seymourblogger

Banned
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    381

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by seymourblogger

  1. seymourblogger
    What the hell is that supposed to mean? Here is part 2 of a debate between Foucault and Chomsky. (The first part can also be seen on YouTube). At 2:55 in, Foucault cites Mao's distinction between a bourgeois human nature and a proletarian human nature. (No other source is cited by Foucault throughout the discussion.) This typical leftist claptrap is followed, near the end, by Foucault's summary of his idiotic relativism -- something he also hawks in the first part. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0SaqrxgJvw Foucault has always struck me as a caricature of an intellectual in a Woody Allen movie. Ghs "A pity," says Jane.
  2. seymourblogger
    Elsewhere I said try Thomas Mallon's A Book of One's Own http://www.amazon.co...27966557&sr=1-9 NOt exactly what you were asking for but it will do. Do not talk about your own sex life in a bio about someone else. Save that for your own. Or call it your own not The Passion of Ayn Rand. Glug. What an unfortunate choice of a title. And she was my teacher so I feel free saying what I want about her. Has anyone else here watched her and listened to her for two years straight. Hello.......bio Your rules (or Mallone's, haven't read him) are interesting. In part, technically, you are right in that Barbara's bio did incorporate part memoir, and she presented this honestly. Xray's evaluation was right, and yours was wrong. The book was insightful, it was beautifully written. Furthermore, it was as objective as she could make it, I think, and as well researched as it could have been, given the constraints the "heir to the Estate" put on materials and even people who could give information. I have read hundreds of biographies. Have you? I am fully qualified, although not by the Sorbonne, to read them and judge them as a reader. Are you? I don't agree she presented it honestly. The title was The Passion of Ayn Rand, so why did her agoraphobia and sex neuroses have to be included. For titilation?
  3. seymourblogger
    No of course not. How did you read that in my words. BB had nothing to do with what I said. I was referring to x-ray saying he thought it was deeply insightful and well written. It was neither BTW, but it is one of the only 2 accounts written by the 2 people who knew her best. If there had been more who knew her and wrote about her, BB would not have been so likely to get published or would have had certain things highly edited out of it. I cannot even imagine how so much got through an editor. My criticism was of the person who showed a lack of discrimination. IMO. Does that soften it? Were you baiting me? Knowingly or not?
  4. seymourblogger
    Yes. That's why I asked and did not "accuse" as you said in an earlier post. Did you read the posting guidelines? Michael I have the right to remain silent. Anything I say can and will be used against me. Too bad Martha Stewart didn't remember that when she was being set up.
  5. seymourblogger
    Shoot, I haven’t seen Moneyball. But I have seen Rollerball, and find it fits well into the Spenglerian civilization model grid, specifically, where Democracy transitions to Caesarism. I liked Moneyball a great deal; in fact, I watched it twice, even though I'm not much of a baseball fan. But I don't recall the "Foucauldian Grid of power/knowledge in linguistic action." I thought it was a just good sports movie that happens to be true. Maybe the Foucauldian stuff happened during the locker-room pep talk. Not being versed in Foucauldian analysis, I may have missed the the complex subtleties that are previewed here: Ghs Well now that you have been suitably enlightened, can you see it. A rose is a rose is a rose. Theme is OK but it does not open any more information to you, it just labels what you have seen. There are no resonances except what is like it in theme or not like it in theme, but a Foucault reading allows you to see the power/knowledge/capital relation in action, in it dynamics rather than stasis. An object does not exist until and unless it is observed. - William Burroughs Or as Rand says about the impossibility of seeing something everyone refuses to see. - Rand paraphrase so give me the correct quote one of you trivial pursuit people. There's another famous one but I forget who. I forget a lot you know. Thank heavens for blessings.
  6. seymourblogger
    Perhaps it was this kind of muddled thinking that enabled Foucault to praise the Iranian Revolution to the extent he did. For the entire review, see: http://www.h-net.org...ev.php?id=12437 Ghs I remember there were lots of people I knew being joyous that the shah was going down. A mistake. Even the Iranian people acknowledged their mistake. Some of them. Foucault did too BTW, publicly. When he was wrong he changed his mind. Like Churchill. What do you do? I agree Foucault sounds incomprehensible with the above excerpt. But that's what it is suposed to sound like. That makes the person who wrote it sound really really profound, doesn't it? Doesn't he I should say? For a simple sound bi8te for you try my Moneyball: http://moviesandfilm.blogspot.com/2012/01/moneyball-order-of-seduction-and.html This is the 2nd one and different. Try it you may even like it.
  7. seymourblogger
    I would love to see Foucault translated into "simple English." But the moment that is done -- assuming it can be done, which I doubt -- Foucault will lose his aura of profundity and appear as the mediocre thinker he was. I've seen this sort of thing before, both on Atlantis II and on OL. Someone with a smattering of philosophical knowledge will come onto an O'ist forum and throw some names around, figuring that O'ist types are philosophically iilliterate and will therefore be easily impressed and bamboozled. After my initial dismissal of Foucault, recall how Janet mistakenly assumed that I had never read anything by him and then told me that only an "expert" could legitimately criticize him. And then, when I suggested that Janet start a thread on Foucault and said that I would be willing to review some of his books in order to participate, notice how she called this a "trap" and came up with some other nonsense to rationalize her refusal. I can spot an intellectual phony a mile away. If I am wrong about Janet, then she can easily set the record straight by beginning a thread on Foucault and outlining some of his ideas -- and we can go from there. Ghs You are one of those people who wants everything reduced to a ready-made word or sentence. Go wiki Judith Butler as she has a great answer for you. I'm being baited again. I just took your bait but not the hook.
  8. seymourblogger
    I would love to see Foucault translated into "simple English." But the moment that is done -- assuming it can be done, which I doubt -- Foucault will lose his aura of profundity and appear as the mediocre thinker he was. I've seen this sort of thing before, both on Atlantis II and on OL. Someone with a smattering of philosophical knowledge will come onto an O'ist forum and throw some names around, figuring that O'ist types are philosophically iilliterate and will therefore be easily impressed and bamboozled. After my initial dismissal of Foucault, recall how Janet mistakenly assumed that I had never read anything by him and then told me that only an "expert" could legitimately criticize him. And then, when I suggested that Janet start a thread on Foucault and said that I would be willing to review some of his books in order to participate, notice how she called this a "trap" and came up with some other nonsense to rationalize her refusal. I can spot an intellectual phony a mile away. If I am wrong about Janet, then she can easily set the record straight by beginning a thread on Foucault and outlining some of his ideas -- and we can go from there. Ghs You are one of those people who wants everything reduced to a ready-made word or sentence. Go wiki Judith Butler as she has a great answer for you.
  9. seymourblogger
    [italics are mine, not yours] Can you help me with a simple question? How can you (or anyone else) know what is going on in someone else's head as in understanding intention or motivation. In my entire life I have never been able to know anything about anyone else other than what I inferred from their externalities: speech, writings, public actions, body language, facial expression etc. Short of a real time PET scan how can anyone know what is going on in someone else's head? I have been "mind blind" my entire life. I did not even begin to grasp body language until my mid 20s and for me body language is like a foreign language. I only know about it by purely empirical and external means. I cannot relate it to anything going on inside med. To put a point on it, I have not got the foggiest notion of what someone else is feeling other than by inference and guesswork. I have not the foggiest notion of what motivates others. So I simply take them at their word when they express a motive publicly. And even then I don't know - since they could be mistaken or lying. Ba'al Chatzaf You have seduced me into answering you. I am not sure. One could say a touch of autism, but that is clinical and I don't like it. Tell me more. Your ID indicates you are not American. Maybe that has something to do with what you wrote? Your wonderings sound very much like Wittgenstein. Have you read him? Well you should. You will understand him easily. Not like the rest of us.
  10. seymourblogger
    Phil, you are entirely right here, but she cannot get rid of the jargon because the jargon is the point of her points. It is all semiotics. In simple English it would just be the usual ideas we deal with well or badly all the time. Here's my link to my Moneyball. How could I be any clearer? Please. I am serious about asking this about this. http://moviesandfilm...ucault-and.html And no you had to know about Foucault's grid to observe it in the movie. An object does not exist until and unless it is observed. - Wiliam Burroughs
  11. seymourblogger
    Phil, you are entirely right here, but she cannot get rid of the jargon because the jargon is the point of her points. It is all semiotics. In simple English it would just be the usual ideas we deal with well or badly all the time. Here's my link to my Moneyball. How could I be any clearer? Please. I am serious about asking this about this. http://moviesandfilm.blogspot.com/2012/01/review-moneyball-foucault-and.html
  12. seymourblogger
    Mao and Foucault. Hitler and Nietzsche. See where this kind of thinking goes.
  13. seymourblogger
    How do I park it? I still don't get it but will try to figure it out. I'd start a thread consisting only of your signature line with all that info for a point of base reference. Maybe an additional comment or two. --Brant Thank you. I think.
  14. seymourblogger
    I can only say that if you think BB bio was "full of deep insight and very well written" that you need to read some great bio. This statement of yours voices a mere personal opinion without replying to what I had asked you: " What exaclty do you criticize about B. Branden's book on Rand?" So if you would please be more specific. See above. Copying 'Toohey's message' and suggesting that this constitues evidence to support your claim is a thinking error. Its fallacy lies in presenting a mere personal opinion as alleged evidence. I already said it quite a few times now. In three different ways.
  15. seymourblogger
    I have read hundreds of biographies. Have you? I am fully qualified, although not by the Sorbonne, to read them and judge them as a reader. Are you? Fully qualified. Wow! Do you have a certificate? Who issued it? Was it a presidential proclamation? Hundreds? Thousands? Oh my! I am duly chastised and absolutely impressed.
  16. seymourblogger
    I love it. You are so funny.
  17. seymourblogger
    Elsewhere I said try Thomas Mallon's A Book of One's Own http://www.amazon.co...27966557&sr=1-9 NOt exactly what you were asking for but it will do. Do not talk about your own sex life in a bio about someone else. Save that for your own. Or call it your own not The Passion of Ayn Rand. Glug. What an unfortunate choice of a title. And she was my teacher so I feel free saying what I want about her. Has anyone else here watched her and listened to her for two years straight. Hello.......bio Your rules (or Mallone's, haven't read him) are interesting. In part, technically, you are right in that Barbara's bio did incorporate part memoir, and she presented this honestly. Xray's evaluation was right, and yours was wrong. The book was insightful, it was beautifully written. Furthermore, it was as objective as she could make it, I think, and as well researched as it could have been, given the constraints the "heir to the Estate" put on materials and even people who could give information. I have read hundreds of biographies. Have you? I am fully qualified, although not by the Sorbonne, to read them and judge them as a reader. Are you? Right and wrong, here we go, back into the dialectic. Here's my answer. Recently I ate at a restaurant and at the check out she pasted on a smile and said, "How was your mean today?" I said, "It was awful. Thank you for asking." (She was a woman of color.) A guy behind me said, "I thought it was really good. I'll come back again." I said, "Well I guess it was really good if you are used to eating at McDonald's." It's all relative said Einstein. Don't feel bad about not teaching at the Sorbonne. Foucault couldn't even come close to getting an appointment there. Neither could Baudrillard, so you are in excellent company. And they kicked out Lacan. Good, instructive answer. Did you paste on the smile because your server was a woman of colour? Did the other customer praise the food in reaction to your rudeness? Does the idea of "someone used to eating at McDonald's" influence one's taste buds? Read please: I said SHE pasted on a smile, not me. Yes I think McDonald's effects your taste buds. They do it deliberately with salt and sugar. Any macrobiotic eater knows that. Remember Barbaraq Streisand in Prince of Tides: She orders a dinner for them at a French restaurant, in French. Nolte says to her, "I thought you didn't cook." She says, "I don't. But I know how to eat." And why the hell is it rude to say a dinner was lousy when they've just charged you $15 for it? She wasn't a friend that I would be willing to deny reality for and lie. Are you telling me I should deny reality and not tell her the truth. Shame on you.
  18. seymourblogger
    Elsewhere I said try Thomas Mallon's A Book of One's Own http://www.amazon.co...27966557&sr=1-9 NOt exactly what you were asking for but it will do. Do not talk about your own sex life in a bio about someone else. Save that for your own. Or call it your own not The Passion of Ayn Rand. Glug. What an unfortunate choice of a title. And she was my teacher so I feel free saying what I want about her. Has anyone else here watched her and listened to her for two years straight. Hello.......bio Your rules (or Mallone's, haven't read him) are interesting. In part, technically, you are right in that Barbara's bio did incorporate part memoir, and she presented this honestly. Xray's evaluation was right, and yours was wrong. The book was insightful, it was beautifully written. Furthermore, it was as objective as she could make it, I think, and as well researched as it could have been, given the constraints the "heir to the Estate" put on materials and even people who could give information. I have read hundreds of biographies. Have you? I am fully qualified, although not by the Sorbonne, to read them and judge them as a reader. Are you? Right and wrong, here we go, back into the dialectic. Here's my answer. Recently I ate at a restaurant and at the check out she pasted on a smile and said, "How was your mean today?" I said, "It was awful. Thank you for asking." (She was a woman of color.) A guy behind me said, "I thought it was really good. I'll come back again." I said, "Well I guess it was really good if you are used to eating at McDonald's." It's all relative said Einstein. Don't feel bad about not teaching at the Sorbonne. Foucault couldn't even come close to getting an appointment there. Neither could Baudrillard, so you are in excellent company. And they kicked out Lacan. Good, instructive answer. Did you paste on the smile because your server was a woman of colour? Did the other customer praise the food in reaction to your rudeness? Does the idea of "someone used to eating at McDonald's" influence one's taste buds? Read please: I said SHE pasted on a smile, not me. Yes I think McDonald's effects your taste buds. They do it deliberately with salt and sugar. Any macrobiotic eater knows that. Remember Barbaraq Streisand in Prince of Tides: She orders a dinner for them at a French restaurant, in French. Nolte says to her, "I thought you didn't cook." She says, "I don't. But I know how to eat."
  19. seymourblogger
    Sorry. I won't be nice t you anymore. I'll treat you just like everyone else does. Then you can whine some more: Oh she doesn't like me either. I don't. So there.
  20. seymourblogger
    Elsewhere I said try Thomas Mallon's A Book of One's Own http://www.amazon.co...27966557&sr=1-9 NOt exactly what you were asking for but it will do. Do not talk about your own sex life in a bio about someone else. Save that for your own. Or call it your own not The Passion of Ayn Rand. Glug. What an unfortunate choice of a title. And she was my teacher so I feel free saying what I want about her. Has anyone else here watched her and listened to her for two years straight. Hello.......bio Your rules (or Mallone's, haven't read him) are interesting. In part, technically, you are right in that Barbara's bio did incorporate part memoir, and she presented this honestly. Xray's evaluation was right, and yours was wrong. The book was insightful, it was beautifully written. Furthermore, it was as objective as she could make it, I think, and as well researched as it could have been, given the constraints the "heir to the Estate" put on materials and even people who could give information. I have read hundreds of biographies. Have you? I am fully qualified, although not by the Sorbonne, to read them and judge them as a reader. Are you? Oh and Mallon doesn't give you rules. He just excerpts form excellent examples and says why he chose them. His book is easier to recommend than a reading list that would take you a few years to go through. If you think POAR is excellent, all that does is say something about you. Just as what I said says something about me. Where does right and wrong come in pray tell? OH excuse me, how stupid of me, we are in the dialectic, aren't we?
  21. seymourblogger
    Elsewhere I said try Thomas Mallon's A Book of One's Own http://www.amazon.co...27966557&sr=1-9 NOt exactly what you were asking for but it will do. Do not talk about your own sex life in a bio about someone else. Save that for your own. Or call it your own not The Passion of Ayn Rand. Glug. What an unfortunate choice of a title. And she was my teacher so I feel free saying what I want about her. Has anyone else here watched her and listened to her for two years straight. Hello.......bio Your rules (or Mallone's, haven't read him) are interesting. In part, technically, you are right in that Barbara's bio did incorporate part memoir, and she presented this honestly. Xray's evaluation was right, and yours was wrong. The book was insightful, it was beautifully written. Furthermore, it was as objective as she could make it, I think, and as well researched as it could have been, given the constraints the "heir to the Estate" put on materials and even people who could give information. I have read hundreds of biographies. Have you? I am fully qualified, although not by the Sorbonne, to read them and judge them as a reader. Are you? Right and wrong, here we go, back into the dialectic. Here's my answer. Recently I ate at a restaurant and at the check out she pasted on a smile and said, "How was your mean today?" I said, "It was awful. Thank you for asking." (She was a woman of color.) A guy behind me said, "I thought it was really good. I'll come back again." I said, "Well I guess it was really good if you are used to eating at McDonald's." It's all relative said Einstein. Don't feel bad about not teaching at the Sorbonne. Foucault couldn't even come close to getting an appointment there. Neither could Baudrillard, so you are in excellent company. And they kicked out Lacan.
  22. seymourblogger
    I remember the panic attacks, particularly the one portrayed in the film, since it was important to the plot, but the rest of this? I certainly don't recall Barbara writing about her orgasms in The Passion of Ayn Rand. And if NB said something about alimony it wasn't in The Passion of Ayn Rand, and isn't that the book you're critiquing? I don't recall any of this being in Judgement Day either, but I didn't care much for that book so I may have missed some things. If she didn't say she wasn't having orgasms then how would I know? Branden certainly didn't say that about her. I'm not critiquing Passion I have gotten myself sucked into this mess about BB. Evidently no one is supposed to say anything negative about her. I am only saying what she has already said about herself. Go look. She said it. Having worked with a number of women with panic attacks under Joseph Wolpe who developed the therapy for working with them, what BB said about herself is accurate. the two things go together. Me I'll take psychoanalysis any day. Jeez I didn't break a few windows. It looks like I blew up the whole goddamn building!
  23. seymourblogger
    I'm not sure I know what you mean by Order of Production and Order of Seduction, but on the surface, it sounds like my real interest comes way before chopping my head off from my heart like that. What you saw as a ping-pong feels more like 3D pool in a space as large as the Milky Way to me. I was just thinking out loud and my fingers can't keep up with the speed of my thoughts. Good thing, too. Most of that stuff is not for public viewing. Imagine if it happened. What a way to lose all your credibility and reputation in one whack! The most beautiful example of the Order of Production came from selene in his comparison table of Rand and Nietzsche so it must be towards the end of that post on Rand and Nietzsche.. It's a very very long comment. I would link it but I can't gt easily from one page to another yet. I said easily. A TOSHIBA IS NOT AN APPLE! The example of the Order of Seduction would be Rand's fiction, especially in Fountainhead. Are you clear on what Baudrillard means by this now?
  24. seymourblogger
    "After the table, I’ve added some comments on the significance of the tabulated results." selene/adam What you have presented me with is lot of information within the Order of Production. When set in a table it becomes quantifiable, can be counted, and stats can be run on it. It is measurable. It is almost exactly what Foucault discusses in his essay on representation in The Archeology of Knowledge. It is the first essay and it is on Las Meninas the painting by Valasquez. It's all there and I know you will love it. So I don't think I have to say more. Please don't blow me off for this. That's not what I am after.
  25. seymourblogger
    Hicks sucks.