Greetings Economists, On Feb 24, 2007, at 8:46 AM, Yoshie Furuhashi wrote:
James also said, "Pacifists ought to enter more deeply into the aesthetical and ethical point of view of their opponents. Do that first in any controversy, says J. J. Chapman, _then move the point_, and your opponent will follow."
Doyle; I have no disagreement with this. I think though one must shift certain religious assumptions which is a little like what James says. Morality and ethics are verbal descriptions about how the emotion system ought to work. Online communities offer freedom from those strictures. That why Emily Nussbaum's article in New York Magazine last month resonates as a slogan. Say everything online, be a lesbian, be a real leftist, expose your love life in pictures in video, it doesn't matter. Develop and embrace a world in which you say anything. Morality is meant to proscribe 'bad' behavior but people who are depressed and working class people are heavily stressed which leads to depression will for example medicate themselves with 'drugs' to get through the day feelings la de da happy. A 'say everything' culture ends privacy and that is a long thread in socialism about individualism. Religion can't enter the doors (blocked by moralism) of a movement that 'says everything', but socialist can. And the socialist can offer a way to live in an online world that isn't anarchy of all against all. Doyle
