Stéphane Hessel "All things considered ... or almost"

philosophical debates and companies.
bidouille23
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 1155
Registration: 21/06/09, 01:02
Location: Britain BZH powaaa
x 2




by bidouille23 » 02/03/13, 14:55

No comment on the extra terrestrial, whether it is there or not it doesn't change anything at all .... it's like for death if you spend your life wondering what it is you miss it essential ...


But everyone is free to do what they want with their time in this space we call life ...


Obamot:


Yes Bidouille, it is not what is reproached him, but his lack of discernment which borders on the code



I don't understand sorry, what are you calling please?
0 x
User avatar
gegyx
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6930
Registration: 21/01/05, 11:59
x 2870




by gegyx » 02/03/13, 14:57

Next / In Italy today, young graduates are thinking straight out (with the family) and changing their nationality…
Because the country has no future.

It is still a sign!
:frown:
0 x
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28725
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5538




by Obamot » 02/03/13, 15:00

bidouille23 wrote:No comment on the extra terrestrial, whether it is there or not it doesn't change anything at all .... it's like for death if you spend your life wondering what it is you miss it essential ...


But everyone is free to do what they want with their time in this space we call life ...


Obamot:


Yes Bidouille, it is not what is reproached him, but his lack of discernment which borders on the code



I don't understand sorry, what are you calling please?

"Curling the code" is a common idiomatic expression (sorry for that barbaric name), you will find others here, of which it is part:
http://www.geneva-french-lessons.com/gallicismes2.html
0 x
bidouille23
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 1155
Registration: 21/06/09, 01:02
Location: Britain BZH powaaa
x 2




by bidouille23 » 02/03/13, 17:07

re,
no problem on the contrary my dear Obamot, I have just learned a new word thanks to you, so thank you ...

but I have a definition that could stick I think ...

source: http://www.francaisfacile.com/forum/lir ... er+le+code



quote:

"Curling the code.
A colloquial expression meaning "to be at the extreme limit of honesty." "
Ex: Dupont has never had any trouble with the justice system in his country, but if he continues to follow the code, the situation may well change. "


hum, how to say, is it he (have a good talk about Mr. Hessel reassures me) who borders on the code or the way we use it or the way we used it? If we really believe what we said and suddenly did it really curl the code?

I do not see in fact how what he said and advocated could be interpreted as a lack of honesty, except that actually he lived in the same world as us therefore subject to the same problems, hence a semblance of curling code, which I don't necessarily have ... Then the only thing I would say is that he had the possibility that we didn't necessarily have to have his time and a certain ease of money allowing him to do that ...
But he was fighting for ideas, so there was no monetary interest (around him, however, no doubt, this is where we find the possibility of being used by others ... )


there is little to be able to extract in this case the main idea, without integrating it into the complexity of the system of which it was part ...
0 x
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28725
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5538




by Obamot » 02/03/13, 19:21

bidouille23 wrote:re,
no problem on the contrary my dear Obamot, I just learned a new word thanks to you, so thank you ...

but I have a definition that could stick I think ...

source: http://www.francaisfacile.com/forum/lir ... er+le+code



quote:

"Curling the code.
A colloquial expression meaning "to be at the extreme limit of honesty." "
Ex: Dupont has never had any trouble with the justice system in his country, but if he continues to follow the code, the situation may well change. "


hum, how to say, is it he (have a good talk about Mr. Hessel reassures me) who borders on the code or the way we use it or the way we used it?

Nooooooooonnn (well whatever ... indeed, if we take what Bob said, it could be understood like that!)

It's neither Bob nor Hessel, nor you : Cheesy:

bidouille23 wrote:rIf we really believe what we said and suddenly did it really curl the code?

I do not see in fact how what he said and advocated could be interpreted as a lack of honesty, except that actually he lived in the same world as us therefore subject to the same problems, hence a semblance of curling code, which I don't necessarily have ... Then the only thing I would say is that he had the possibility that we didn't necessarily have to have his time and a certain ease of money allowing him to do that ...
But he was fighting for ideas, so there was no monetary interest (around him, however, no doubt, this is where we find the possibility of being used by others ... )

there is little to be able to extract in this case the main idea, without integrating it into the complexity of the system of which it was part ...

In reality, and I often say it, the rulers (most) are very overwhelmed by what is happening in the world (are we not ourselves at our humble level?).
So I'm not sure all the "actors" are consciously malicious! Certainly there are, and these are the ones who are in the sights. But very clever who will be able to untangle the trick, an ignoramus like me remains a little dumb in front of the sum of knowledge which it would be necessary to acquire to achieve it:

Economic and social sciences
Political Sciences
Medicine
Technologies
Comparative law (local and international)
Even the knowledge base in philosophy, psychology, sociology, and theology *

On the other hand, I believe that Bob has posed the problem of media governance and their lack of independence. Moreover, some are so connected with the current theoretical model that there is no need to "control" them, they self-censor very well on their own.

* science fiction would be optional ...;)
0 x
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963




by Ahmed » 02/03/13, 22:00

The success of its "indignation" shows both that it echoes a very strong feeling and that, unfortunately, the analysis which accompanies it is sufficiently simplistic to arouse a form of suspect unanimity (since it conforms to the prevailing prejudices ).
Completely backward-looking, his words celebrate an era during which, thanks to special conditions, certain advances could have developed: these conditions ceasing, these advances have faded.
I naturally conclude from this that the modifications had no structural character whatsoever since this era led us to the current situation and that it is therefore both impossible and illogical to try to repeat History.
This result is not the fact of a deviation or dysfunctions that a healthy "indignation" would be able to resolve, but the pursuit, for a moment concealed, of a long-term process.

I come to your note, Obamot:
In reality, and I often say it, the rulers (most) are very overwhelmed by what is happening in the world (are we not ourselves at our humble level?).
So I'm not sure all the "actors" are consciously malicious! Certainly there are, and these are the ones who are in the sights.

The "actors" are indeed not particularly malicious, but, precisely as actors, play their role and in doing so cannot ignore the nature and the artificial character of the characters which they embody.
Basically, I think they are well informed (because well trained), or able to be, on the reality of the world, simply it is not they who wrote the play; probably, and this is where their pride is placed and what their care is about, can they bring their role to a particular coloring ... breathe a little life into the automaton.
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
BobFuck
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 534
Registration: 04/10/12, 16:12
x 2




by BobFuck » 02/03/13, 23:33

bidouille23 wrote:Bob, the only common plan is empathy nothing more ...
it is the question of wondering if I am even why I would have reached this conclusion if I had been myself put in this position.


It should not be confused :

1- Understanding others (an essential process, otherwise you are autistic);
2- And seek by all means excuses for thugs.

There is a difference between a guy who steals food because he bursts the slab, and a guy who explodes a granny to steal his jewelry and buy a fashionable iphone. Or an Islamist terrorist. Not to see this difference, that's the world of bisounours: as the conclusion of a logical thought is politically incorrect, we refrain from thinking. It works very well with journalists.
0 x
bidouille23
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 1155
Registration: 21/06/09, 01:02
Location: Britain BZH powaaa
x 2




by bidouille23 » 03/03/13, 13:34

Hi ;

Bob if you say it is that it must be true;) ... to each his own reality of things ... to each his reality of his own world (we all live on the same planet but each in our world) ...


There is no question of accepting (and not excusing) the acts of men who have lost their way on the path of life (have they been there alone and on their own, on a basis of understanding of just leaving ?? ).
and in the end it is not them that I apologize but myself to be able to be in their situation and act like them, if subject to the same external interaction as them (interaction with the close environment which since their birth which to be trained and pushed into becoming what they are).

Do you see the nuance?

Understanding why, by finding the reasons, and therefore excuses, is basically for me looking for the causes and not the way to correct the effects ... but that's not why I accept the consequences of their acts ... but I accept on the other hand that one could arrive at such acts, if put in a similar situation.

Take the case of suicide bombers, at the present time the more they have made war on them the more there are ... it is true for a little everything, the more have sought to correct the problem downstream, the more it magnified, why?
it is like for the cancers which are more and more numerous, have sought to cure them but not to know why they are developing, we are basically looking for vaccines to better continue to live as we do, without questioning our actions which are however the basis of the problem ...

Understanding the basis (or trying in any case, the thing being easier said than done), makes it possible to find one (or more) possible (s) more sustainable solution (s) when actions that develop on these bases precisely ...

Finally, the fact of qualifying in a derogatory way a form of thought that you do not necessarily accept is quite simply given to be even a good reason not to go looking further. It is exactly the same reasoning, in some ready terms and / or formulations, as that used by these same terrorists ...

but as everyone said at noon on their door ... so I stop there because I can not and do not want you to accept this form of reality which is specific to me, I just wanted to express it in order to emit another possible, and another form of understanding ...

And your vision is as respectable as mine at the end and that of each .... In short, I wanted to react to the fact that qualifying someone on his actions and words while this is the way in which the ace used which is in question, which seems to me unfairly just and too limiting ...

So yes the media have a governance, but for the journalists we can take again the same logic to explain previously, and there it is as the saying obamot all the society which questioned it ...

From there I take up Ahmed's words about the "actors" who are not necessarily malicious, but who know the character of the characters they play (for certain at least). And who ultimately choose to accept or not to give a little life to the automaton .... automaton of which we are a part ....
0 x
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963




by Ahmed » 03/03/13, 18:48

Yes, Bidouille23, you're absolutely right: you have to distinguish between the act and what is "first cause", as would say Spinoza.
The concept of "terrorist" is such a practical labeling process that you have to handle it with a grain of salt (one is always + or - the other's terrorist).

And, since "fighting" against terrorism amounts to attacking the consequences and not the causes, we should not be surprised by what you point out:
... the more we make war on them the more there is ... it is true for a little everything, the more we try to correct the problem downstream, the more it grows, why?


Do not forget either the extreme usefulness of the enemy which must be aroused, as soon as it comes to disappear ...
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
bidouille23
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 1155
Registration: 21/06/09, 01:02
Location: Britain BZH powaaa
x 2




by bidouille23 » 03/03/13, 22:38

evening re,

Ahmed:

[/ quote] Do not forget either the extreme usefulness of the enemy which must be aroused, as soon as it comes to disappear ...
[Quote]


This is unfortunately so true .... It is necessary to show the enemy to concentrate the hatred of the other and therefore the energies which will be developed will therefore be lost for other much more just causes.

By changing the repository of perception of things have, creates the world that we have wanted .... stigmatized a way of being and / or acting, whether it is called terrorist or any other, come back to make lures useful to the great world machine ....

We must therefore be vigilant not to be manipulated as could be the word yet just Mr. Hessel ...

who in the end I persist in saying it was good and full of compassion .... we must not forget that it is thanks to a German and a dead man that he himself survived ... I think that leaves us to think when we are beneficiary of life thanks to the death of another ...

After his word is used for the current trade yes certainly, he must not have been fooled by it but used it too ...
We are part of the thing that creates us and that we nourish with our thoughts our actions and our words ....

it's a circle that should be as long as it can be virtuous ...

easier said than done because the machine is well run ...

As you say Ahmed, we should be wary of labeling processes that push for ease (for lack of taking a step back), and serve a cause that may ultimately be the opposite of what we would like. ..

here is a quote that I like, heard on Fi, around 19 pm "you see the painting" by Christophe Blain:

"if when you are in front of a painting and the light is not sufficient to see it well then frown to increase the lack of light and when you are too far away to see a painting clearly then take a step back" ... .

I find that transposable to an infinity of things ...;)
0 x

Back to "Society and Philosophy"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 182 guests