Money, myth, and Joseph Campbell

Introducing people of all ages to mythology... in pre-college educational curricula, youth orgs, the media, etc. Share your knowledge, stories, unit and lesson plans, techniques, and more.

Moderators: Clemsy, Martin_Weyers, Cindy B.

Locked
JamesN.
Associate
Posts: 2187
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 2:46 am
Location: Nashville, Tn.

Post by JamesN. »

Bill Gates has done X, and I hold him responsible.
Christianity has done much harm over the centuries.
Religion has done much good.
These are absolute statements.

In reality it is the universe unfolding ... we will be shaped by its unfolding and indeed we shape the unfolding. I think it is pointless to look at these two things as separate phenomena.

Not sure I have shed any illumination.
Rom I think " projection " may be what you are describing although I think it could be said that phenomena could also be subject to interpretation in this sense. That's what the process of scientific analysis is concerned with; no?

( Also I would like to add this a " great " discussion and is " exactly " what I had in mind addressing this issue. ) 8)
What do I know? - Michael de Montaigne

romansh
Associate
Posts: 2277
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 5:25 am
Location: In the woods, BC, near US border
Contact:

Post by romansh »

JamesN. wrote: Rom I think " projection " may be what you are describing although I think it could be said that phenomena could also be subject to interpretation in this sense. That's what the process of scientific analysis is concerned with; no?
Scientific analysis? Perhaps. But what is scientific analysis other than a really careful way of looking at the world and carefully describing what we see?

The universe unfolding is a poetic metaphor for what is all around us. It encompasses the big bang or a flower blossoming.

"The phenomena" are subject to different interpretations, but those different interpretations themselves are the universe unfolding.

Philosophically I disagree with Carl Sagan when he uses the word know, but I think he pretty much nails it when he says:
  1. We are a way for the cosmos to know itself.
"That's right!" shouted Vroomfondel, "we demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"

Clemsy
Working Associate
Posts: 10645
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2002 6:00 am
Location: The forest... somewhere north of Albany
Contact:

Post by Clemsy »

morally responsible
Is all responsibility a matter of morality?

Actions are simply that. The morality of an action is a value overlay. Acts have effects. When one acts, one must be ready to accept responsibility for those effects.
Give me stories before I go mad! ~Andreas

JamesN.
Associate
Posts: 2187
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 2:46 am
Location: Nashville, Tn.

Post by JamesN. »

Clemsy wrote:
morally responsible
Is all responsibility a matter of morality?

Actions are simply that. The morality of an action is a value overlay. Acts have effects. When one acts, one must be ready to accept responsibility for those effects.
I have to agree with this statement because; ( if I am understanding the premise correctly ); I would interpret this as another way of looking at the term " Karma ". And the reason behind that would be is that it affects other people; ( whether in the personal or the abstract sense ).
What do I know? - Michael de Montaigne

JamesN.
Associate
Posts: 2187
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 2:46 am
Location: Nashville, Tn.

Post by JamesN. »

Rom said:
We are a way for the cosmos to know itself.
Yes I think so. Didn't Joe say: " We are the eyes and ears of the Universe. " Or something to that effect?
What do I know? - Michael de Montaigne

romansh
Associate
Posts: 2277
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 5:25 am
Location: In the woods, BC, near US border
Contact:

Post by romansh »

JamesN. wrote: Rom I think " projection " may be what you are describing although I think it could be said that phenomena could also be subject to interpretation in this sense.
I think this projection could be a form of dualism ... something that we all feel and act on at times.

I will always remember visiting Cragside a British stately home. There was a strange dichotomy here. the House was built by Lord Armstrong, who owned shipbuilding and armament manufacturing companies. The property was peaceful. The house was filled with treasures and generally was opulent.

I could not help wondering how could one family have so much wealth. But as I wandered around the house, I understood Armstrong did not take it with him, and the property is now part of the National Trust available to everyone. I don't think the building and collection would have been available if it were not for Armstrong. As I walked around I understood being rich is not a crime.

Also I enjoyed watching a program on yacht builders for the mega rich. These builders were creating items of beauty (in my opinion) and they certainly were following their bliss. And you could see wealth dispersal in action.
"That's right!" shouted Vroomfondel, "we demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"

Andreas
Associate
Posts: 2274
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2009 6:07 am

Post by Andreas »

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-20243493

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-20334136
"I'm called 'the poorest president', but I don't feel poor. Poor people are those who only work to try to keep an expensive lifestyle, and always want more and more,"
"This is a matter of freedom. If you don't have many possessions then you don't need to work all your life like a slave to sustain them, and therefore you have more time for yourself,"
Nough said.

JamesN.
Associate
Posts: 2187
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 2:46 am
Location: Nashville, Tn.

Post by JamesN. »

romansh wrote:
JamesN. wrote: Rom I think " projection " may be what you are describing although I think it could be said that phenomena could also be subject to interpretation in this sense.
I think this projection could be a form of dualism ... something that we all feel and act on at times.

I will always remember visiting Cragside a British stately home. There was a strange dichotomy here. the House was built by Lord Armstrong, who owned shipbuilding and armament manufacturing companies. The property was peaceful. The house was filled with treasures and generally was opulent.

I could not help wondering how could one family have so much wealth. But as I wandered around the house, I understood Armstrong did not take it with him, and the property is now part of the National Trust available to everyone. I don't think the building and collection would have been available if it were not for Armstrong. As I walked around I understood being rich is not a crime.

Also I enjoyed watching a program on yacht builders for the mega rich. These builders were creating items of beauty (in my opinion) and they certainly were following their bliss. And you could see wealth dispersal in action.

Indeed Rom; I think in one sense if we are viewing certain aspects historically such as art or artifacts or are being affected by their beauty in a sense of wonder or " aesthetic arrest " the world would be a very barren place without them. Scientifically where would we be without the contributions of what went before that is generated by wealth; but I think at least part of this issue is more concerned with the dimension of; ( as Joseph put it ); the wrong channeling of resources.

Politically speaking; one of the main issues that the US is confronting is the idea of " political responsibility " verses " personal entitlement " in dealing with the channeling of it's resources and the rules that frame it. The debate centers around how the idea of " The American Dream " is interpreted within the societal construct and how this perception is to be implemented within the political process. ( Not the best articulation here but it will have to do for the moment. )

IMHO concerning these ideas is the lack of a sense of ( social responsibility ). And the societal devastation wrought through the crafty stealth of certain engineered policies of vested political interests over the last half century and it's ensuing " political karma "; have brought about a large amount of the economic demise that is now impacting the entire global free-market system.

( One of the ideas that was brought over to the " New World " as an inherited cultural imprint was that of " Noblesse Oblige ". This was translated into modern times as " social responsibility " such as with FDR and the " New Deal " or Lyndon Johnson's " The Great Society " and the " War On Poverty ". This idea of " those who have more extend a hand up to those who do not " resulted not only in affecting much of it's " social consciousness " but also in helping to produce one of the most powerful economic engines in global history. ( One might ask why this would be assumed; and my answer would be that of: " because all classes were included in it's participation and had a stake in it's outcome. ")

( Without sounding didactic I hope ); my point here is that in my humble opinion I think without the inclusion of this societal sense of inter-connectedness and responsibity for the welfare of others; much of the vitriol that is present within this debate over the " haves and have-nots " is; like a cancer or toxic disease; going to spread. One might say this is " too simplistic " an overview; but I would just suggest : turn on the global news and make your own assessments.

So hear again is the point of this thread:( to " explore " these dimensions and flesh them out along with Joseph's themes ). Not being judgmental; just trying to stay on target without sounding insensitive.

Cheers :)

( I have to unplug from this for awhile; Santa's Reindeer are getting impatient for I have tasks to complete since it is the holidays. But I'll be back later. ) :wink:
What do I know? - Michael de Montaigne

romansh
Associate
Posts: 2277
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 5:25 am
Location: In the woods, BC, near US border
Contact:

Post by romansh »

Clemsy wrote: Is all responsibility a matter of morality?
I would say no ... personally I don't particularly believe in morality , so I might not even say some responsibility.
Clemsy wrote:Actions are simply that. The morality of an action is a value overlay. Acts have effects. When one acts, one must be ready to accept responsibility for those effects.
I think you allude to this here ... but for me the question harks back to the free will thread. In a sense we ask the question could someone have done otherwise? If the answer is no, then it is hard to ascribe a value to the action.
"That's right!" shouted Vroomfondel, "we demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"

romansh
Associate
Posts: 2277
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 5:25 am
Location: In the woods, BC, near US border
Contact:

Post by romansh »

Andreas wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-20243493

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-20334136
"I'm called 'the poorest president', but I don't feel poor. Poor people are those who only work to try to keep an expensive lifestyle, and always want more and more,"
"This is a matter of freedom. If you don't have many possessions then you don't need to work all your life like a slave to sustain them, and therefore you have more time for yourself,"
Nough said.
Is he an effective president?
I don't know, but it will be interesting as to what future administrations will inherit.
"That's right!" shouted Vroomfondel, "we demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"

Clemsy
Working Associate
Posts: 10645
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2002 6:00 am
Location: The forest... somewhere north of Albany
Contact:

Post by Clemsy »

I think you allude to this here ... but for me the question harks back to the free will thread.
Aaaaahhhh!!! Noooooo!!!!!
Give me stories before I go mad! ~Andreas

Andreas
Associate
Posts: 2274
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2009 6:07 am

Post by Andreas »

Is he an effective president?
I don't know, but it will be interesting as to what future administrations will inherit.- Rom
Well I know what we inherited with all the presidents we had. A crisis?

JamesN.
Associate
Posts: 2187
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 2:46 am
Location: Nashville, Tn.

Post by JamesN. »

( From the BBC article about Uruguay's " President Jose Mujica ):
"We've been talking all afternoon about sustainable development. To get the masses out of poverty.

"But what are we thinking? Do we want the model of development and consumption of the rich countries? I ask you now: what would happen to this planet if Indians would have the same proportion of cars per household than Germans? How much oxygen would we have left?

"Does this planet have enough resources so seven or eight billion can have the same level of consumption and waste that today is seen in rich societies? It is this level of hyper-consumption that is harming our planet."

Mujica accuses most world leaders of having a "blind obsession to achieve growth with consumption, as if the contrary would mean the end of the world".

Hey fellow mythic folk. The reindeer are taking a hay brake while I regroup for the final " Xmas push. " :wink:

I think what is happening in Beijing with pollution right now for those who are aware is a good example of the article and some of the major negative effects produced by the current global economic model. Aside from the societal and political debate you can actually see the threatening physical consequences this is producing and what the forward-looking implications for the planet are.

The problem I think in many ways really begs the question: " What is equitable? " By that I mean: " How does one balance the proposition of ( freedom of fulfillment with the concern for our fellow human beings ); much less how it affects the planet that we are a part of?

The world's struggle for the various human populations to feed themselves and maintain a sustainable quality of life and still get along together I think is going to push this issue until they are forced to confront the fact that there is not enough of the earth's ability to sustain this trajectory; no matter what the agenda may be. One may debate this issue in any form or fashion they wish; but to me this reality is inescapable.

There is a certain " mindset of denial " in play at the moment representing various social, political, and religious interests that I think sooner or later will have to become reconciled to this reality; and whether kicking, screaming, or spreading vitriol about who is to blame; it will be how this resolution plays out that will have the most impact on determining this issue of balancing the two points of view we are discussing. ( This is of course if the planet can survive discussion. ) :roll: IMHO I think this " balance point " is a major central concern going forward. :idea:
What do I know? - Michael de Montaigne

romansh
Associate
Posts: 2277
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 5:25 am
Location: In the woods, BC, near US border
Contact:

Post by romansh »

Clemsy wrote:
I think you allude to this here ... but for me the question harks back to the free will thread.
Aaaaahhhh!!! Noooooo!!!!!
And yet your world view and others in this thread and and no doubt others assume free will implicitly.

If free will is false then just about every argument we have presented here is built on a foundation of sand.
"That's right!" shouted Vroomfondel, "we demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"

romansh
Associate
Posts: 2277
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 5:25 am
Location: In the woods, BC, near US border
Contact:

Post by romansh »

JamesN. wrote: [/i]The world's struggle for the various human populations to feed themselves and maintain a sustainable quality of life and still get along together I think is going to push this issue until they are forced to confront the fact that there is not enough of the earth's ability to sustain this trajectory; no matter what the agenda may be. One may debate this issue in any form or fashion they wish; but to me this reality is inescapable.
This reminds me of the JWs who come to my door and say what aterrible world we are living in..

The problem is not that we are unsuccesful in serving the poor, it is because we have been all too successful (slipping into dualistic thought for the moment).

there is a series of you tubes for Hans Rosling here, which pretty much sums up what I mean.
"That's right!" shouted Vroomfondel, "we demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"

Locked