Well, isn’t it right that’s a dog eat dog world? They say pets are so much like their owners, guess it works reversely as well…
In fact it is more likely that democracy was like priories, destroying ir’self from the inside out, that is, more and more, law and order had to be slowly transformed into procedural augmentation, to allow slack to adjust from the black and white letter law, that you’re either right or wrong. That allowance compensated for the relaxation of standards, which have become unaffordable . The cost of maintaining the law had to be balanced with the cost of maintaining levels of productivity that the establishment’s overfed and apparently lazy workforce that immigrants could so readily perform, and so on.
Not that there is no precedent for it like the Colusseum gladiator games and such, or the public displays of action at the guillotine , and other lusty blood letting of the current vogue.
But then Trump was right on in holding on to at least one model , that is a severe denial and dismissal of the conspiratorial theory that the trip to the moon was produced in a Hollywood back lot.
Maybe the fortune tellers of old turned psychic realists could in fact planned that real event to solidify the premise of things to expect in the ecenopolitical foreshadowed arena that goes far back to the 19th century, with Huxley , Orwell @ Co. ? (maybe baby)
Consider it as 2 synced events, coincidentally used within 2 different contexts, so there may be a link there, or maybe it might be slightly more than that, but now back to Carl Polanyi’s ‘The Great Transformation’ and how it relates in situ, and what that significance entails, if any, in terms of behavior vs. inheritance
Under the premise that any two ideas are relatable, the question is in what degree, and how pan-psychism can be generated when levels of apprehension create functional gaps.
“The Wesr was Won”, is a meaningless, loaded phrase.
It’s theft and genocide not a game.
WHo do you think your “ancestors” are anyway.
It’s nothing you can be proud of.
Is thinking phenomenologically about being able to suss out what parts of your thoughts are more about drawing logical/abstract inferences (transcontextual) and what parts of your thoughts are about stuff like knowing what time it is (which requires understanding/experiencing the context you’re in)?
Would you be able to think one way if you were not able to think the other way?
Seems irreducibly complex / mutually produced.
The more omnitranstemporal you are, the more inferences or abstractions, as well as knowing what time it is, you can do. And if you’re 100% omnitranstemporal, you don’t even need to “draw” inferences. That whole discursive thing.
Can a local brain process globally? What/Who would bring the “stuff that is experienced“ to it? If that what/who is global, it could laser focus all of it so that such bringing does not cross a distance of either space or time.
…including the experience of discursive conceptualization.
And it could do it efficiently without the local brain understanding how it happens.
So if a donkey can talk, and if a serpent can talk, and even if they can’t, I think a dog could think phenomenologically. Especially with help.