Generational Dynamics World View

[Bob Butler 54]

(05-07-2020, 01:19 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote:

(05-07-2020, 10:03 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: OK.  So you do not perceive progress in areas outside of technology.  Hmm….

What are you talking about?  Obviously there's progress outside of technology.  What didn't happen?  Are you claiming that I don't think Napoleon's code happened?  What you wrote is all garbled.

Originally you claimed that there was no non-cyclical progress outside of technology.  Each example of non cyclical progress outside of technology proves you wrong.  I am not close to running out of them.  I can link them all to the arrow of progress.  In order to deny the arrow of progress exists, you have to deny each of the various forms of progress such as the Code of Napoleon exists.  In which case, you have to admit to either having an ideological bias, or being an idiot.

Each time you try to link me to an unpopular dictator, I can go back to the virtues of human rights, equality, and democracy.  The dictator will soon be seen as not being a big fan of those ideals.  You have to either retract the association, admit to an ideological bias, or admit you are an idiot.

The garble you are experiencing is common when someone has an ideology and encounters something which would make him rethink the ideology.  It is a defense mechanism.  You can either step back and think, admit that your ideology prevents you from comprehending, or claim to be an idiot.

Frankly, denying you have an ideological bias is fine with me.

(05-07-2020, 10:03 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(05-07-2020, 01:19 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: You have a system that justifies your ideological bias, and present it as true and objective.

What ideology is that?

I believe you call it Generational Dynamics.

(05-07-2020, 01:19 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote:

(05-07-2020, 10:03 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: Friend! Comrade!  We are on the same side!  

You wish.

Shortly after the Falklands war, somebody did a political cartoon which showed an Argentine solider and a British soldier sharing a trench.  One asked the other what cause he was fighting for.  The response was that his government was unpopular, that there was a need for a wartime unifying movement to unite the country.  The original questioner then exclaimed with wild enthusiasm that they were comrades, fighting for the same cause.

It was a memorable line.  Couldn’t resist.

Now with great difficulty we might each assume our systems can benefit from picking up aspects of the other.  This won't happen if I regularly encounter false statements, deliberate misinterpretation of what I say, mischaracterization and demonization.  We could continue on, or I could just assume you have no ideological bias.