Comments by "harvey young" (@harveyyoung3423) on "Zuby" channel.

  1. Part 1: 2 mins in. Carl Benjamin's description of growing up in a military family with about 5 years in UK and 5 years in Germany and five years in UK and so on might be sort of similar to a person spending a few years in a home town, then a few years as undergraduate on a university campus, then a few years back in "civie street" (sp?) and then some more years as a post grad on a university camps, and so on. Now that is not a final picture of similarity of course but a start of a Socratic dialogue to explore sameness and difference maybe even in general. So we may begin the dialogue in a familiar run down northern town i take as my picture of Benjamin's description of non-London Metropolitan England . I mean what my London friends used to call "proper north", as distinct form large parts of Manchester and Birmingham and Liverpool. i guess i am making a kind of categorial distinction here between metropolitan middleclass diaspora, and city's and towns in decline diaspora. A modernist rationalist legal scientistic and technological networked architecture, contrasted with distributed ghost towns. This might seem similar to the late 1970's to me. Proper northern town, in soon to decline tradition al industries on life support though government subsides as Nationalised Industries like Coal and Steel and other large scale manufacturing. As a teen I used to go to London on holidays: visited the Museums many times and Soho too. In those days Soho was like proper north, but now its "gentrified". English cultural history was in the Museums even then, while outside of these frozen White Whales, were a Harlequin working class cultures, Heavy Rock "Greeboes", Skin Heads, Rockabilly Revivals, hold out Hippies, MOD revivals and of course Punks, and the beginnings of what's now called Goths. I was a MOD very early on before the movie Quadrophenia came out because i knew someone who lived near the pub where the late 70's MOD revival began. I used to walk around school and town in a Parka and non one knew anything about it, until the move came out, as a double bill along with SCUM. I might have looked or been kind of working class doing work on small building sites in the holidays but going to University was given for me. I studied on a large University campus but lodged in house with a family just off the campus. Many of the students dressed like Miners in black jackets with a nice orange shoulder flash with NCB on. In US Army designer Green Karckie Soldier Coats. I was a "Straight" by then though. Even though i worked on working class sort of job in the holidays, its not what it looks like, because you always know or think you are heading to a middleclass type of job. Its not a performance of a job, its proper hard work, but you know its only for a month or so. I believe these days students are more likely to have holiday work in the kind of job they hope to go into after, and in many cases I've heard they aren't paid either, and even so the competition for an unpaid upper middleclass job experience is very high. 4000 applicants for an unpaid holiday job at a top London Newspaper and so on. Big difference is houses were in abundance back then, as rent and even easy to buy and get a mortgage, even in 10 mins walk from central London. A university campuses then were kind of archepelligo connected across the country but mostly on the outskirts of cites, or as being a University quarter in a city. Now the university quarter is also a designated Cultural Quarter not a museum but of modern art and crafts but usually involved in woke stuff now. The old fringes or Soho's of the cities, the pubs and clubs where real culture happened have pretty much gone. Like the Pariah of Atlantis. Back then the south and central city was nearly all working class white people except a few Pakistani Asians with the north where mostly black people lived. Middle class lived in sort of suburbs and in areas around large hospitals. Now the Asian and black populations have increased dramatically compared to white people. But mostly white people still make up much of the Universality professionals but also there are many Asians Students which was not the case 40 years ago. The hospitals have predominantly white nurses and cleaners, white and Asian Doctors and black security. The Universities and the Hospitals now are very much connected together. So really now we have a city University/Hospital Complex connected in networks as a middle class archipelago each city and across the country. I think this is the new primary distinction for social geography and active effective and active “interventionist” or “pro-active” culturalisation of “care” into the communities they see as manifold “risk”, as Diasporas communities they used to presuppose as good and just serve. Cultures of mental health are the tools of community control and transformation by the new middle class archipelago
    1
  2. Part 2: These University/Hospital complexes and university outreach projects and community social care and health care programs in every city are very similar to European Colonialist projects in the third world except medical science interventions have replaced railway building, mental health replaced Christianity and social justice projects have replaced economic business interests. The country is now divided primarily as a middleclass colonial masters of risks and mental health care as agents to third world patents in the communities they are to oversee. This is Amyarta Sen’s middleclass third world project come home to the non-middleclass non university non hospital “primitive tribes” in their lost city of Atlantis. As well as third world projects coming back here, mass immigration has been coming here too. The third world university hospital projects are directed to all communities under woke ideology. This is in part due to the university and hospital complex and being as well as a domestic archipelago, they are international or foreign networked archipelagos too. Indeed race and gender concepts we use domestically are really concepts in mind as international in scope and extension and content. Domestic news is seen schematised not by domestic class difference categories, but by international conceptual race and gender difference concepts. This at once searves the domestic middle class by masking domestic class and institutional power differences with global race and gender differences. Foreign correspondence on wars famines plagues and racial gender violence are superimposed by global data to depict the domestic as a subset off a global homogeneous field (violence against women in the world and ethical conflict in the world). The conceptual conflations though can be accompanied by real network covariance and contra variance though much is just invariance relations. Immigration is not just people moving, its relations determined by science technology and laws. This science and technology and law determined as international/foreign content, is also the same relation domestically from the university hospital archipelago to the non middleclass diasporas now. All the trouble is just used by the middleclass to divide and control the non middle classes a control they a pay for in taxes (you couldn’t make that up, in what sense is that a tax from them to us when sued for control. It’s like rented tools and land in Ricardo. All the Lib Dems in the 2010 collation were reading Ricardo. Ricardo rent seeking applied though woke social justice and international save the planet. Middle Class Colonialism and Victorian class difference labelled virtue and vice: 2.0. They came out of the university and metropolitan banking middleclass mortgage rip off and austerity system destroyed our culture and then the hospitals outreach of social care women’s groups and so on are the new army of controls and shame. Evidence of the new Criteria of difference not previously labelled or data metricised: “Association of Demographic and Occupational Factors with SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine Uptake in Multi-Ethnic UK Healthcare Workforce: A Rapid Real world Analysis” This was by many authors but though University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust. I Accessed version posted Feb 13 2021. Be warned this is under copyright, and pre-peer review, and without licence for display. It is also what is called in, or I call from, the philosophy of science “verification transcendent”. I found a verification transcendent “fact” also from Chernobyl fall out in North Wales in 1987.
    1
  3. Part B: 1: at about 4 mins, so when Carl Benjamin and Zuby talk about people leaving the UK are they thinking its like Auf Wiedersehen, Pet (All free Dasein with Pets), no as they say its the "upwardly mobile" the middle-class well paid jobs. this is the international middle diaspora archipelago playing inter-national musical chairs. its in Salmon Rushdie's book how the metropolitan middle class can move from one legal scientific technological disenchanted "culture" to another with frictionless and substanceless ease. got to learn the language if not English though really nowadays. The ones with "i did a gap year helping out in some third world country on their CV. The ones in the now fake English City pub who say "well what about human rights" and "save the planet" to everything. the ones who use this, in class interest, for self interest, internationally. the woke appropriation of, and intervention in Business English as a Foreign Language. here from the 1980's the English taught heuristics of cultural sensitivity as a tool for a good sales meeting with a foreign client, the woke regulatory and constative rules of force backed "legal respect" (yes that's a thing), and then from there the gender version to get the women able to get rid of the men. Female domestication of the pubic sphere so as to add to the turning of culture into a middleclass museum, they add turn the public space into a Menagerie or there very own Men-zoo.
    1
  4. Part B1note: A women I've mentioned recently at PotLE read Christian philosophy stuff, i used to go round there, like once a week to chat. She had a small living room and bedroom in one. not much furniture so I'd sit on the floor or the bed. We got on well i thought. One night she wanted to read 19th century love poetry with me. She sitting on the bed next to me with this book of love stuff. I go to kiss her and she freaks out, and screams "you've got to leave!" "get out now"! I was always told by women that I was too slow with women. Do what you feel, and all that. It was a set up for sure. but she was good at the art of the set up. The next one a few years later was really clever at law and stuff but mechanical and artless, over egged it. i still didn't realise what she was up to but my mates did, and saved me. This is not random its about rationality science law and "love" technologies from the internet women's sites devoted to weaponizing love into a ordinance. the personal is political and so on. My ex from many years ago had warned me that this was going on on line, some years earlier but i didn't get it didn't see it. I'm still waiting for them to send the police. Another told me all about the then new police file system where they could just name a guy as a bad guy, but not press charges and the police opened a file on the guy without his knowledge. This could be passively accessed by a girl asking about say a new boy friend if they have a file on them. or if more than one women then the police would pro actively warn any girl who started a relationship with them. That's what i was told 15 years ago. the women have still got their men on their puppet strings for the new political sirens. i have much worse on this from another much earlier in the 1990's and sometime later much much worse.
    1
  5. Part C1: That's a nice turn by Zuby at 20 mins. So yes liberalism and progressivism are not disjunctive, in one way its a factual scientific argument entirely internal to liberalism, that sees a long run short run distinction, that if the competition requires each to cut wages for lower costs and lower prices then this appears short run efficient and rational and as a particular rationality for the firm alone. it will also be driven by investors seeking to maximise returns and so profit in choice of firm. The left at the moment and the EU say this as only a short run/long run categorial difference, but i think they also see the problem as a particular/general or particular/universal distinction also. They don't say that though. What they do say is Social Justice, and see this in terms of regulation over the liberal system of laws eg equality metrics and project laws. While it claims a moral case it seems substantively the same as dealing with the particular in the universal. But in these international and super state institutions this amounts only to dealing with "falling wages" in terms of falling consumption at the international market level. That is the problem of local proximate wage and consumption fall is not death with proximately, rather the consequent is dealt with not the antecedent wage fall. that is social justice at the international level brings in consumption though outsource labour at low wage costs. A bit of honesty or candidness then the falling wages and consumption problem is one of Marx's 6 internal exogenic contradictions of Capitalism,. its an incoherence theory of positive liberal scientific "facts". The Marxist Communist theorist Alex Callinicos i think would claim this will be from Marx's reading Hegel's logic while following the falling share and stock values in the data he got in real time from Engles. No record exists as far as i know as to how he did this but particular and universal dialectic seems the part of Hegel logic he might have used. Lenin diagnosed colonial Empire to be as much if not more to do with solving this local problem of falling consumption that falling wages. State Communism although a process was aimed and orientated at the construction of the universal as the State, better the general State. But its focused on the commanding heights of the economy then Steel and coal then oil. its is still a heavily Hegal's logic forward "particular under general" logic from Hegel's "Logic" (see Stephen Houlgate on Hegel's Logic as forward). Thing is the Soviet Union is not determined by logical form alone, as is not Hegel. Context is everything. So variable are these context differences as to look like entirely different projects all together. So the Socialists and later liberals had a response to the Crisis (Bismarck leaving the silver standard and flooding the world with cheap silver when many currency’s involved silver as the standard or had mixed silver and gold standards) and to Marx predictive analysis. The socialists did propose things like wage and price controls and the expansion of State centred Welfare. They had already seen education and heath as an economic necessity clothed in moralistic and virtue. Germany even before Hegel had seen the future commanding heights of the economy was going to shift from land to manufacturing science and law. The old Aristocracy were sent to Kant’s and Hegel’s lectures (let them eat German Romantcism!) to becomes a new command heights of education welfare and civil servants for a massive unified State to come.
    1
  6. Part C2: So on the one hand Britain was catching up on the German plan with state education and welfare replacing churches and charities and so on. Healthy educated work force for the technological advancing necessities of progressive economy. It was seen as a foundation of sorts or a stabilisation or a conditioning conditioned condition. (The Big Lebrowskie song). That is it is required for a growing economy but it is paid for only through that growing economy. It’s called taxation and extreme liberals see it as theft or a moralised imposition on pure self-interest competition and as such as a inefficiency cost. But really it’s a necessity they depend on. They are paying tax to themselves really and argue over who gets to decide what its spent on. A Soviet Style heavy state could be built not on coal and steel but by expanding health care and education care from the needs of firms, to a foundation in itself. That is expanding into mental health as labour and consumption industry and the infinite creative production of technologies and products. But now the people are not really the consumers of the heath care products but more like the products worked on. It’s like Marx/Adorno commodification. We are the pin not the arm. Now liberalism and socialism can be substantively similar between a short Dedekind cut. But the directions the possibilities can be very different over the long run. This is what the French left from 1968 grasped. Its open endogenous system in which coherence and predetermined ends (old school Aristotelian essences) no longer apply as determinants. Only process and contingency and context and differential or marginal advance to equality. This they got from the late Heidegger’s “Destruction of Western metaphysics” and his work on “Difference” or “Ontological Difference”. Now it more fitting to think of them applying Hegel’s logic as a reverse reading of the book from back to front (see Robert Pippin and Wilfred Sellers on inference) Deleuzse. Hay against Hegel the post-moderns protest too much! The liberal capitalism was always becoming global from the Crystal Palace, the Chicago Exhibition, Keynes global finance system and the internet. The woke drew in on this process again: its expanding markets and labour sources to deal with proximate general wage fall and consumption fall. Concepts of a liberal self interested economic person (“the people” in the US constitution and so into the international Human rights laws Derrida) when thought though a detached audit of justice in itself, allowed equality at the global scale to dominate as a new inferential function. The American Civil and then Gender equality rights from the stand point of global metrics as Justice became the appropriate tactical specific content. It does several things at the same time: the proximate fall in wages and consumption in “The West” is deflated both economically and morally if not ethically. In the 1980’s rather than the loss of traditional industries in the north and the poverty being an economic and moral problem for the city in the international cites archipelago, it was seen though the schema of international race and gender difference. Live Aid became the moral issue not northern aid. I mean people in famine verses people on the dole, its not disjunctive but it’s a choice motivated by images and music. Now the degradation of the cites in the north is compared to war zones. With new 1980’s race association turned into covariant relations of justice.
    1
  7. Part C3: Recently liberal free movement of goods for international solution to proximate wage falls has become free movement of people. Why? Well it’s bring in more low level consumption and more sustainable low wages. For global completion. But it also claim to be for global justice and brig Peter Singer 1972 to our proximate sympathy. The solution to Bernard Williams Government house and Kant’s moral burocracy distance sympathy gap is closed. Now though education and health care has had to undergo a massive change to deal with the continued degradation of the northern cities and towns and the new already cultured arrivals at scale. Much is done by universities driving this with educational shifts to social justice and mental health care. The campus becoming the civil society with them in charge. They claim both the new ethnic arrivals need to be cultured, and the poor and low wage people need to be controlled. The key stone is women in this. Women can demand that they are protected from dangerous immigrants, and that women can treat any racism as an education and mental health issue along with poverty and proximate injustice. Education and mental health care are the new growth industries for a female work force. It’s the replacement for the old male white dominated industries and welfare. But white men and immigrants are their commodities and passivity stability and compliance and silence are the products. It also radically changes the social contract into something like a medical consent form for a designated high risk to themselves and others mental health patent or educational deficient. That’s what the state of nature looks like now. Complaints about substantive differences and cultural differences, just excuse more and more women educational and mental health interventions and more and more jobs for the girls. Expanding sexual assault data positive feedback cybernetic systems create jobs for women and can insight racial conflict which then of course creates more jobs for women. It’s a curious synergy with Live Aid, that this new mental health role was adopted by women during the Rave and Party scene of the 190’sand 2000’s. That is where they learnt this new role from the margins of Rock and Roll to the Centre of Chill out mental heath care. Many of the first cohort to do the deep dive into psychology and mental illness came from this community based informal adopted role. And just expanded and expanded it and their authority and power. Women have always being interested in psychology. I remember even at school in the 1970;s the teen mags were thinly disguised psycho-babble and how to manipulate boys. It must be a proclivity of women. Look at the background of the first editors of Jackie Magazine. For some unfathomable reason maybe guilt or just taking the glory she did an interview years ago where she outlined exactly her intentions and methods with the female readers of Jackie. Oxford graduate Feminist activist and so on. “Man Watching” and so on.
    1
  8. Part C4: The question of essences then is complicated. Legal Equality discourse has been replaced by existential phenomenological difference. Men are an economic surplus and economically expendable. Maybe there’s job for few in protecting the women form other men. There’s a return to a traditional medieval essence for yer.
    1
  9. Part C5: one way into essences might be in terms of women and men as consumers. look at 1980's 1990's theories of sales and advertising. in our town many shops have closed down but the nails and beauty shops thrive in increasing numbers eg effective essences as powers as manifest dispositions and character in an economic context. Drummed into me was sales training to couples, the most common sales context for door to door direct cold calling, in London. Maxim was "talk to the man but you're actually selling through the women". "Get the women to sell it to the man for you, but by talking to the man". Blimey this was harder to get my head around than Negel's "View From Nowhere", and, I'm off to have a chill out in the liberary with Wittgenstein's "Tractatus" after work.
    1
  10. Part D1 at 30 mins Benjamin is addressing difference in terms of how it is schematised though concepts like race and gender as a manifold of binary concepts. White/black male/female and so on. As they are in binary oppositions so they are not in use or representation positive propositions. That is "White man" is true, does not itself as a fact express anything semantically about "a black man". We might want to say they are relations then or in a binary structure. But again these are not logically connected like synthetic a priori, they are constructed. We can say historically or in terms of mass data sets of economic difference or both. we can begin with the presupposed difference (prior probability or heuristic or common sense so called bias, which is nonsensical prior to the data anyway which is subject to a limits boundary usually, anyway) and test it or use Bayesian methods and hope the difference falls out of the data over time and so a post fact criteria for the veracity of the presupposition, but the presumption never goes away as such an origin. With this approach to representations the logical inferences are always i say flat. Tied by "not"s and so on as in sets. Benjamin is right about the particular is only ever a case of the general, but that's how it is from Government House. Then there are many such schemes Anglican or Jedi Knight. Beatles or Rolling Stones all kinds of intersectionalities. But wait the schema Beatles, what about Paul McCartney? Must he be a Beatle fan? or can he tick the Rolling Stones box. Can you be both a Rolling Stones and Beatle fan equally? or are they disjunctive? You can have Jedi Beatle fan data set. But what if the person who makes the schema is a Jedi? Is that problem. What about an Anglican Black Sabbath fan? But what about the question are you a schema person or a particular person? Must all people who fill in the form be schema persons? Is this a kind of tautology? But what kind? It’s not a logical one in the ordinary sense of "not" "and" etc. You cannot tick the particular box can you?" ("We are all individuals" "I'm not") General logic cannot express these paradoxes at the level of representation. There’s a depth to it, that these self-referential sort of expressions, and exclusionary expressions paradoxes reveal in a strange way of not revealing but showing something is wrong or missing. We need some therapy some Cognitive Behavioural Therapy. Some Mindfulness training. In one way its making manifest that the syllogisms are hierarchical, and I think this shows that the syllogism with its three parts is isomorphic with Government house burocracy. The State. The State and this syllogistic logic are not external to each other. Then we can see that the on the form are you middleclass or working class? Are you a schema maker or schema taker? Are you an author of the scheme or a subject in it? Are you both or neither? Are you a doctor or a patent? Are you an Agent or patent? These are paradoxes of an entirely different and transcendentally prior order than the ones we are used to: inter-sectional-ity, identity of indecernables, definite descriptions and so on. It may well be that more white people took the Covid Vaccine than black people. But it’s empirical. And then we can search for a cause. And it’s not hard to find given, even the known, history of medicine in Africa and even the US in the 1970’s. I believe that the year of my birth 1963 in the UK a number of pregnant women were injected with Plutonium to see the effects on the child. Why? Because of the Cuban Missile Crisis and the worries of impending Nuclear war and the medical system having to predict consequences and health impacts and to make rational empirical based decisions on preparations given a finite budget. Shock horror I hear you say. Maybe they ought to have asked the pregnant women for consent. Would they have understood the risk by prior probability informed consent? They did use the diving table the Japanese Empire created using prisoners of war. I’ve seen them. What if these few hundred, I think it was, pregnant women in 1963, had helped save many tens of thousands in the event of a nuclear war. Utility expendable, a good decision or a duty? What kind of duty? Who’s duty?
    1
  11. Part D2: But what if we find that on the form of binaries for who is to be chosen by the doctors for this: we find that the box doctors does not exist on the form. Nothing on the form represents the doctors. They exist but not outside of the schema as an anomaly or no prior probability heuristic. I means we might trust the doctors and so they being on the form would be otiose. Or understood, a prior bias of ours. Or maybe they are necessarily, excluded. That is if the doctors were severely harmed then the whole population experiment would be otiose. Because no one could administer the medical care anyway. Better make the data analysts “exceptions” too. “Will someone think of the Bayesian Algorithm computer”. It too “first year undergraduate” to just shriek in horror and say “never again”. “Save the Planet”, “Everybody ought to be nice to each other”. So what’s the answer what the criteria. Well maybe something like they had in the Soviet Union Nuclear Power program back in the day. The designers had to live near the reactors they designed. A Maxim: The designer must design himself into all the rector designs. The creators of the law must be subject to the law. But in what sense formal conceptually as a representation. Can a women r#pe a man? In the radially empirical sense it’s impossible. Breakers of the law making laws. Mentally ill people writing the DMS manual. Autistic people making laws is that a priori? Middle class women with University PhD’s in cognitive linguistics and by gender statistically greater dispositional skill in linguistics, than men let alone working class, men or men from an older generation, who worked down pit all their lives. Though I met some builders at a “bar b que” and I told them I studied philosophy and one said are you a Plato man or an Aristotle man? My mate gave some money to a homeless person years ago and the guy asked him “what you do” he said “I study philosophy” and the homeless guy goes “Don’t talk to me about Derrida!”. Hypocrisy and exceptionalism strike’s us as problematic. The left would say it’s about power, it’s a manifestation of power differacnes, but only when its others. When its them it’s some kind of necessity some kind of emergency for the in-dispensable, in-despicable. The State sylogism is like virtue at the top and vice at the bottom. There is no possible coherence theory of truth here its not isomorphic to the representation and modes of representation. Class difference in this syllogistic sense is not like any other represented binary difference. The middle class point to the super rich, the necessary exception for middle class exculpations. Anyway I’ve spent the last, G*d knows how many years learning structural and post structural linguistics, cognitive behavioural linguistics, and discourse pragmatics. E bay even sent me a fist edition of J.L. Austin’s “How to do things with words by mistake”. I bet even Judith Butler hasn’t got a first edition of that. So as Sellers said: “I’m alright Jack”.
    1
  12. Part E1: I'm going to go back and try and approach the discussion from 20 mins through to 30 minutes and beyond in a different way. That's not to say the above is wrong or rejected, but rather that, i can intervene with a different framing. I hope one closer to Benjamin's framing in the discussion. I'm hoping this will support and enrich my account in Parts D, rather than force me to reject it or abandon it. So Parts E are also re-walking Parts C and D eg Part E(C and D) :o At the onset I'm going to revisit the post Fegel/Sellars/Hospers 1950's Collections of papers. That is discussions of necessity and identity from the 1960's, eg Putnam and Kripke responses to Quine particularly identity statements between different logics and languages eg science and ordinary languages. This then is inspired by Trumps recent "Aurora" speech: A triggering 5 way coincidence, and listening again more closely to Benjamin's account. For openers then Benjamin frames it within an ordinary language exchange between people and about people. He says we have references that abide within roughly Aristotelian Categories such as familiarity with a person, and this a varying with time. Aristotle "only after sharing a pitcher of salt". I guess we might mix our languages or metaphorize this using an economic concepts: "short run" acquaintances and "long run" friendships. Does it make any difference, is thee any difference between phrases like "I've only eaten fish and chips with them once, they seem ok" and I "only have short run investments in them". Or "we have shared meals together for many years they are a good person I can trust" verses "I have had many quid pro quo exchanges with them many taking in turns rounds of beers and so a long run trust for large investments". (Note: Are these different ways of referring to the same person then also identity statements between the two modes of referring? (This was triggered by a highly tactic Trump two stage relation reference, but also the final reference was a three or three way coincidence, if indeed the word coincident is appropriate to three coinciding events. I mean ordinarily by coincidence we mean only two event ties. The paper is "It ain't necessarily so" (Putnan 1962). This pretty much dragged the late 19th century debate on synthetic a priori statements/propositions/judgements, out off the libraries dusty shelves and back into the contemporary Analytical debate after Quines "Two Dogmas". Its related to the "water is H2O" and Kripke's "Naming and necessity". it also brought the forgotten Frege back as a central figure in all this. All good as a metaphorical prelude to Halloween's Lucifer Rising.) So Benjamin then makes a point, that i think is from Paul Grice, that in ordinary talk we also refer to people, though heuristics and say archetypes, which can be from anywhere. Typically the left talk about media archetypes or stereotypes, and such stereotypes in movies and advertising. (see Porgy and Bess "It aint necessarily so"). The left focus on "negative stereotypes", and seek to do substitutions or reversals in revised versions of the same story (see the categories of story type in literary formalism) and create new stories. the justification can be that these stereotypes are "products" "consequences" of prejudice and bias or "symptoms" maybe better: might be jsut what we "mean" by prejudice and bias. the later in the sense of Wittgenstein in On Certainty" or the weather reporter at the end of "Mean Girls". That is a "stereotype" to a property or consequence or symptom is like standing in the rain is to "it is raining" as opposed to reading a weather forecast of rain" is to "its is raining". (The Hurricane failed to deliver the catastrophe predicted by the forecast "Stay and you die". The criteria was not just the later different forecast, but the weather girl standing in the street giving a present update and new forecast when and where the catastrophe was predicted or "meant"(?) to be. Short run failures, kind of raises serious doubts about 100 year predictions doesn't it? Verification and Falsification Transcendent long run claims.)
    1
  13. Part E2: Now, the left focus then on positive substitutions, for negative e stereotypes and now negative substations for post stereotypes. Not just in the media and movie deconstruction, that was a warm up, a 2-30 year several cohort student training session. Really they wanted to take this into law and use the law to do substations and legal and cultural change and political policy. The media was really a tactical context for the real meaning which was the courts and policy. The media movie substitutions were a means to an end not an end in themselves. In these projects though distinctions between intention and habit collapsed when viewed say linguistically. Complaints about this though rather like walking into a trap because claims of non-intentional speech allowed the educational and legal projects to go un-opposed, because they were tactically admitting to the Criteria of bias and just saying they had no idea no understand of this ergo in need of training or re training. Jobs for an army of lefty woke young de contextualised socio psycho mechanical linguists. A equivalent job for all the human race cohort. Now Benjamin also correctly, points out that even in ordinary talk people might refer to official scientific population and inequality data. The left don’t do this so much now, or I just don’t hang around them anymore? If you referred to a negative story about a woman or a black man, they respond with some data correction, a kind of naturalised Bayesianism. I guess now there is a phone app with the data on to replace the memory and responsibility, and people as avatars for the data apps fight over data web sites sources, while the web sites cash in on it. Just a group go down the pub and say “whose round is it next”? And access the mass data on wealth by identity app to decide. So Grice is right then about ordinary language as mess of science metaphor idle talk and so on. Is the question though which vocabulary and logic and semantics has priority, highest justification and legitimacy, or who has such highest legitimacy and priority. What criteria are we talking about here?
    1
  14. Part E3: So far I've focused on how the scientific can enter ordinary discourse. Kant said these interventions would strike us as revealing that the "person" saying them was either making a joke or mad or maybe bad. So "What's your friend like?".." I don't know i haven't eaten them yet?". The equivocations or slips look like ironic jokes. But what about the other way round? Wen the personal is mixed into the scientific. So once a few of us round a woman's house, and she said i want to set you all a problem. she went into teacher or lecturer or flip sheet mode. and said: "You are all trapped in a cave and said each had certain characteristics and abilities, who would you pick to do some difficult task to get out.?" The appropriate answer was that "you" don't decide, you should ask. That is think outside the frame. But my friend implied that this was not an interesting evening puzzell, for fun. It was a shaming and exposure trick "Look at the men they think in terms of being the one in charge, deciding by numbers for everybody else." "She's a b*tch that one!" Another time my mate shagged my girlfriend, and she told me in an horrendously brutal shocking and cleverly thought out way. Word got around pretty quick. A few days later I was having official German or French lessons with others in my group of off one of the guys in our circle. and his sentence example all the way though was something like "The girl did so and so ", "The girl friend did such and such" and so on. So I'm sitting there and he getting me to say this stuff in French or German and correcting me in front of everybody and that's good no its.. etc 's. I still wasn't certain it was deliberate though. Could be coincidence. Another girl and mate who knew him, later told a ghost story down the pub. And made a point of saying the sound in the house was a quiet little tapping. tap tap tap. And i eventually said why quiet not loud. And she said its only works scary when its just slightly above the subliminal threshold of hearing and understanding. You see not getting a reaction, later they just tried to get me to hit them by full on goading and threatening and setting me up. I have no idea to this day why?
    1
  15. Part E4: So one framing for scientific discourse or language is it is meant to be impersonal. That is the things said are meant to have justification and legitimacy elsewhere. This elsewhere is also meant o be de personalised justification. these days they terminate at an institutions or within a nexus of institutions. Many papers and reports really refer to to many other papers and reports and the authorship consists of many primary collaborating authors, which refer to many other secondary reports also by many collaborating authors. When people write as a gang then they are legion. Authorship is lost within a sea of endless references, deferrals, the death of responsibility though a million references. Sometimes we see this evidenced when we get "the such and such institute apologises". Also with this there are internal silos of peer group projects and internal peer group reviews for justification. there use in other areas is what gives it de facto legitimacy. Justas authorship is lost so is any politicised sense of the scientific projects. You can find the most incredible stuff on YouTube in the form of groups of women and a man making up a panel of so called scientific research into internet addictions, and so on and so fourth. it looks like ordinary audience shaming by other means. I've witnessed the most incredible things said by women teachers and lectures disguised as just a lesson. Talk about excess pleasure and jouissance. or reference meaning and identity. So bad i cant say since its probably boarder line improper and dodgy. these are the middleclass version s of what is just not disguised at all in medicine and mental heath and social work and community care. etc Or what goes on with the office secretaries the tricks and the traps. these are the new archetypes or role models for young women. Putman talking about functionalism on the model of Turing Machine. But dysfunctional discourse is more like the Turing Halting problem. The end or search for essences becomes an endless game, resembling the old Cult technique of trying to wear down the "opponent", with flip flopping claims to foundations which are used really for other personal purposes. Here then the loss of the official authors is replaced by attempts to appeal, not to authority, but member ship or attachment to an institution. and the left or the right then seek to de legitimatise those institutions.
    1
  16. Part F1: yes its curious how much of the discussions and disagreements on identity and essences and natural kinds, share the attempts, in different and opposed ways, of getting some kind of authorless picture of the world or the world to be made. that then people can help themselves to. see "Natural kinds" in Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy. I guess they would all want to do that though wouldn't they. Because of this vacuum of an author, or hole where a subject used to be, it ends up coming in like a kind of revenge, in the face to face interfaces. That is between people on either side of an official boundary of public and private agent and patent, authority and subject, or just across a conversation, which all, sides would want to read as itself a version of one of the above asymmetric power and utility. In the taking up of the much of world as abstracted into institutions without authors, the subjects returns but in a way devoid of features: as a pure subjectivity of self interest and bias. its like i said earlier the virtue in reason is taken out and run by anonymous people who then view human relations as vice and subjectivity only. Conservativism has to have a different conception of agent and patient, authority and subject, and of scientific and legal exculpations, such that all the good people are dragged back from their stations of anonymity.
    1