be honest. I've kinda stoped following the discussion.

    I'm not sure if I stop paying attention because of the actual complexity of the arguments or frustration at constantly reading things that are inherently simple yet seek to be perceived as complex.

    What's more, the fact that only those things viewed through the lens of 500-2000 year old (or maybe longer, who knows) Arabic/Japanese thinking can be correct is rather annoying.

    Actually, I’m even confused at why these successful cultures would be used as a lens by you when you say “Perhaps success in culture makes us forget the value of the other...”

    Perhaps it’s not modern cultures that are broken, but the lens through which you examine them.

    Then again, maybe you’ve got it right.

    For me, I think Danny sums it up nicely when he says "No-one designed human culture. Cultures evolve in response to nature."

    In that sense, everything should be viewed as being expedient, including rule of law.

    And including the path which we are currently walking down in our local and global cultures.

    If we’ve got it wrong and have no chance of getting it right, well… we’re fucked!

    I like to think that we’ve got it wrong but have a chance to get it right. In the much bigger picture, this short-term focus on material gain is being tried-out. Sooner rather than later it will be found to be wanting and we’ll head down another path. That’s what we do.

    Then again, who’s to say our role in the bigger picture isn’t to develop technology to a point where we create artificial intelligence smart enough to reproduce itself and make us redundant.

    Jump in line Sleiman, and play your role! If you think, you stink!

     

  • At 2:59 AM, September 13, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    What's interesting is the fact that you have assumed that I think that the lens of Arabic or Japanese is somehow THE lens to use. My use of Arabic or Japanese is a reflection of my cultural influences as well as interests. Of cultures, I have done the most reading on Arabic ones and of course, my time here in Japan, studying a Japanese art, has had a similar effect.

    The whole point of using examples from these cultures is not because they are inherently correct but because words that I have read have sparked something in me that I try to run with to see where it takes me. You'll also notice that I've used an African source in Achebe, a science-fiction novel in the Dune series as well good old Chuck D from the USA. (I've tried to find a place for Britney Spears but the art in her work is, uhm, a tad lacking me thinks...)

    For sure, quotes derive their literal meaning from a certain context. Yet, I wonder if the creative source that gives birth to a quote is not more useful than the quote itself. In anycase, I wouldn't take my quote usage as anything more than a springboard. Indeed, I'm gearing my whole writing style towards this end. If I jump off the board and whack my head against the wall every now and then, well, I'm hoping you'll be able to see through that...

    My comment on the danger of success in culture was questioning the sense of immobility that comes from static understanding. Answering this, I think, helps to appreciate that the uniting factor between all cultures is the capacity for a person to work their way through them. If a discovery leads to a stop, then in my opinion, it's not much of a discovery.

    Perhaps it's at this stopping point that we need to start questioning the quality of the lens.

     

  • At 1:08 PM, September 15, 2006, Blogger KH said…

    It’s true it was an assumption, but based on observation. Your comments about including US culture etc. are like someone saying “I’m not racist, I have black friends” – i.e. not really relevant

    Anyway, you make my point exactly when you say “My use of Arabic or Japanese is a reflection of my cultural influences as well as interests.”

    There’s nothing necessarily wrong with that, it’s just it’s important to note it.

    You see, sometimes I get a sense that your questions and posts are not a search for discussion but a forum to put forward your predefined notions of what’s correct and what’s not. Again, there’s nothing wrong with that, but the notion that these opinions are immutable, when so heavily reliant on only a couple of points of view, doesn’t always rest well with me.

    I may be off the mark, but the responsibility in communication lies with the communicator to get what they’re saying across. So if I’ve got it wrong, it’s your fault :)

    Now, back to the matter at hand. Personally, I would question the quality of the lens BEFORE embarking on a journey of discovery using it, not when I come to a stopping point. What if your discovery moves so slowly or goes in circles so as to never allow you to encounter a stopping point. Your hypothesis would suggest that this would preclude the lens from ever being questioned.

    And, as for what is natural and what is not, it depends 100% on the definition of these terms (here we go again). This makes it a linguistic issue and nothing else.

    Anyway, I hope you don’t take my comments the wrong way. They seem so much harsher when written.

    Instead, imagine us in a café on Norton St or at Mark’s Café arguing over a game of chess with smiles on our faces, getting excited and angry and loud while coming to some sort of collaborative conclusion on the discussion of the day.

    If you can do that, then you can understand the spirit in which I’m writing these things and why you’ll always be wrong and I’ll always be right.

    K

     

Post a Comment

<< Home