The official new members and lurkers thread

[Jeff]

Bumping for any new folks looking for a place to say hi.

[WakeUpAndLive]

I've posted too much in a little amount of time but haven't introduced myself. Young california native here, been skeptical since 9th grade when WTC went down and glad I found a place with such a diverse and open discussion platform. Much appreciation Jeff!

[DevilYouKnow]

Long-time intermittent lurker here who hopes to contribute items of interest to the community now and then. Left-leaning atheistic male non-American who likes humans and chooses to be cautiously optimistic about their future, in the face of all evidence, experience and common sense.

I'll add that I'm very impressed with the quality of the discussions here nowadays. I often end up spending way more time than I should just reading the threads. For information sharing and discussion on things parapolitical (or just plain political), this place is an oasis. The spirit is one of openness to the outrageous without the hysterical credulity that often accompanies it, combined with a truly humanistic outlook. Three cheers for Master Wells and all contributors!

Someone remarked, in one of the long threads I recently finished, that the overarching theme of Rigorous Intuition is that of secrecy vs. literacy. I think that's wonderfully succinctly put, so I'm repeating it here.

[Stephen Morgan]

Someone remarked, in one of the long threads I recently finished, that the overarching theme of Rigorous Intuition is that of secrecy vs. literacy. I think that's wonderfully succinctly put, so I'm repeating it here.

[T]he struggle of man against power is the struggle of memory against forgetting.
-- Milan Kundera, 1980

[23]

I'm not too sure that it's one of secrecy vs. literacy, though. The converse of secrecy is transparency, while illiteracy is the other side of the coin of literacy.

I rather think that it's between willful ignorance vs. truth for the sake of truth instead.

I see evidence of the former prevailing in the general populace, and the latter prevailing here.

[DevilYouKnow]

I was thinkning more in an epistemological sense. You want to know the truth for the sake of the truth, okay, but how can you know the truth? Literacy gives access to knowledge. It is what allows you to decypher texts, codes, events. The flipside is illiteracy, sure, but when some conspire to deny you this literacy, then we have secrecy.

[wintler2]

Not that it matters, but i like literacy better than truth as an ideal, so long as literacy is not mistaken for mere credentials and verbosity. Its much easier to claim and to test (you believe that, but are you aware of/can you explain this?), more of an expanding field than a citadel to be defended.

Thanks to the newbies introducing themselves, hi y'all, welcome!

[23]

I was thinkning more in an epistemological sense. You want to know the truth for the sake of the truth, okay, but how can you know the truth? Literacy gives access to knowledge. It is what allows you to decypher texts, codes, events. The flipside is illiteracy, sure, but when some conspire to deny you this literacy, then we have secrecy.

I'm not so worried about Subject X denying Subject Y the truth. I'm more worried about Y's strong dis-interest in knowing the truth (AKA willful ignorance)... and bias towards hearing what they want to hear... which makes X's job am amazingly easy one.

Truth tellers aren't always necessarily literate, I've also discovered. Thinking and communicating truthfully... and expecting nothing less from others... doesn't necessarily require a high degree of literacy.

But then again, maybe this deserves a continued discussion in another thread. Wouldn't want to stray away from the OP here.

[freemason9]

i like beer

[eyeno]

Thinking and communicating truthfully... and expecting nothing less from others... doesn't necessarily require a high degree of literacy.

True. Expecting it does not require a high degree of literacy.

Demanding it and accepting no less often creates a huge amount of friction though, especially from the willfully ignorant segment you mentioned. I like to think of it as accuracy instead of truth. Seems to take some of the conflict out of the equation because it helps remove it from the "right/wrong" matrix.

[JackRiddler]

.

The use of "literacy" as a contrast to secrecy comes from an article by Jimmy Johnson, posted here:
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=28897&start=30#p383542

He doesn't necessarily mean the ability to read, but the ability to access the privileged knowledge from which power springs. In medieval Europe, that was literally literacy. The bible was the equivalent of a state secret, those who held it, read it and interpreted it had power over the rest as a result. The printing press and the Reformation broke that down, just as Internet and leaks may be breaking down the present-day secrecy regime.

So NO, this thread should NOT go off-topic like this. Let the new members have their say, debate them elsewhere.

Oh, and welcome to Wakeupandlive and DevilYouKnow!

.

[Cosmic Cowbell]

Truth tellers aren't always necessarily literate, I've also discovered. Thinking and communicating truthfully... and expecting nothing less from others... doesn't necessarily require a high degree of literacy.

High gnu peeplz.

[wallflower]

Hi I'm 55 live in Western Pennsylvania. I like gardening and making paper party hats--the world needs more parties. I've lurked long and posted little.

[Mikey]

Yes i have lurked and while lurking have been entertained, upset, amused and had my brain tweaked. Whether i have anything worthwhile to add to any debate or subject well lets see. I'm from the UK recovering from illness and i'm a teacher in a 'challenging' inner city school but i have wild interests and maybe some different points of view. Lovely to be here though thanks for having me.

[WakeUpAndLive]

i like beer

Touche

High gnu peeplz.

ze snowboard combpanie?