Has any Facebook posting changed you?

Well, since the Internet is my main source of reading and Facebook is my main activity on Internet, and I have 1060 “friends” many of whom went to St. John’s Great Books, but others who are on an equal education level, therefore, every post is a glimpse into what is catching the attention and interest of those 1000 people… So certainly I am affected and influenced and sometimes I change my mind or position… I cannot say that I have been influence into some earthshaking change like conversion to Islam or registering as a Republican or having a sex-change operation…. but if I sit and think about it I will realize some turning points or “apotreptic moments” where I read something that make me see things from someone else’s different point of view.

++++

A “posting on FB” could be a link to anything… a page of the Bible, Das Kapital, Mein Kampf, a Jehovah Witness or Scientology site, and conceivable one might follow that link, read what is there, and suddenly make a life changing decision to join a religion, leave a religion, give up smoking and alcohol, or take up smoking and drinking… or go on a diet… or take up exercise or meditation.. or any number of other things. The Internet in general and FB in particular are simply mediums for communication with the written word. They may be used for good things or evil things. I would say when people stop changing then they are dead because to live is to change and grow. Even that apostle who said “I believe, help thou my unbelief” suggests change and growth. It even says of young Jesus that “he grew strong.” So I am perplexed about this issue of change, or fearing change.

I have to walk 30 min. to Chinatown to buy some stuff, (wife is nagging)… but your phrase “what is the purpose of my speech” reminds me that Sartre (and others) have written on the question of “why do we write.” I have not actually found Sartre’s article. People like Bloom and Mortimer Adler also address the broad question of why we write and why we read (and it gets into readerly and writerly) and I am thinking right now about John Barth’s collection of essays (Further Fridays)…for years he devotes every Friday to expository prose as an exercise, discipline, and the other six days to writing long novels.
++++
Aristotle “man is a political animal” and political animals live on logos. as well as T.W.I.T. (the western intellectual tradition ) robert ornstein… we do not completely experience something UNTIL we put it in words and narrate it to someone else (like all the tales people exchange in the Odyssey)… gotta run (er walk fast with my cane)

++++

Thoreau said “most people live out lives of quiet desperation.” Some people have their head shoved so far up that place where the sun dont shine that they can never change or learn a new thing and they are in denial about their situation so they spend a lot of energy on defense mechanisms to guard against new ideas and change and continually convince themselves that they are right and everyone else is wrong or crazy. The super bright people have brains with “lots of moving parts” so the more complex, the more moving parts, the greater the chance of something going wrong and breaking. Simpler is better. It is the brightest and most gifted that wind up in planemenos prelest and so they cannot be truly “orthodox” because orthodox in terms of Vincent of Lerins is an unchanging thing, the touchstone being semper, quod ubique, quod ab omnibus creditumi sit (” That faith which has been believed everywhere, always, by all.) But really brilliant people like Origen (who COINED the term THEOTOKOS) became planemenos. Hans Kung and Carl Ratzinger were the two brightest minds at Vatican II but Kung was perhaps brighter, and Kung went off the deep end dogmatically/doctrinally. In order to be “orthodox” (depending on whose orthodoxy you are talking about) you cannot be too complex or too simple. If you are too simple then you just don’t retain a lot. If you are too complex then you stray from the beaten path.

With regard to the “possibility” that a brilliant, certified, highly trained Nobel prize winner might actually be “misguided” may I direct your attention to:
http://bipolarblast.wordpress.com/2009/02/03/nobel-prize-for-lobotomy/

http://webspace.ship.edu/cgboer/lobotomy.html

http://mcmanweb.com/lobotomy.html

I am looking for that Sartre piece on “why we write” http://www.sartre.org/Writings/WhatisLiterature.htm

and it appears to be entitled “What is Literature” AND I HAVE FINALLY FOUND A TRANSLATION

http://www.scribd.com/doc/12238868/Sartre-What-is-Literature

NOW YOU HAVE TO PAGE WAY DOWN BEFORE YOU HIT THE TEXT… and if you dont page down about 10 times then you will think that it is all blank. Translated from the French by Bernard Frechtman in 1949

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: