Subj : World of Pogo 1/2 To : LEE LOFASO From : RICHARD M. MEIC Date : Wed Jul 18 2001 08:44 am -> >LL>The statement you made argues that there is no problem since the -> > >problem is "under control". And if the problem is "under control" -> > >there is no enemy. -> -> RMM>No... having a problem under control does not negate the problem or the -> RMM>enemy. The problem is not solved, but merely under control. -> -> If a problem is "under control", then there is no more problem. -> The problem may crop up again once the situation is no longer "under -> control", but as long as it is "under control" there is no problem. -> -> For instance, a rapist is apprehended and brought to trial, convicted, -> and sentenced to prison. The problem is thus "under control", society -> no longer having to fear from the rapist. However, once the rapist has -> served his sentence and is released back into society the problem may -> arise again, particularly if the rapist has not been rehabilitated. We obviously differ on this. I accept that we do not agree. -> >LL>And who is that enemy? -> > >[..] -> >LL>I say. My own creation, "Eliza" is very beautiful. :)] -> -> RMM>You are a very lonely man aren't you. ;o) -> -> "Eliza" is my "friend". ;) Okay... ;o) -> >LL>Two people in a world of six billion? -> -> RMM>I would not say that as such... however two people can cause alot of -> RMM>damage. So two people can be a subset of the whole. -> -> Okay. More than one individual. .... can still be a subset of the whole. The enemy may be greater than any of us is able to imagine. -> Although one individual can cause -> lots of damage, such as a Hitler. Fortunately, not many folks are like -> Hitler... I disagree, even Hitler needed others to carry out his wishes. One can cause damage, but not at the scale as many in a unified effort. Be glad that we (the enemy) are not _unified_ to the task of destruction. -> >LL>Or the total population as a whole? -> > >Is it only a handful of people, or many? -> -> RMM>Not really the total population either. There are H/G [...] -> RMM>intent with that particular scene. -> -> Perhaps. But which is more rational, the collective or the individual? Both and niether? I realize that this is a rather cryptic response, but I am unsure how to answer, so I will simply speculate. -> >LL>What is the psychological foundation? -> -> RMM>There are three states; part of the problem, part of the solution, and -> RMM>part of the victim. -> -> First there must be recognition of the problem, recognition of -> the solution, and recognition of the victim. Only then can steps -> be taken to correct the problem, finding a possible solution, and -> granting restitution for the victim. But who is more likely to -> take such steps? The individual, or the collective? Both together as a unified effort. Union is always stronger than loose association... IMHO. -> RMM>Generalizations are unavoidable, so as a species we are the enemy. As a -> RMM>collective we are the problem, the solution and the victim. -> -> How can we, as a collective group, take steps to correct a known -> problem (assuming we are able to recognize a problem that exists)? As a programmer the first step to solving a problem is knowing the whole problem. I am not sure that we know the whole problem yet. We know the symptoms, but the root cause not fully known. -> Does history guide individuals, or individuals guide history? Individuals and history (IMO) take the roles of yin and yan, and feed eachother. -> RMM>As individuals we can also be the problem, the solution and the victim. -> -> True enough. But who is more rational? The individual, or the -> collective? Both and niether? Keeping in mind that we as individual and as a collective are all three roles, perhaps both together are greater than the sum of each? -> RMM>Both as a collective and as individuals we play all three roles. [...] -> RMM>streets and parks. -> -> Although we may, as individuals, look at ourselves as being rational -> creatures, more oftentimes than not we act much differently. I think this is because there is no unity. We are still too divided. [...] -> Unfortunately, you'd be wrong. That is because all the other -> individuals of your little group are also thinking along the same -> lines. Therefore, everybody runs and all get killed. Unless, of -> course, you are able to run very very fast. :) I agree. Your explanation seems to point toward the lack of unity. -> RMM>To restate in brief: -> RMM>It matters not weather one views the strip as an individual or as a member -> RMM>of a collective, we/I are the problem the solution and the victim, all -> RMM>rolled up into one. -> -> It does make some difference whether something is viewed as an -> individual or as a member of a collective, although there are many -> similarities. I think that if one role is viewed more than the other two than ballance and harmony is lost and we drift further away from understanding the problem and solution as a single entity, using the premise that every problem has a solution. Perhaps, thinking of it as the unity of all things. The Tao of Pogo? --- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5 * Origin: Try Our Web Based QWK: DOCSPLACE.ORG (1:18/140) .