Debt crisis: austerity, a chance for econology?

[sen-no-sen]

Christophe,
The goal is not to create misery and dissatisfaction, it is simply the consequence:

Not so sure friend ...
The concept of creating problems and proposing pseudo-solutions is a well-established concept.
A crisis with global consequences will see a solution to the dimension of the problem: global governance.

[Ahmed]

Certainly, Sen-no-sen, Naomi Klein has a vision that goes more from the political to the economic and I lean more for the opposite ...
It is more a question of angle of attack, it does not profoundly change the analysis at this level.

I do not believe in imminent global governance, because too many differences; maybe a convergence?

[sen-no-sen]

Certainly, Sen-no-sen, Naomi Klein has a vision that goes more from the political to the economic and I lean more for the opposite ...
It is more a question of angle of attack, it does not profoundly change the analysis at this level.

Right, both visions are correct.
In addition, certain consequences linked to globalism lead to counterproductive effects (this is the case with the questioning of certain countries in the euro zone).

I do not believe in imminent global governance, because too many differences; maybe a convergence?

The absence of effective measures (and this in all strategic areas) shows to what extent the leaders follow a clear line, which is in fact only the ideology of this global governance.
The EU, NAFTA, ASEAN etc ... are only the embryos of this project.

As you do well to notice the divergences are numerous, because the economic blocks have different visions of things.
Nevertheless, the model of standardization of the world proves itself, "the american way of life" now have a Chinese equivalent!

[Ahmed]

Absolutely: the religion of the commodity has become a universal creed , however the chapels remain divided since competing ...
At the national level, the division between the left and the right is only in the way of celebrating Mass!

You write:

Right, both visions are correct.

Note, however, that they do not lead to the same conclusions.

[sen-no-sen]

At the national level, the division between the left and the right is only in the way of celebrating Mass!

... And all of us wear the signs of the beast!

Quote:
Right, both visions are correct.

Note, however, that they do not lead to the same conclusions.

Yes, in one case it would be the will of some ... of the other the consequences of a system, right?
I see a mixture of the two.

[Ahmed]

... And all of them sport the sign of the Beast!

The apocalypse is not far away!

Yes, in one case it would be the will of a few ... of the other, the consequences of a system, right?

Absolutely!

I see a mixture of the two.

it is a mixture, of course, but office.
Capitalism is a religion served by high priests, ie by those who agree to submit to its rules in exchange for a substantial consideration (goods, power, prestige).

I do not speak of religion by chance: this ultra rational doctrine in its development rests on a completely mythical foundation.

I don't know if I've already mentioned it, but Daniel Cerezuelle in his latest book, "The technique and the flesh", wonders, in the first part of his book on the reason that pushes so many people to believe in arguments that are not very credible when it comes to" progress "or technology.
He then develops the metaphysical argument that I have already proposed here (copier, Go!), Namely that it is very difficult for us to admit the tragic and the finitude of our existence and that we therefore want to believe in a kind of external negation by technique, by the accumulation of merchandise.
An ontological sleight of hand that wants to be a bulwark and that is only an ineffective screen ...

[sen-no-sen]

I don't know if I've already mentioned it, but Daniel Cerezuelle in his latest book, "The technique and the flesh", wonders, in the first part of his book on the reason that pushes so many people to believe in arguments that are not very credible when it comes to" progress "or technology.
He then develops the metaphysical argument that I have already proposed here (copier, Go!), Namely that it is very difficult for us to admit the tragic and the finitude of our existence and that we therefore want to believe in a kind of external negation by technique, by the accumulation of merchandise.
An ontological sleight of hand that wants to be a bulwark and that is only an ineffective screen ...

Very interesting!
Indeed, in the light of certain currents of scientific thought *, it appears that the project to save humanity from death by means of technology is not just a simple idea ... Matrix here I am!

For H. Laborit the main motivation is the search for individual pleasure through dominance, contemporary societies have completely alienated themselves from the means used to obtain it: production for production, and we consider it as an end in itself.

Besides, by replacing contemporary societies with banks and production with finance in the previous sentence, we get the current crisis.

* See about it:
http://www.internetactu.net/2008/09/08/prochain-arret-la-singularite-34-de-la-realite-intelligente-au-computronium/

[Ahmed]

Yes, the scientific currents develop this kind of fad, but not only: there is a will onturgical, according to the word of John Brown, ie the desire to create an "augmented" man; by intervening on the human body it would be possible to improve its capacities or performance.
Until now, the technique only intervened to restore degraded functions: glasses, dentures, prostheses ...
It is time for supporters of this delirium to realize that these virtual possibilities have their counterpart in the overall consequences of the operation of technical hyperpower which risks catching up with them and bringing them back to reality.

Amusing: D. Cerezuelle talk about Matrix!

It is after reading the theses of Laborit that I had found interesting but incomplete, in the sense that his area of ​​competence limited reasoning and only allowed a partial answer: there was not really a satisfactory final explanation.
I then headed towards a metaphysical reflection.

[sen-no-sen]

It is after reading the theses of Laborit that I had found interesting but incomplete, in the sense that his area of ​​competence limited reasoning and only allowed a partial answer: there was not really a satisfactory final explanation.
I then headed towards a metaphysical reflection.

H.Laborit developed his thesis based on the compilation of knowledge available in his time, and as he had written, a "new grid" of more comprehensive explanation of human experience will replace it in the future.

Your approach is very interesting! indeed, the man (or rather his ego ...) would seek a kind of eternal life in the matter? (it is a rather Gnostic approach which deserves to be dug).

I also think, and this is a point that is too little discussed, that human beings have an exponential tendency (this is what really differentiates them from other animals, where does this function come from?), and that this is undoubtedly the basis of all vices, as of all virtues ... the dice are in our hands!

[Ahmed]

... man (or rather his ego ...) would seek a kind of eternal life in matter?

An eternal life indirectly, at least a life sufficiently accelerated and congested thanks to the rational action on matter so that it obstructs the vision of death.
Accelerated, because the combined power of science * and technology allows large changes in a short time: it is the equivalent of gain by dilation of time.
Cluttered, because, as Marx states in the first sentence of the French edition of "Capital" **:

The wealth of the societies in which the capitalist mode of production reigns promises to be an “immense accumulation of goods”.

It is thus not only eternal life, or at least its simulacrum, which is sought: more daily, it is the negation of our finiteness and our weaknesses: assigned to a circumscribed place, we are constantly to get rid of it by faster and faster vehicles, subject to the vicissitudes of the climate, we build bubbles which refute its action, etc ...

* We see here that science, which claims to be the domain par excellence of reason, finds its foundations in a metaphysical dream.

** Capitalism wants to be a promise of universal prosperity, but how to explain, in front of the evidence of the imposture, the adhesion of those very who would have the best reasons not to believe it, if not by this morbid fascination that is exercised, through material production, the negation / destruction of nature and our nature?