I am Free...
Showing posts with label news. Show all posts
Showing posts with label news. Show all posts
Thursday 26 March 2020
Wednesday 25 March 2020
This is an illustration of the effectiveness of the surgical hand washing technique— World of Engineering (@engineers_feed) March 25, 2020
pic.twitter.com/hcP0TL7GHA
Friday 20 March 2020
YOU TUBE INFORM...
"... As we do this, users and creators may see increased video removals, including some videos that may not violate policies. We won’t issue strikes on this content except in cases where we have high confidence that it’s violative. If creators think that their content was removed in error, they can appeal the decision and our teams will take a look. However, note that our workforce precautions will also result in delayed appeal reviews. We’ll also be more cautious about what content gets promoted, including livestreams. In some cases, unreviewed content may not be available via search, on the homepage, or in recommendations.... KEEP READING IN THE ORIGINAL SITE
Wednesday 18 March 2020
One get a little bit fascist - Luca Sofri
One get a little bit fascist
Luca Sofri
Luca Sofri
Il Post
18 March 2020
It is nothing new in the historical and sociological view that fear is the main incentive to demand strong manners, authoritarian regimes, I should like to thank the rapporteur for the work he has put into this report. On the contrary, the advocates of such regimes and approaches have often turned the relationship of cause and effect upside down, trying to spread with force or words a growing measure of fear precisely to push the demand, precisely, of authoritarian regimes.
In these weeks after many parts of the world worked to build artificial fears for years, with success– it came from where less expected a real fear, concrete, founded, enormous. That on the one hand does little to the case of those who wish strong manners because– unlike the fears that suggest propaganda manuals– does not accompany an enemy against which to arouse and direct anger. It is not excluded that from right– they are capable of everything– soon they begin to claim that "the left is a friend of the coronavirus", but it is a rhetoric that does a bit of work: as stupid you think your voters, To incite them to hate a microscopic pallet with pispoli around is not easy even for the most reckless fomentators of hate.
On the other hand, however, this natural, real, motivated fear is already generating shares of natural, real, motivated fascism in all: extreme intolerance and demands for repression towards those who leave the house (with DIY justice tips and fanaticism between the ridiculous and the disturbing)indulgence for measures of censorship even on books, which in other times would have been much discussed for their implications, a widespread feeling of having to each of us defend a higher need, a feeling that legitimizes us and puts us all in a uniform, I want to call the police, report someone, or intervene ourselves. Congratulations on exemplary punishment. Even, in our own small, impatience on the part of the moderators of the Post comments against expressions of stupidity on which we are usually more tolerant. "If you don’t understand it well, you have to be a little more aggressive," Fontana said today. And each of you will have examples around you, and within you. We are becoming– a bit at a time, – more intolerant, more eager for intransigence, more prone to discipline imposed by the bad, and without going for the subtle.
Don’t think too hard.
That’s normal, of course. He’s motivated, often. Is that okay?
You pay attention to that.
https://www.wittgenstein.it/2020/03/18/si-diventa-un-po-fascisti/
translated with https://www.reverso.net/
18 March 2020
It is nothing new in the historical and sociological view that fear is the main incentive to demand strong manners, authoritarian regimes, I should like to thank the rapporteur for the work he has put into this report. On the contrary, the advocates of such regimes and approaches have often turned the relationship of cause and effect upside down, trying to spread with force or words a growing measure of fear precisely to push the demand, precisely, of authoritarian regimes.
In these weeks after many parts of the world worked to build artificial fears for years, with success– it came from where less expected a real fear, concrete, founded, enormous. That on the one hand does little to the case of those who wish strong manners because– unlike the fears that suggest propaganda manuals– does not accompany an enemy against which to arouse and direct anger. It is not excluded that from right– they are capable of everything– soon they begin to claim that "the left is a friend of the coronavirus", but it is a rhetoric that does a bit of work: as stupid you think your voters, To incite them to hate a microscopic pallet with pispoli around is not easy even for the most reckless fomentators of hate.
On the other hand, however, this natural, real, motivated fear is already generating shares of natural, real, motivated fascism in all: extreme intolerance and demands for repression towards those who leave the house (with DIY justice tips and fanaticism between the ridiculous and the disturbing)indulgence for measures of censorship even on books, which in other times would have been much discussed for their implications, a widespread feeling of having to each of us defend a higher need, a feeling that legitimizes us and puts us all in a uniform, I want to call the police, report someone, or intervene ourselves. Congratulations on exemplary punishment. Even, in our own small, impatience on the part of the moderators of the Post comments against expressions of stupidity on which we are usually more tolerant. "If you don’t understand it well, you have to be a little more aggressive," Fontana said today. And each of you will have examples around you, and within you. We are becoming– a bit at a time, – more intolerant, more eager for intransigence, more prone to discipline imposed by the bad, and without going for the subtle.
Don’t think too hard.
That’s normal, of course. He’s motivated, often. Is that okay?
You pay attention to that.
https://www.wittgenstein.it/2020/03/18/si-diventa-un-po-fascisti/
translated with https://www.reverso.net/
Monday 16 March 2020
Italians’ Nightly Singalongs Prove That Music Soothes the Savage Beast of Coronavirus Quarantine & Self-Isolation https://t.co/idbnFb1TKO pic.twitter.com/2KobPhDjyp
— Open Culture (@openculture) March 16, 2020
Sunday 15 March 2020
#SecondLife to expand support & reduce prices for
#SecondLife to expand support & reduce prices for Education & Nonprofits. Also some remote solutions for conferences, events, or classes! Details here: https://t.co/OO14ivpfJC pic.twitter.com/AF0miLap9g— Second Life Official (@SecondLife) March 13, 2020
Friday 13 March 2020
figure it out for themselves - Luca Sofri - Wittgenstein - Ilpost.it
figure it out for themselves
Luca Sofri
Wittgenstein
Ilpost.it
11 Mars 2020
A few years ago, during an American holiday with my family, my son Ludovico was very intrigued by the discovery of the honor system, which was illustrated by a friend who lives in Seattle. We had come across a discount in a museum for those who prove to have come by bike, showing the bike helmet. And Ludovico had prudently asked: "how do they know that one did not wear the helmet only for the discount, and came in the car?". So our friend Diego explained the honor system to him.
Unfortunately, we would have liked to have done without it, but the government decrees on the coronavirus and their formulations on behavioural and travel restrictions are an interesting laboratory of reflection on the balance between education and repression, but also more extensively on the State’s interference in people’s autonomous choices, on citizens' ability to "look after themselves" and on many other concepts that have always been discussed with many contradictions (think of those right-wing people who want at the same time more freedom from the state and more control of the state). And finally, they generate reflections on the education of citizens, on the information, on the cultural work to be done to improve the functioning of a community and a country.
A confident and constructive reading of the decrees we are talking about can in fact consider them as such: they are a measured attempt to suggest to people a gravity of the situation and a need for sacrifices that had hitherto been underestimated, without recourse to explicit prohibitions, restrictions on freedom, authoritarian and repressive approaches. Despite the widespread use of the term these days, those rules are not "prohibitions" and the Count himself at the press conference was careful not to call them so, with balanced but revealing formulations of this attempt.
And being excluded also in practice that the observance of the demands of the decree can be managed in a police and systematic way, I think that the idea, sensible, was: we raise the voice and ask for help at the same time, we scare and responsibility at the same time. Let us rely on– once the dangers are cleared–to the understanding and conscience of people, but this cannot be enough without the deterrent of sanctions for those who have not understood even now. A right balance– in my opinion– of education and repression, in which the first always prevails and allows there to be no overpowering of an authoritarian state with respect to the autonomy of judgment and freedom of persons.
After this encouraging reading, however, three problems arose. I count three, at least.
The first is a formal and substantial contradiction: on the one hand there is the communication that there are no absolute prohibitions, the relying on a part of common sense and interpretation ("of course you can go shopping"), the hint that the various cases of "necessity" – obviously very ambiguous and elastic term– they are delegated to the judgement of the individuals; on the other hand there is the explicit call to sanctions and defined criminal consequences. And you understand that it is difficult for people to feel serene about their autonomy of judgment and common sense if at the same time something says to them "if you fail in judgment, we will put you in jail". It’s the honor system of one of its founding halves.
Tell me exactly what I can do and what I can’t.
And here is the second problem: that in such an unprecedented state intervention situation to overturn common and customary behaviors, to regulate exactly what can and cannot be done is practically impossible. The most diverse eventualities are manifesting themselves right after the announcement of the rules, many unforeseen events. I am not a lawyer, but it could be the decree with the highest relationship between its brevity and the field of occasions to which it applies: field summarized in "lives". Of 60 million people. These days even the Post– and I imagine even more the major newspapers– receives frequent requests for explanation on very singular (and often poignant) cases of people with the most diverse and delicate needs and problems. "Can I do this?" we all ask ourselves several times every day. And we have all already imagined great and small "normative voids", sometimes insignificant but other times very significant and dramatic. A greater example of all concerns families that for one reason or another (the separated, for example) do not live continuously and permanently together: simply wanting to see oneself, is in those cases a "necessity"? (Of course it is, I say: but I decide, it is not written or said anywhere). Not to mention the simple romantic relationships of non-cohabitants.
It is true, as some complain, that the instructions are vague and sometimes frightening. It is also true that they are instructions that are trying to do something that has never been done, and perhaps you can not do so much better than this– adding gradually more clarity, and "to understand" – remaining a democratic country, libertarian and with a Constitution.
The third problem is related to this, but it has a whole history, and it is the biggest and most enlightening problem of the functioning of the country, in my opinion: that precedes and will follow this emergency. The honor system, or any even more moderate and controlled investment in citizens' responsibility and awareness, needs citizens' awareness. Many, in recent days, have rather called for severe, authoritarian and repressive interventions, after observing the lightness with which a part of the population was reacting to requests for prudence. And the feeling is that often we ourselves need "orders", not instructions: many of us struggle to appropriate the responsibility to decide for the best, feel disoriented, fear to do the wrong thing. They want "orders" and someone to give them to them.
It is partly human and understandable, but it has also increased extraordinarily from the low level of information and culture that we receive. Being responsible, conscious, autonomous in reasonable and conscientious judgment is the result of knowing things, understanding them, being informed of them, as well as being educated in the sense and functioning of a community (and perhaps also to the understanding and methods of science). "to understand it alone" is the result of a political and cultural work that is now more weakened than ever. The rituals and secular comments about Italians who need to be commanded are once again the overflow towards the repression of something that should be left to education: Italians– we– need to be educated, or educate themselves if you prefer (on the meaning of educating and the sensibilities that collide here); it is not by chance that the honor system is widespread in countries where the investment in civic education, education and correct information has always been greater.
Maybe we’ll remember that when it’s over. maybe it’ll help.
https://www.wittgenstein.it/2020/03/11/capirlo-da-soli/
in this new there are several other link
I translated this one:
https://free-libbberamente.blogspot.com/2020/03/nobody-drives-me-to-me-luca-sofri.html
here is the remaining in italian, the first link are the italian goverment infos for Corona virus:
https://www.ilpost.it/2020/03/10/governo-coronavirus-domande-risposte-faq/
https://www.wittgenstein.it/2012/02/04/educare-le-masse/
https://www.wittgenstein.it/2019/03/06/sorvegliare-e-punire-2/
english
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honor_system
Luca Sofri
Wittgenstein
Ilpost.it
11 Mars 2020
A few years ago, during an American holiday with my family, my son Ludovico was very intrigued by the discovery of the honor system, which was illustrated by a friend who lives in Seattle. We had come across a discount in a museum for those who prove to have come by bike, showing the bike helmet. And Ludovico had prudently asked: "how do they know that one did not wear the helmet only for the discount, and came in the car?". So our friend Diego explained the honor system to him.
"An honor system or honesty system is a philosophical way of running a Variety of Endeavors based on trust, honor, and honesty. Something that operates under the rule of the "honor system" is usually something that does not have strictly enforced rules governing its principles.
The honor system is also a system granting freedom from customary surveillance (as to students or prisoners) with the understanding that those who are so freed will be bound by their honor to observe Regulations (e.g. prison farms are operated under the honor system), and will therefore not abuse the trust placed in them.
A person engaged in an honor system has a strong negative concept of breaking or going against it. The negatives may include community shame, loss of status, loss of a personal sense of integrity and pride or in extreme situations, banishment from one’s community."
Unfortunately, we would have liked to have done without it, but the government decrees on the coronavirus and their formulations on behavioural and travel restrictions are an interesting laboratory of reflection on the balance between education and repression, but also more extensively on the State’s interference in people’s autonomous choices, on citizens' ability to "look after themselves" and on many other concepts that have always been discussed with many contradictions (think of those right-wing people who want at the same time more freedom from the state and more control of the state). And finally, they generate reflections on the education of citizens, on the information, on the cultural work to be done to improve the functioning of a community and a country.
A confident and constructive reading of the decrees we are talking about can in fact consider them as such: they are a measured attempt to suggest to people a gravity of the situation and a need for sacrifices that had hitherto been underestimated, without recourse to explicit prohibitions, restrictions on freedom, authoritarian and repressive approaches. Despite the widespread use of the term these days, those rules are not "prohibitions" and the Count himself at the press conference was careful not to call them so, with balanced but revealing formulations of this attempt.
"there will be the constraint to avoid any displacementThe same decree distinguishes between the formulas of "absolute prohibition of mobility" intended for the infected and that "avoiding any movement" for all the others.
we do not have a total ban on transfer, but there is a need to motivate it, and therefore certainly there is a reduced mobilitywe must all be more responsible"
And being excluded also in practice that the observance of the demands of the decree can be managed in a police and systematic way, I think that the idea, sensible, was: we raise the voice and ask for help at the same time, we scare and responsibility at the same time. Let us rely on– once the dangers are cleared–to the understanding and conscience of people, but this cannot be enough without the deterrent of sanctions for those who have not understood even now. A right balance– in my opinion– of education and repression, in which the first always prevails and allows there to be no overpowering of an authoritarian state with respect to the autonomy of judgment and freedom of persons.
After this encouraging reading, however, three problems arose. I count three, at least.
The first is a formal and substantial contradiction: on the one hand there is the communication that there are no absolute prohibitions, the relying on a part of common sense and interpretation ("of course you can go shopping"), the hint that the various cases of "necessity" – obviously very ambiguous and elastic term– they are delegated to the judgement of the individuals; on the other hand there is the explicit call to sanctions and defined criminal consequences. And you understand that it is difficult for people to feel serene about their autonomy of judgment and common sense if at the same time something says to them "if you fail in judgment, we will put you in jail". It’s the honor system of one of its founding halves.
Tell me exactly what I can do and what I can’t.
And here is the second problem: that in such an unprecedented state intervention situation to overturn common and customary behaviors, to regulate exactly what can and cannot be done is practically impossible. The most diverse eventualities are manifesting themselves right after the announcement of the rules, many unforeseen events. I am not a lawyer, but it could be the decree with the highest relationship between its brevity and the field of occasions to which it applies: field summarized in "lives". Of 60 million people. These days even the Post– and I imagine even more the major newspapers– receives frequent requests for explanation on very singular (and often poignant) cases of people with the most diverse and delicate needs and problems. "Can I do this?" we all ask ourselves several times every day. And we have all already imagined great and small "normative voids", sometimes insignificant but other times very significant and dramatic. A greater example of all concerns families that for one reason or another (the separated, for example) do not live continuously and permanently together: simply wanting to see oneself, is in those cases a "necessity"? (Of course it is, I say: but I decide, it is not written or said anywhere). Not to mention the simple romantic relationships of non-cohabitants.
It is true, as some complain, that the instructions are vague and sometimes frightening. It is also true that they are instructions that are trying to do something that has never been done, and perhaps you can not do so much better than this– adding gradually more clarity, and "to understand" – remaining a democratic country, libertarian and with a Constitution.
The third problem is related to this, but it has a whole history, and it is the biggest and most enlightening problem of the functioning of the country, in my opinion: that precedes and will follow this emergency. The honor system, or any even more moderate and controlled investment in citizens' responsibility and awareness, needs citizens' awareness. Many, in recent days, have rather called for severe, authoritarian and repressive interventions, after observing the lightness with which a part of the population was reacting to requests for prudence. And the feeling is that often we ourselves need "orders", not instructions: many of us struggle to appropriate the responsibility to decide for the best, feel disoriented, fear to do the wrong thing. They want "orders" and someone to give them to them.
It is partly human and understandable, but it has also increased extraordinarily from the low level of information and culture that we receive. Being responsible, conscious, autonomous in reasonable and conscientious judgment is the result of knowing things, understanding them, being informed of them, as well as being educated in the sense and functioning of a community (and perhaps also to the understanding and methods of science). "to understand it alone" is the result of a political and cultural work that is now more weakened than ever. The rituals and secular comments about Italians who need to be commanded are once again the overflow towards the repression of something that should be left to education: Italians– we– need to be educated, or educate themselves if you prefer (on the meaning of educating and the sensibilities that collide here); it is not by chance that the honor system is widespread in countries where the investment in civic education, education and correct information has always been greater.
Maybe we’ll remember that when it’s over. maybe it’ll help.
https://www.wittgenstein.it/2020/03/11/capirlo-da-soli/
in this new there are several other link
I translated this one:
https://free-libbberamente.blogspot.com/2020/03/nobody-drives-me-to-me-luca-sofri.html
here is the remaining in italian, the first link are the italian goverment infos for Corona virus:
https://www.ilpost.it/2020/03/10/governo-coronavirus-domande-risposte-faq/
https://www.wittgenstein.it/2012/02/04/educare-le-masse/
https://www.wittgenstein.it/2019/03/06/sorvegliare-e-punire-2/
english
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honor_system
Nobody drives me, to me! - Luca Sofri - Wittgenstein - Il Post
Nobody drives me, to me!
Luca Sofri
Wittgenstein
Il Post
18 February 2013
Today there is a nice interview with Elio and the stretched Stories about Repubblica, beautiful because they say different intelligent things and not banal (while lately it has become banal and predictable almost everything that happens and is said around Elio and the tense Stories). Among the other answers, however, at a certain point Elio says something banal yes:
What makes this sentence original is that Elio says it, putting into crisis the cliché that would like such thoughts to be only in the head of soloni, snobs, and overbearing Stalinist intellectuals (the same, I see that it has generated irritation around). The "educational" role of everything we do, and of those who have tools to transmit to others their own culture and competence, is indeed indisputable: but it is systematically hindered by a childhood hypersensitivity that we all have towards the idea that someone guides us, educate us, address us, give us lessons (what am I doing, me here: if not try to guide, address?). How much one should be careful not to hurt sensibility had also noticed mounts, before me (here is Roman Vlad, instead; and here an American astrophysicist): but I wrote a long thing that I willingly attach here.
The comparison of ideas and reflections is the first mechanism of building knowledge and an informed opinion on things. That in turn is what a better society is built on: understanding things, understanding what is right, from time to time, and making wise and informed choices. There are the right things and the wrong things, and you have to do the right things. You only get it by studying, accepting lessons, taking every piece of information as a teaching and an extra piece of your treasure trove of knowledge (even when you discard or discard it). This gives us a double responsibility, corresponding to the double duty we have in life, the improvement of ourselves and of the world. I repeat it all the way back, sorry: the world is getting better by improving ourselves and others and making us willing to be improved by ourselves and others. The first thing is to spread and offer to others the things that we know and understand, especially about what is right and what is wrong and about the tools to understand it. Imparting lessons.8 The second thing you get symmetrically by accepting lessons. It is a virtuous circle, increasingly interrupted by the attitudes of which we have spoken. And that equally affects– even their relationship creates a virtuous or vicious circle– society and us other people on one side, and politics on the other.
It seems to me that there are two main obstacles to the reconstruction of this virtuous circle. One is the psychological one about which I have spoken and which lies behind the accusations of snobbery, presumption of moral superiority, presumption, distance from the «real country» that boil those who try to improve it, the real country, starting from itself: how dare you? Who does he think he is? Even more if it does not have a position of recognized power that saves it from the above questions (we are conformists: in competition with our peers, and discreet with our superiors). The other obstacle is linguistic intolerance. A social reprobation for some words, which blinds us to their real meaning and value.9 We cannot stand «lessons». We can’t stand someone «teaching us» things. Nobody is allowed to «educate us», despite the fact that educating literally means «lead out, so free, bring to light something that is hidden». If someone educates me it means I’m rude, we think. If someone teaches me, it means I’m ignorant. If someone explains me, it means I don’t understand. I’m an idiot. And my insecurity– which suggests to me that it really is– makes me even more unbearable. And so we reject pedagogy and education– for their infantilizing sound to our ignorant ears and for the «crest cagone» – and allow a general instigation, and a claim of ignorance. A thick layer of insecurity is glued around us and makes us react to everything with fear of the effect it will have on our image in the eyes of others. Every time someone fills our glass, we rush to find justifications for the fact that it was empty. We live every human shortcoming as a public failure. We are very concerned about the effect we have, and too insecure to make this anxiety a stimulus rather than an incentive to escape.
To conclude: all this is not solved by analyzing it. Analysing serves to understand, and discussing serves to understand. And understanding serves to confront. In this case, however, understanding and discussing are hampered by the very limit we were talking about: the unwillingness to understand and discuss. How do you learn to take lessons, how do you take lessons? Do we work on words, by hypocritically tiptoeing and using political-linguistic correctness that avoids very sensible but potentially offensive terms to our sensibilities? 10 (as you may have noticed, I’M done flooring myself at several points of this exhibition, which some will then find too cautious and others too wise). At a certain point inside the barbarians, Baricco speaks in a very acute way of how much the question of the sensibility of the receiver with respect to the content of the things that are said, having traced his analysis to the reading of a Goffredo Parise text (again! Of course he said of enlightening things, this Parise):
The word written at a certain point became communication where it used to be expression, says Baricco. And it follows that any subsequent attempt at expression must now come to terms with the fact that it will always be understood as communication: «What are you saying to me?» «What do you want me to think?» «where are you going?» «where does this book go?» «yes, yes, but then?».
And so, what do you do? Do you work on words so much that communication becomes hyperexpressive?
Do you make a great collective self-analysis? Do you give up?
******
8 Not only do we find it difficult to accept lessons, but when they can be good and fruitful we are even reluctant to give them. God forbid we make anyone’s life any better. The entrepreneur Alessandro mannarini, interviewed by «Corriere della Sera» on the parties of his friend gianpaolo tarantini with drugs and exploitation of prostitution, answered candidly: «I’ve seen others do but everyone on holiday does what he wants. I couldn’t stand up to moralizer».
9 Richard Thaler and Cass sunstein, in their popular nudge essay, have from the beginning felt the reader of such linguistic difficulty. They call their political attitude «libertarian paternalism», knowing well «that readers will not find this expression of their immediate liking», because both terms «have been taken hostage by dogmatists».
10 Fofi uses this formula, attentive to sensibilities and alternative to the use of misunderstood verbs such as «teaching» and «educating»: «(Man helps himself) helping him to bring out of himself the ability to understand the world and find his own place, active and supportive».
https://www.wittgenstein.it/2013/02/18/amme-non-mi-guida-nessuno-amme/
Luca Sofri
Wittgenstein
Il Post
18 February 2013
Today there is a nice interview with Elio and the stretched Stories about Repubblica, beautiful because they say different intelligent things and not banal (while lately it has become banal and predictable almost everything that happens and is said around Elio and the tense Stories). Among the other answers, however, at a certain point Elio says something banal yes:
«The public must be guided, addressed»
What makes this sentence original is that Elio says it, putting into crisis the cliché that would like such thoughts to be only in the head of soloni, snobs, and overbearing Stalinist intellectuals (the same, I see that it has generated irritation around). The "educational" role of everything we do, and of those who have tools to transmit to others their own culture and competence, is indeed indisputable: but it is systematically hindered by a childhood hypersensitivity that we all have towards the idea that someone guides us, educate us, address us, give us lessons (what am I doing, me here: if not try to guide, address?). How much one should be careful not to hurt sensibility had also noticed mounts, before me (here is Roman Vlad, instead; and here an American astrophysicist): but I wrote a long thing that I willingly attach here.
The comparison of ideas and reflections is the first mechanism of building knowledge and an informed opinion on things. That in turn is what a better society is built on: understanding things, understanding what is right, from time to time, and making wise and informed choices. There are the right things and the wrong things, and you have to do the right things. You only get it by studying, accepting lessons, taking every piece of information as a teaching and an extra piece of your treasure trove of knowledge (even when you discard or discard it). This gives us a double responsibility, corresponding to the double duty we have in life, the improvement of ourselves and of the world. I repeat it all the way back, sorry: the world is getting better by improving ourselves and others and making us willing to be improved by ourselves and others. The first thing is to spread and offer to others the things that we know and understand, especially about what is right and what is wrong and about the tools to understand it. Imparting lessons.8 The second thing you get symmetrically by accepting lessons. It is a virtuous circle, increasingly interrupted by the attitudes of which we have spoken. And that equally affects– even their relationship creates a virtuous or vicious circle– society and us other people on one side, and politics on the other.
It seems to me that there are two main obstacles to the reconstruction of this virtuous circle. One is the psychological one about which I have spoken and which lies behind the accusations of snobbery, presumption of moral superiority, presumption, distance from the «real country» that boil those who try to improve it, the real country, starting from itself: how dare you? Who does he think he is? Even more if it does not have a position of recognized power that saves it from the above questions (we are conformists: in competition with our peers, and discreet with our superiors). The other obstacle is linguistic intolerance. A social reprobation for some words, which blinds us to their real meaning and value.9 We cannot stand «lessons». We can’t stand someone «teaching us» things. Nobody is allowed to «educate us», despite the fact that educating literally means «lead out, so free, bring to light something that is hidden». If someone educates me it means I’m rude, we think. If someone teaches me, it means I’m ignorant. If someone explains me, it means I don’t understand. I’m an idiot. And my insecurity– which suggests to me that it really is– makes me even more unbearable. And so we reject pedagogy and education– for their infantilizing sound to our ignorant ears and for the «crest cagone» – and allow a general instigation, and a claim of ignorance. A thick layer of insecurity is glued around us and makes us react to everything with fear of the effect it will have on our image in the eyes of others. Every time someone fills our glass, we rush to find justifications for the fact that it was empty. We live every human shortcoming as a public failure. We are very concerned about the effect we have, and too insecure to make this anxiety a stimulus rather than an incentive to escape.
Our capacity to educate is experienced realistically in ourselves: by educating us, we will have educated others.Piero gobetti, The Liberal Revolution
To conclude: all this is not solved by analyzing it. Analysing serves to understand, and discussing serves to understand. And understanding serves to confront. In this case, however, understanding and discussing are hampered by the very limit we were talking about: the unwillingness to understand and discuss. How do you learn to take lessons, how do you take lessons? Do we work on words, by hypocritically tiptoeing and using political-linguistic correctness that avoids very sensible but potentially offensive terms to our sensibilities? 10 (as you may have noticed, I’M done flooring myself at several points of this exhibition, which some will then find too cautious and others too wise). At a certain point inside the barbarians, Baricco speaks in a very acute way of how much the question of the sensibility of the receiver with respect to the content of the things that are said, having traced his analysis to the reading of a Goffredo Parise text (again! Of course he said of enlightening things, this Parise):
Suddenly the written word shifted its center of gravity from the voice that spoke it to the ear that I was listening. As it were, he went up to the surface and sought the transit of the world: at the cost of losing all its value in the departure from its roots.
The word written at a certain point became communication where it used to be expression, says Baricco. And it follows that any subsequent attempt at expression must now come to terms with the fact that it will always be understood as communication: «What are you saying to me?» «What do you want me to think?» «where are you going?» «where does this book go?» «yes, yes, but then?».
And so, what do you do? Do you work on words so much that communication becomes hyperexpressive?
Do you make a great collective self-analysis? Do you give up?
******
8 Not only do we find it difficult to accept lessons, but when they can be good and fruitful we are even reluctant to give them. God forbid we make anyone’s life any better. The entrepreneur Alessandro mannarini, interviewed by «Corriere della Sera» on the parties of his friend gianpaolo tarantini with drugs and exploitation of prostitution, answered candidly: «I’ve seen others do but everyone on holiday does what he wants. I couldn’t stand up to moralizer».
9 Richard Thaler and Cass sunstein, in their popular nudge essay, have from the beginning felt the reader of such linguistic difficulty. They call their political attitude «libertarian paternalism», knowing well «that readers will not find this expression of their immediate liking», because both terms «have been taken hostage by dogmatists».
10 Fofi uses this formula, attentive to sensibilities and alternative to the use of misunderstood verbs such as «teaching» and «educating»: «(Man helps himself) helping him to bring out of himself the ability to understand the world and find his own place, active and supportive».
https://www.wittgenstein.it/2013/02/18/amme-non-mi-guida-nessuno-amme/
Thursday 12 March 2020
VEGETAL PLANET IS CLOSING IN A WEEK TIME... HEEEEEEEEEEEEEEELP...
VEGETAL PLANET IS CLOSING IN A WEEK TIME...
HEEEEEEEEEEEEEEELP...
VEGETAL PLANET - OAK PARK
- Second Life
https://secondlife.com/destination/vegetal-planet?sourceid=dgw1
music by Lobo Loco - Charypthis
https://freemusicarchive.org/music/Lobo_Loco/Tree_of_Meditation/Charypthis_ID_897
Wednesday 11 March 2020
Tuesday 10 March 2020
Guy Kawasaki: How to Be a Remarkable Speaker
| ||
| ||
|
Monday 9 March 2020
Most of these experimental methods drew from older sources, such as
Among the political and social revolutions of the 1960s, the movement to democratize education is of central historical importance. Parents and politicians were entrenched in battles over integrating local schools years after 1954’s Brown v. Board of Education. Sit-ins and protests on college campuses made similar student unrest today seem mild by comparison. Meanwhile, quieter, though no less radical, educational movements proliferated in communes, homeschools, and communities that could pay for private schools.
Most of these experimental methods drew from older sources, such as the theories of Rudolf Steiner and Maria Montessori, both of whom died before the Age of Aquarius. One movement that got its start decades earlier was popularized in the 60s when its founder A.S. Neill published the influential Summerhill: A Radical Approach to Child Rearing, a classic work of alternative pedagogy in which the Scottish writer and educator described the radical ideas developed in his Summerhill School in England, first founded in 1921.... http://www.openculture.com/2020/03/summerhill-school.html
. Is such a thing even possible in practice?
Guy Kawasaki choices
3 Simple Tips for Effectively Communicating with Executives https://t.co/uuQ85Bfw7l pic.twitter.com/PSLYPaUpMo— Guy Kawasaki (@GuyKawasaki) March 7, 2020
How to Quarantine Yourself https://t.co/dQxtC5k34f— Guy Kawasaki (@GuyKawasaki) March 7, 2020
somebody in my bar, today, told me that it is impossible that wine goes out of the factory in to the water system and reach the houses...
Delightful Malfunction Makes Wine Flow out of Taps in Northern Italian Town https://t.co/IUydcbXAzv— cinzia opezzi (@giuggiolalibera) March 7, 2020
Remember that incredible rotating shot in Mr Robot? Here i figured a way to recreate it with a 360 GoPro and a few things around my house. Let me know what you think! pic.twitter.com/914HLzbGda— Dan Mace (@Dannmace) March 6, 2020
Beautiful Nature 😍 pic.twitter.com/E5i5u7YhCn— Naturism.Com💎💎 (@NaturismC) March 7, 2020
— Irena Buzarewicz (@IrenaBuzarewicz) March 6, 2020
— Physics & Astronomy Zone🔭 (@ZonePhysics) March 7, 2020
Thursday 27 February 2020
Coronavirus, psychiatrists: “there is a cognitive epidemic. Unjustified and excessive”reactions. Here is the decalogue against panic
To curb anxiety the Italian Society of Psychiatry (sip) has developed the rules ‘anti-panic’and launches an appeal to “not to overturn daily habits”. Stick to the official communications of health authorities; rely only on authoritative newspapers; do not treasure what you intercept online and on social media, especially if ‘shared by only virtual friends, who really do not know each other, and if not thoroughly verified; ask your doctor and do not ask questions about social groups, asking opinions; recognize that the frightening‘’s things that attract our attention are not necessarily the most risky; Contain fear and avoid making decisions until the panic has passed; if symptoms appear such as panic, anxiety or depression consult the specialist for a proper diagnosis.
Il Fatto Quotidiano
As it rises, inevitably, the number of infections from Cov2 sars also increases people’s anxiety and fear. The outbreak, due to the coronavirus, has two faces: one biological and one more mind-bound, cognitive. “Human beings– explains Enrico Zanalda, president of the Italian Society of Psychiatry (sip) and director of the Department of Mental Health of’ASL TO3 and – have a common fear: the fear of being overwhelmed by an epidemic. It is a fear so deep that it leads to uncontrolled actions, those of those who no longer know what to do and try them all to save themselves. This atavistic fear is amplified by the infodemia, the viral and very fast diffusion, which in the past did not exist, of partial and contradictory, if not even false, news that can cause a breakdown of confidence in relationships between people and institutions, and make more powerful the effect on the psyche of a phenomenon that has always existed”.
“In Italy, which is the European country with the highest number of cases – explains Professor Massimo Di giannantonio, elected president of the sip and ordinary of psychiatry at the University of Chieti-There are unjustified and excessive psychological reactions to the spread of the virus, together with the measures taken by the authorities to contain the infection. An anxiety-inducing mix that has altered our habits and the perception of individual health and well-being. We are therefore not only attacked by a severe flu virus but also by a cognitive epidemic that is likely to generate not only fright and confusion but also mass panic and anxiety by untori”. “Each of us...
Leon Panetta: Former White House Chief of Staff, CIA Director, and Secretary of Defense - from Remarkable People of Guy Kawasaki
from Guy Kawasaki's mailing list
suscribe guy kawasaki's remarkable people podcast HERE:
many thanks to Guy to let me share is work on my non commercial, time out, blog .c.o.
| ||||
|
many thanks to Guy to let me share is work on my non commercial, time out, blog .c.o.
Monday 24 February 2020
Thursday 20 February 2020
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)