Creating "IT" Out of Thin Air

The Chinese have won!

We do live in interesting times. The question of course is whether this is a blessing or a curse. I'll let you decide ...

Following the thread I'll share with you a story of Al Qaeda ... but first I'll go back a step or two before taking a few more forward.

A few folks have suggested to me that I somehow sent a message that Hawaii is a more "enlightened" place than elsewhere because they have a same sex marriage possibility available to folks there. But that's not what I said, it is interesting though that that's what some people read. I simply pointed out that one of the most ubequitous social contracts we come into contact with regularly is that of marriage - AND we assume that it's "real" in some sense that goes beyond the social level of ontology. What I said specifically is that we "create" marriage out of thin air by declaring it so. I'm not saying that the Hawaiians are right - or that they are wrong - just that's it's interesting that they've chosen a different path for now about that particular reality they're creating.

What's interesting most to me about this in particular is that it makes a great arguement for the "reality" of a social reality.

Now just one other small thing ... the strength of the "reality" that exists on the social level is always in relation to how many people believe AND act upon it at once. It becomes more "real" (lower-case "r") as a result. This is an ontological, and not a epistemological truth (lower-case "t"). What it absolutely doesn't do is address in any way what is either "Real" (upper-case "R") or "True" (upper-case "T"). I've stated explicitly that while I accept both a "Reality" and a "Truth" that are beyond what I "experience" (not "know") as "real" and "true" I don't a have a mechanism to get to them directly (i.e.: the upper-case forms). So I live instead in an inter-subjective experiential mileu of what is made real and true by agreement.

Now let's go back to Al Qaeda shall we ... according to them IT'S (TONY) BLAIR'S FAULT THAT PEOPLE HAVE DIED IN LONDON AND THAT THE CITY HAS BEEN BOMBED.

As an example of social reality I love this! I hate the seeming Reality of it, but I love the example of how malleable people are with their realities. (Are you folks all getting used to the upper/lower case thing yet?) These folks either actually believe or are trying to get enough others to believe that this is how it happened. NOT THAT SOME NUTCASES CAME AND BLEW SOME PEOPLE AND STUFF UP ... but that Tony Blair did it. What's interesting is that if they are successful this will be the reality and truth of it!

Just for the record what's Real and True is that these folks are nuts ... so what do you think of that ... how many ubequitous truths about what's real do I have to hold to believe and act on that one???

Now, let's move on again ... shall we? The most prevalent and pervasive use of the structure of social ontology is in propoganda and persuasion. Those who are masters of these forms, propoganda and persuasion, are also masters by definition of creating social realities ... that others both believe and act on!!! When you get this you begin to become free - or at least freer than you were before you didn't. Now that you are beginning to get it just by reading this stuff you'll also begin to recognize it when it appears right in front of you. It's always plain as day when you're primed to look for it and notice it when it's there.

What ultimately underwrites this structure is that it's created out of thin air. Someone just makes it up and they use the prevailing "realities" and "truths" to support the additions to them that they are forming. It's called "logical chaining" by moi - but we'll save that one for another time my sweeties ... in the meantime whad'da you all think of the magnificent magic of Al Qaeda in getting the world to believe what didn't happen actually did ... this is at least twice now and going on?

[NOTE: I read a book recently that tried to convince me that the most unbiased, accurate coverage of world events is coming out of Al Jezzra, the Arab News (capital "N") network. And this was a book by and primarily for English speaking "Western" (in this case, i.e.: US/UK) journalists. AND THE FOLKS WHO WROTE IT EITHER BELIEVE IT THEMSELVES OR AT LEAST ARE TRYING TO GET OTHERS TO BELIEVE IT ... and they are at or near the heart of American journalistic education. So what do you think, that I could make all this stuff up?]

Joseph
(still in Sunny Southern California ... and soaking it all up for you all)