28.5.03

re: nexus II

>> As to whether a mysterious investigations mag has any place in our dialogue, I would say it does - if only to help keep us intellectually honest. I would hope that one of the things we foster here is not only critical analysis, but also open minds. Being dismissive of any thought without giving it the proper study is the path to intellectual snobbery and isolation. This is one reason I do tend to intro material which is more contentious than most (within our far-left framework). Even if we study it and find it wanting - as will often be the case - it still is worth the study.

this is all viddy well ryan. the reason why i am conducting critical analysis of this "mysterious investigations" material has nothing to do with not wanting it to be posted here- it's rather that enlightenment requires monopoly on a certain type of truth claim (the transcendental pretense if you want)- that there is always a "means" of assessing data that is sexiest in terms of approximation to truth. that's why "dangers of conspiracy T" is an important topic, as is the post-modern mess (to ethical stance possible with relativism as in "all claims to truth are equal") weak analysis of power structures can lead us to. this is by the way true of any belief system, whether it be "religious" or "scientific" in outlook. my favourite example of this is foucault, who's archeology of knowledge (modelled on FN archeology of morals), and excellent work of reflection re: knowledge production and interests, falls into a hideous dark fucker of a hole when he attributes resistance to be part of the overall system (death of hegel, end of progress). hence discussion, hence challenge.

if there are therefore two truth claims around 9-11, namely institutional and conspiracy type enquiry, i will certainly favour the earlier over the latter for the very reasons outlined at length below. the search for truth (such as with the dialectic of historical materialism) is an endless process of eliminating contradictory theories. and the two sets discussed below cannot co-exist unless we're going for "discourse" banter here (end of history and eternal nodding). regarding the brain- and earthwaves material, i can't really see how one would conduct research and to what extent this research would provide a framework for action. what's being propagated here is that "there's something wrong" in terms of obscure scientific language with a number of odd abbreviations- without any links to material relations where one would be able to discuss possibilities for change and is therefore irrelevant to discussion of praxis. if i was involved in this sort of ball game i'd probably end up recommending meditating until brainwaves are adjusted to P-alpha-3 pulse waves or whatever and then sell it on tape, make a mince and call the whole thing scientology (the pseudo-scientific language is in fact reminiscent of their material).

No comments:

Post a Comment