Topic: Redundancy/Cooperation Site Model Metaphor... Religious Models, parallel between the Appeal of Wiser
Posts (1 - 6 of 6)
Sort by: Ascending | Descending
Login to Post a Reply.
|
|
Hi, I'm not sure what your purpose here is exactly. I don't think WiserEarth presupposes any supernatural phenomena. In that sense, it is unlike major religions and virtually all religions I would guess (unless you consider consumerism a religion as well). Is your argument a criticism of WE or just a statement of fact? Is it a problem if WE is based on a "religious model"?
Do you take issue with Barack Obama? What does he have to do with WiserEarth? |
|
|
no... i think wiser earth and barack obama are both great -- i was just thinking (dangerous stuff) that both their success is based an appeal created by 'an assimilation of emotion' , which could be argued to be human-based (artistic), and thus unnatural.
|
|
|
so in other words... to make the idea more explicit -- isn't it unnatural/ not in the vein of consumerism... to die for your convictions... couldn't it be argued that wiser earth/ barack obama appeal to the emotional/ artistic/ human-part of our 'psyche' that would put ourselves in harms way for the sake of meaning, for the sake of other people that we dont even know ... dont they both inspire a kind of collective faith, encourage risk... (faith/risk being things that are not fundamental to consummerism, to the 'natural'/ nature-based world...)
|
|
|
well i rewrote my question a little better/ more clearly;
Isn't the whole idea of Wiser Earth a religious model? A prophecy of hope, an explanation for how things could work out? Phrases like 'natural capitalism', 'biomimicry' and 'wiser business' seem to succedde in their intended word-play. Wiser Earth seems different though. If someone said that Wiser Earth did not make sense and was irrational/ not-natural would your instinct as a believer be to condemn them? The western thought version would be to say that Wiser Earth is attempting to improve upon the earth for the gain of humanity(which wouldn't work because who is humanity to decide what is right for the earth? -- isn't that direction of thought similar to that which fueled the industrial revolution? isn't that unnatural?)... The eastern thought version might suggest that the word 'wiser' conjures up the idea of the earth itself like the buddha (which is seems to be flawed as well, as the earth has passed thru natural cycles of extreme violence to life and subsequent improvement; ice age/ death of dinasaurs, formation of new/ improved terrestrial life(humans)). Either way its hard to look at the phrase and honestly prove that 'Wiser Earth' is not logically/rationally a religious model? It seems to be flawed like the oxymoron 'Scientology'... conjures up those media clips of Tom Cruise with the manic light in his eye condemning psychiatry, the use of prescription medications to curve behavior... leads to the question would we have the genius in the music of Mozart if he lived today?... or who he be put on meds? Doesn't the very idea of a 'just and sustainable world created by community' undermine the potential for tragedy? Undermine the potential for change? For art? Will the genius of Barack Obama's ability to influence inevitably (naturally) demand that he becomes a tragic figure, an expression of living art? Is self-destruction inevitable to genius, to ideas of genius... Is Wiser Earth's genius' idea vulnerable? Is that why it is genius -- because it essentially lacks a cultural/national/personal identity? That it is an artisitc, almost spiritual assimilation of things created by emotion?... Isn't there something to the idea that Barack Obama's wildfire-like political success in the current U.S. presidential race is a consequence of portraying himself as a 'religious' figure, an agent of change/ hope. Something for us to put our collective faith in (just like Wiser Earth)...? Something to believe in, perhaps someday die for? * ) |
|
|
The implied idea that the earth can be 'wiser', basically anthropomorphizes the planet, I would say it is a reasonable argument to say that the use of language ('wiser' modifying planet) attributes human form/ personality(the unnatural, 'wiser') to the inhuman (the natural 'earth'). I think that inherently pre-supposes the idea of the supernatural... regardless of the intent, in my opinion that is what is accomplished by the diction/ syntax.
And I think that is invariably responsible for part of the appeal. Regardless I am all for the site etc., just having some difficulty with the word choice. But admittedly I don't think I could come up with a better name so I better pipe down... |
1 to 6 of 6 Posts
Isn't it fair to say that the brush of the wings of tragedy is the thing which has the greatest potential to change the chemistry of the world? Doesn't the very idea of a 'just and sustainable world created by community' undermine the potential for tragedy? Undermine the potential for change? For art? Will the genius of Barack Obama's ability to influence inevitably (naturally) demand that he becomes a tragic figure, an expression of living art? Is self-destruction inevitable to genius, to ideas of genius... Is Wiser Earth's genius idea vulnerable to the non-violent assassination/ coup of words thru the freedom of speech and the flat world of the Internet? Is that why it is genius -- because someone can destroy it in their mind non-violently and not change the world? Because it essentially lacks a cultural/national/personal identity? Is an artisitc, almost spiritual thing?... Isn't there something to the idea that Barack Obama's wildfire-like political success in the current U.S. presidential race is a consequence of portraying himself as a 'religious' figure, an agent of change/ hope. Something for us to put our collective faith in (just like Wiser Earth)...?