Posted by pseudoname on June 23, 2006, at 22:38:47
In reply to Coherance comes slowly » pseudoname, posted by Declan on June 23, 2006, at 20:28:00
[the *trig* is one word in the 3rd-to-last graph]
> ......probably better for those who've never tried opiates? This is leaving to one side the relief in the difficulty of acquisition.
Ha! Ironic, eh?
> Still, you would agree, if narcotics were available OTC now, the situation would be uncontrollable?
It would not be good. I don't think it would've been good in 1953, either. They took all those narcotic ingredients out for some reason.
> So there is some kind of difference.
Maybe it's just improved means of production and distribution of illicit addictives? You've made me want to read more about that history. I've seen a good recent book about it, but I'll have to hunt it down.
> The heirarchies of God, Church, King, landed families, fathers etc were more intact.
I think your experience was quite different on this axis than mine. I don't know if an American of any age could say anything like that. Even extrapolating for "King".
Do you feel this sense of duty now?
> All the terrible things of the C20 used duty as a motivator.
I disagree. The twentieth century had a wide variety of terrible things and many other motivations: power, greed, power, money (as a conditioned reinforcer apart from greed), moral superiority, safety, bigotry, hunger, power, aesthetics, indifference (if that counts), even peace, love, and good intentions.
But perhaps you see all these infused with duty. I don't. I do feel duty, but I can't imagine applying it outside my family and for friends who I love as much as family. No one outside that circle could ever have told me what my duty was or that it applied to anyone else. I remember some trying, and their efforts were like pebbles bouncing off concrete.
> All spiritual and psychological systems emphasise acceptance. You reckon?
Disagreeing with you twice in one post seems like posing. But… well… *some* do, in part; that's very true.
I mentioned Forester because I'm entering my circadian Hornblower period. (It alternates every 3 or 4 years with John le Carré and there's nothing I can do about it.) I mention it again because the contrast between my life and an early 19th century sailor's life is astounding. Mine's 100 times richer & safer; it's longer with better food and dental care. Yet I feel that they lived their brief lives with much less moral sitting around. Their philosophy was just as keen or dull as ours, but they had more data from abutting death and dismemberment to base their a prioris on.
I imagine they didn't wait as much for better opportunities. Or feelings.
This is simply a question of degree. They took opium, too.
Bedtime here in BFE. ;-)
poster:pseudoname
thread:657263
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20060623/msgs/660817.html