The Frogs Have More Fun...

Flowers



"All the names I know from nurse:
Gardener's garters, Shepherd's purse,
Bachelor's buttons, Lady's smock,
And the Lady Hollyhock.

Fairy places, Fairy things,
Fairy woods where the wild bee wings,
Tiny trees for tiny dames.
- These must all be Fairy names !"

(from Child's Garden of Verses
by R.L. Stevenson)


"Anyone can write a short-story.
A bad one, I mean."

(R.L. Stevenson)
----------------

"Science without conscience is the Soul's perdition."
- Francois Rabelais, Pantagruel
- Acc to/above is citated from: Medical Apartheid. The dark history of Medical Experimentation on Black Americans from Colonial Times to the Present, by Harriet A. Washington (Doubleday ; 2006 ; p. 1.)

----------------
"In the high society of the first half of the century, marriage, despite it's bestowal status upon the wife, was the most absurdity. Marriage, conferring instanteous rank or money, ... lost most of its prestige and moment right after the wedding. ...By the end of the century, spurred by Rousseau's moralistic Nouvelle Hèloíse, a contrary cult, that of virtue, arose. After 1770 conjugal and maternal love became not merely admissible, but, for some, moral imperatives. ...

[...]
...Rousseau, who sought for himself the crown of morality in ostensibly defending marriage, presents in his Nouvelle Hèloíse the most enticing and extended defense of illicit love ever penned. The root of the problem is that as the century progressed sensibility became confused with morality: passionate feeling, if expressed in a highly civilized mode with grace and nuance, makes us forgive the Rousseau of The Confessions, for example, his pettiness, his jealousies, his betrayals. This moral-amoral byplay, present already in the novels of Richardson, was to be more intense as the century unfolded."
-
Madelyn Gutwirth : Madame De Staèl, Novelist. The emergence of the Artist as Woman (10,15.)

;
"...As the social contract seems tame in comparison with war, so fucking and sucking come to seem merely nice, and therefore unexciting. ... To be 'nice', as to be civilized, means being alienated from this savage experience - which is entirely staged. [...] The rituals of domination and enslavement being more and more practiced, the art that is more and more devoted to rendering their themes, are perhaps only a logical extension of an affluent society's tendency to turn every part of people's lives into a taste, a choice; to invite them to regard their very lives as a (life) style." - Susan Sontag , on 'Fascinating Fascism' (-74; p 103;104-5 at Under the sign of Saturn)
; "Anyone who cannot give an account to oneself of the past three thousand years remains in darkness, without experience, living from day to day." (Goethe) - as cited by Sontag (on same compile; p. 137.)

;
"It is widely accepted that we are now living in the 'Anthropocene', a new geological epoch in which the Earth's ecosystems and climate are being fundamentally altered by the activities of humans. I loathe the term, but I can't deny that it's appropriate."
; (Goulson), Silent Earth : Averting the Insect Apocalypse (2021; p 47.)
;
"It is sometimes said that humanity is at war with nature, but the word 'war' implies a two-way conflict. Our chemical onslaught on nature is more akin to genocide. It is small wonder that our wildlife is in decline."
; (Goulson, 2021 ; 118.)
;
----------------
"If we believe absurdities, we shall commit atrocities." (Voltaire)
- Citated from; (Joy, Melanie), Why We Love Dogs, Eat Pigs and Wear Cows : An Introduction to Carnism(2010; p. 95.)
;

"In the presence of the monster, you have eyes and ears for nothing else."
; (Flora Tristan) : London Journal of Flora Tristan: the Aristocracy and the Working Class of England ; 1842-edit. (tr: 1982. ; p. 71.)

;
"Every minority invokes justice, and justice is liberty.
A party can be judged of only by the doctrine which
it professes when it is the strongest."
Mdme de Staêl
(on) 'Consideration sur le Révolution de la Francaise' [1818]


6/1/08

Lessons in love: Define concept honesty (for oneself)



How to define honesty? I mean being truly honest to oneself?

We have different approaches to the aspect; some religious, some humanistic ethical, some may be something else. Nevertheless, honesty is never very much in common in real life apart from that religo-theoretical framework. And if, honesty in itself is not very common in life (for ex. take a look at the prices of latest kids sell-out megaseller live-it-to-max playing figures), it should be even harder to truly find some honesty in oneself. In the MuleSkinner World ethics doesn´t differ from the common world, in the long (as in any world) run honesty is more lasting, dishonesty more predictable.


Dishonesty is propably one of the easiest sins (from the seven original ones) to fall for (meaning to lie to oneself). It´s actually so common that we all unnoticeably lie to ourselves constantly, that is: all the time. Being so popular, is it possible for us to act the other way? More significant in the limits of this text how to find standards for one´s honesty. Instead of trying to define truly rare honesty in ourselves, we could try defining it the opposite way. That means taking the lies under examination. Let´s take a quick look what English dictionary says from word lie. Heres citation from Websters, first two sentences:

" mean unworthy of trust or belief. Dishonest implies a willful perversion of truth in order to deceive, cheat, or defraud..." 1) Websters Online Dictionary (it defines some synonyms too and mentions that swindle usually involves two dishonest people, but let´s stick to the point...)

Nothing very obscure here; lying is lot more easily defined as being truhful. However, interesting point in definition: it usually takes two people to deceive, cheat, etc. We don´t usually steal, lie or deceit from ourselves. As an willful act (meaning fully aware of being dishonest to oneself) that could be quite unthinkable, trying to cover one´s own doings from him/herself knowingly. That´s propably possible but not very much common in actual social situations. However, from the earlier paragraphs we noticed that doing so unintentionally is without doubt even more common (sin) than saying aloud so called four-letter-words.


But our primary subject was to define honesty (for oneself). By defining the opposite, we noticed that being honest at least demands from a person to try to be not untruthful to others. Now, let´s ask for help from some most magnifient authoritatives in the ethical world; I mean the religion(s), more specifically we could try to define honesty (again: to oneself) by Christian and Buddhist standards.


The Christian view-point is quite straightforward: try not to do others what you would not prefer for yourself. Taking an example of David that lustfully sighes other mans wife and is said to have fallen adultery gives us some more clarification; by Christian standards falling to dishonesty starts by thoughful, not the physical act. However, we are granted with the mercy either that may actually had happened (or had not).


Buddhism being not so commonly teached in my school-system, it´s not as much familiar for us, so I´ll just give a short (hopefully) satisfying definition for the subject: (one of the) primary goals of buddhism is to lessen unnecessary suffering in the world (which is in itself unavoidable). Judging from that standard, trying to dishonest oneself (and others along with that) seems as unlogical as lying to others. Buddhism, according to my limited knownledge, being a religion of opposite logistics propably finds dishonesty as wrongful as Christianity does. If you wish to add some to others burden, you are propably taken for granted that it should weight in your own load too, in any other way that would be at least unjust by increasing the suffering (of others) by cheating yourself to be allowed not to. As an lightening example, I cannot figure out anything, but I suppose finding support for dishonesty as an act lessening suffering would be quite as unimaginable according to buddhist standards as well as in Christianity. Being much less individually oriented religion than Christianity, Buddhism most likely gives even less credit for the meaningles increase of suffering.


Things being so, acting dishonestly (to others) means implicitly (for the one acting so) trying to free oneself from responsibility of taking part in life itself. Now how about dishonesting oneself? Being truely dishonest (strange pair of words, is it?) in religious aspects means propably that person is (again knowingly) not caring to follow their rules or theoremas, although claims to follow them, but is instead using them gain himself (something). This means, a person is not caring to consider (the religious) principal belief-systems worth slightest consideration in his/her own actions. That is propably much common too, and as we noticed, easily fallen to, as even the mind in itself is never completely free from dishonesty. Naturally, common sense tells us that a person, causing willingly dishonesty to others (lifes), is mostly avoiding to take a responsibility of his own senses. Irresponsibility easily follows from the lack of ethical principles in ones own life.


All this said, is of course just theoretical. Dishonesty can be easily given some definitions with the aid of theoretical explanations of the opposite, much harder to isolate in social situations between people. Trying to cover up ones dishonesty (for oneself) by emotional explanations, temper, circumstances is just one typical response mechanisms for accused dishonesty. Yet, to find some suggestions for honesty in real life we can still ask help from another theoretical level, that being philosophy (and I´ve chosen founding father Aristotle, who is well-known for ethical discussions). In one of most renown antique discussion of ethics, Nikomachean ethics, Aristotle describes good and bad much according to characters. More specifically he typifies them by different manners people take in situations of social life (in this ethic-branch called virtue-ethics, each better act builds persons character better character). Aristotle finds rationale most useful and gives examples of truthfulness by describing the different levels of that; according to Aristotle goodnes in each circumstance is connected to acting in special way in certain situation. Most interesting concerning the principles of honesty, we find that:

"Basing on practical syllogism, Aristotle defines, the peculiar aspect (from modern perspective) that he doesn´t have any concept for freedom of choice or free will in any manner similar to us. Goodful human person acts goodfully unavoidably – he could not act any other way." 2) Saarinen, Esa: Länsimaisen filosofian historia huipulta huipulle. Sokrateesta Marxiin, 1985, p. 85. [Cit. translation by writers]


In Aristotles view-point, we find, concept of honesty is easily defined. Any act not based on rationale is untruhful, goodness is not defined by any individual standards, but sole principles of definitions of good character (my own simplified definition, but suffices to capture the main thing...). This could be frustrating too, staying honest (to oneself) not being an individual choice, but just the result of circumstances. Being the philosophist of reason, Aristotle finds truthfulness in justifiable deeds (according to certain situation). On the contrary to Christianity he seems to believe that true honesty is possible, even more, for reasonable person it is unavoidable. On the contrary to buddhism, he finds suffering not unavoidable but more or less a result of dishonest deeds.


We are not in favor of flagging for the rationale as we aren´t very much impressed with the results of the rationalists developments leading us to a blinded technological march through the world history. But in combination to all our discussion and concerns about honesty (whether philosophical or religious), We´d formulate the concept of honesty (for oneself) in three main principles. Ethically (in the very broadest sense of the word, not just in people to people situations) speaking, all of these are necessary demands of honesty for one´s own sake: Principally trying not to cause intentional harm to others, not intentionally increasing suffering (most often result from acts resulting from will to gain oneself some benefit from others) and trying to reason out if ones deeds in any given circumsances (not sunday:) can be reasoned justifiable according to "good manners":). Not the easiest of tasks, as we all understand...


It can be notified, of course, that this brief essay doesn´t give us any suggestions how to deal with a person found to be dishonest, deceitful, and/or in every manner untrustworthy. However, it shows that being honest to oneself is not in any way impossible, thought most demanding level of conciousness to keep (in mind) and no doubt demands more or less thought-work. As an ethical principle, from MuleSkinner perspective it is at least logically understandable point of view.



jump to the blog mainpage

Newspost#010608

No surprises this week, its mainly about developing technologies - mobiles, Web 2.o apps., not to mention...


While the common world is preparing for bluffon of the record breaking download rally of the year, the Muleskinner World dreams of getting laid with the Android, as well with the new enormously fast SSD NAND hard drives promised to soon reach at least 80/160 Gb capasity and prepares for the painstaking maneuveur to introduce Googles fantastic 3D Maps browser extension for the old time gecko...

Nuclear plans: ”Theres plenty of uranium in this country...” ...to increase the electricity production for satisfying 35 % of maximum demand, brits heads of the state notice; In the same time americans are finding it alarming to have gotten used to poisonous toxicating chemicals on regular basis (thats digesting 200 times over the national safety level of Bisphenol A, chemical linked to estrogenics and carcinogenics causing a.o. breast cancer)

Hard times for an unhonest man ...The officials get surprisingly lot of help from new technology developed for phones: these days even the cheapest phones are likely to have camera, Nokia has started automatically geo-tagging the photos to give a hint of location pictured and from Sim as well as memcards a lot of a data erased can still be rescued afterwards...but is it ones own dogs barking when the trade minister finds the contents of his harddisk copied and stolen...


Wish to check the sources? See our (news)feed.

jump to the blog mainpage