these pages are dedicated to
political philosophy -- unseparable from language
democratic development -- and language philosophy: e.g. M.Foucault
economic human rights
see our first (with FREE PC test) and second and third and fourth servicepages,
and the list of cybercafes in vienna, austria + worldwide cybercafes infolinks
take 2 clicks time to donate RICE at UNO thehungersite
(1 click = 1 1/4 cup of rice, their
see doctors without borders or cerj.org for the reverse side of wealth:
democratic offensive, kwru, augustin: seen already?
human RIGHTS are much. aclu.org does more. but longterm human LIBERTARIAN FREEDOMS are the least against anti-democratic hierarchies.
(dont miss our middle european comments -- choose from choose from 500+ tv + newspaper + magazine online services
***
1) why situational perceptivity?
2) what's around?
3) situational perceptivity faq
***
remark: situational perceptivity is strongly related to non-measurable and non-evaluable parts
of the human soul and personality (and this is very good so)
-- and this implies that taboos and "undesired" things and thoughts around us should not be ignored.
examples are the psychosophy page
and -- as it goes deeper -- even more (though hardly readable yet) the harassment page there:
formulation is not perfect at all, there.
many subjective feelings are attempted to generalize where they are related to other people, too.
(i would not alledge i really succeeded in this point either, so far)
and most readers will possibly feel offended by one or the other point, there
-- situational perceptivity is somewhat "nearer" to a non-offendable and "readable" discussion basis.
1) why situational perceptivity?
simple question, simple answer: web communication uses (D)HTML, XML,
SML or similar "clear" languages where sender and receiver
have a fair opportunity of
(sender) knowing what will be understood (by the receiver)
and (receiver) knowing what was sent and meant (by the sender).
human communication is not as clear, as long as speaker and listener
have their own personalities.
(this is certainly not expressing hope that this should be suppressed)
"own personality" means that words and expressions are u s e d ,
the meaning of which is "perceived" or "understood" following a
learning process from childhood upto the moment of the
actual communication (of the sender).
it means also that words and expressions are u n d e r s t o o d
(perceived) in a way developing from childhood upto the moment of the
actual communication (of the receiver, now).
conscient and unconscient portions of this perception
(and perceptional gaps, their problems and intentional exploitations)
due to language structure (and the structure of language, itself)
are subject of language philosophy.
t h i n k i n g "behind" the communicative "interface" of persons,
and of thinking/acting interrelations, is also subject of "general"
philosophy "itself", and it is not simple to draw "borderlines"
between "fields" of philosophy.
situational perceptivity philosophy, however, intends to focus
on the fact that
* communication depends on sender, receiver and perceptivities
of the participating persons
* perceptivity of a person depends on the situation of the
communication (rather than on "personality profiles"
of the participating persons)
application example: "crime" is not a question of "good" and "bad"
but a question of conflict and (un)solution.
(see cerj.org for more)
logical consequence is that it makes sense rather to speak about
"situational profile(s) of crime(s)" (involving persons, of course)
than of the "personality profile(s) of criminal(s)"
2nd application example: (intended) perceptivity gaps occur e.g.
around "cheating" or harassing situations,
mobbing and bossing (sometimes it is even
"concepts" rather than just situations)
(see "harassment concepts"
for a very uncomplete fragment of thoughts
around cheating and harassing.
3nd application example: hidden behind "cultural perception gaps"
are often (situational, accidental)
hierarchy problems; or a problem of (intended)
"hierarchymaking" and "dependencemaking".
now this one is not so simple:
to the extents of closeness to the society basis (bases)
-- of that hierarchy problem -- this becomes a problem of
democratic development itself (in all involved societies of the
"problematic situation"):
each attempt to find solutions, even punctually, will be possibly
torpedoed by the "partner(s)" of the (intended) "perceptional problem"
in that specific problem point(s) of the situation,
or the (accidental) problem will have at least multiple perception/gap
aspects.
when teams of negociators are involved, this leads to quite
complex perception/gap/attempt/rejection/solution structures.
(too complex to discuss it out fully, here. this is only a fragment)
fragment, notes:
(12/1999)
situational perceptivity concept, comprehension <-> perceptivity
==================================================================
monstrosity theater?
post-empirismus: "wahr ist, was man den leuten einreden kann"
(cf. feyerabend)
konflikt: cf. blondel
perceptivity: depends on
situation (environment: things + persons + world view(s) etc.)
person(s), i.e. (animus/anima combination(s) of self and environment
by/of the persons in that environment, including "successful"
and attempted e.g. suggestive influencing methods/elements
to consciously control/block/widen another's (un)conscience
by introducing/blocking play "rules", game "formalisms"
controlling talking/conversation contents etc.
-- all of these suggestive influencing methods/elements
prevent from "pure" thinking, or reduce the "amount"
of abstractive thinking in quality/quantity, respectively)
communication infrastructure (situation, formal/nonformal relations,
verbal/nonverbal language)
communication disposition, i.e. will + ability pattern(s)
(person, mastering and emotional relation to communication means,
to environment, and to other persons)
this massively implies language philosophy (cf. foucault,
ferdinand de saussure, earlier humboldt)
and phenomenology (cf. husserl, derrida)
implied = deconstruction:
basically, in every thought/concept a content is described
positively (directly/indirectly, verbally/nonverbally, formally/unformally)
and other content(s) are excluded without being mentioned
(just by existence/way of expression of the positive content)
= concept of "diffe'rence" (any identity includes its difference
towards other identities)
= concept of "trace" or "rail" (german: spur; a railway or carriage track
eases transportation while leaving landscape environment aside;
cf. levinas: "trace of difference" (german: spur der andersheit),
considering a text as a tissue/texture never entirely "interpretable",
because unformulated areas outside of formulated "traces" or "rails" are
considered to be interrelated to each other in endless chains)
from foucaul-.999 copied:
(* comment: without entering a "truth" discourse,
here, appearently humans feel very different things
"true", "valid", "contradictionfree" or "reliable",
depending on the density of humans and on
hierarchical pressure they are exposed to
-- but disregardable of the person those
"values" seem to be similar or equal for humans
in the same situation, i.e. density/hierarchical
pressure etc., as different those "equalities"
might be for different situations *end comment)
9911:
=====
kant: "synthetisches vermoegen" => "einheit von sinnlichkeit + verstand"
heidegger: "synthetisches vermoegen" (gefunden im begriff der)
= transzendentale(n) einbildungskraft
husserl: "sinnliche und kategoriale anschauungen"
1) foucault <> derrida:
=======================
foucault = concept of "development" > "facticity"
<>
derrida = concept of "uncheatable facticity" (german: unhintergehbare faktizitaet")
2) husserl <> derrida:
======================
husserl = concept of a "purity of inner constellation" (german: reine innerlichkeit)
<>
derrida = concept of "contamination" > "purity"
3) DIMENSION of derrida's philosophy is strongly related to PHENOMENOLOGY,
============
but with opposite orientation to husserl (cf. above),
i.e. contamination as an "incheatable facticity"
rather than (foucault's) development
and/of (husserl's) "purity of inner constellation"
cit. katharina mai: husserl's concept of a "pure inner constellation"
german: reine innerlichkeit)
be "overcome" by a concept of "contamination"
a) 1972, in "positions" (3 interviews), derrida explains
== determinant influences on his thinking in general:
hegel (dialectics)
marx (marxism)
freud + jacques lacan (psychoanalysis)
ferdinand de saussure (semiologie)
(de saussure is "structuralism" language
philosopher also strongly related to foucault;
cf. also humboldt's language theory)
b) in "structure, sign and play in the discourse of the human sciences",
== derrida describes the influences on his "deconstruction" concept:
(X) i.e.
freud: concept that the (conscient) "ego" is not the "lord" any more
in the "own house" of the self (but an underlying unconscience controls
i.e. limits/directs/diverts/widens/... conscience)
nietzsche: concept of "play" and the interaction (german: verwickeltsein)
of the reader/player in(to) the text/play
(cf. derrida, "la disse'mination", 1972)
heidegger: phenomenology of freedom; in early years studying theology
and calling for "strong leaders" and "abrupt changes"
(devoted to nazi germany until 1934), heidegger later analyzed
"fuehrer principle" and the total(itarian) order state as a
compensation of an inner nihilism and an entire emptiness,
-- a similar nihilism problem is found again with
religion philosopher and theologist karl rahner --
and even anticipated later ecology movements in speeches
on "technology" and "turn", 1962 (ecology was a first begin
of critics on technology and technocracy, on their worldwide
destructive "rules" and hierarchies, 1970-80).
c) 1967, in "l'ecriture et la difference", derrida had related his work
== to the "theater of cruelty" of antonin artaud,
to hegelian george bataille, to michel foucault et levinas
======================================================================
francois marie voltaire (arouet) 1694-1778, who would not consider himself
as a philosopher but chose the form of cynism
to formulate his thoughts into various publications
around political philosophy and social analysis;
voltaire became a main figure in eclairation
(german: aufklaerung)
======================================================================
PHILOSOPHY:
===========
if the assumption is true that philosophy basically always
originates from questioning existing hierarchies (of persons or concepts)
bringing negative emotional/rational experiences to the philosopher,
then 2 conclusions follow:
1) considering the philosopher-hierarchy relation:
1a) hierarchically "positive" personal ... (german: praegung)
leads to a "new" hierarchic personality (of the philosopher) and to a
philosophy not really excluding (the "own", or positively experienced)
hierarchies,
i.e. hierarchic persons', thoughts' and concepts' structures are
questioned but "new"/"own" hierarchic persons', thoughts' and concepts'
structures are formed (cf. marxism: thesis + antithesis = synthesis)
it might sound like a cynism, but hitler's attempt to erase
jewish participation in life and economy might have been
such an attempt to reduce hierarchies (where he saw them),
while his own hierarchic personality and cooperation with war
preparation of the hierarchic military led to one of the worst
(counter-?) hierarchies in history)
1b) hierarchically "negative" personal ... (german: praegung)
leads to questioning (the concept of) "hierarchy" itself,
and to "attempts" to analyze/formulate (basically the same) questions
and thoughts from a standpoint/horizon of reduced hierarchic view.
-- why "attempts"?
nobody really grows up without hierarchies, and this restriction
determines or at least influences always the result of thinking:
the most primitive hierarchy is hierarchy of age,
from "getting sunlight" hierarchy of plants
to "getting nurture/food" hierarchy of animals
to ("primitive") hierarchies of (physically) "the stronger one"
(cf. lynch justice and its "modern" counterpart, legal killing,
"death penalty", "capital punishment", kz camps, jails etc.,
provided by a "police" and "justice" system FORMED BY HUMANS/PERSONS
who put into "reality" the process until (personal, monetary, or
whatever) execution in forms mostly TOO COMPLICATED TO SEE THROUGH
(i.e. through every single personal interaction of those
humans/persons who are not a bit better than previous
obvious physical violence, of course, because they are simply
(X) human persons, too, but who claim recognition and income from
taxes under pretext/reason of acting "legally")
to (contemporary, mostly inconscious) hierarchies of other structures
mostly felt "adequate", "justified" or "right"
(e.g. legal hierarchies, monetary hierarchies, social hierarchies,
and/or their interactions which are by far not easily seen through,
if seen through at all:
(X) -- this is not a plaidoyer for introducing "computer judges":
it is obvious that a pure mechanic execution of physical, mental
or other violence of body, soul, spirit or other constellation(s)
would not be better but just NOT human, call it UNhuman or INhuman!,
as long as counter-violence-concepts like "justice" and "punishment"
prevail,
although reproducibility of computers/robots brought good experiences
when creating "positive" concepts: a computer phone application or
a welding robot simply cannot do else but handling a phone call
or a weld: the difference to radical religious concepts is,
that humans persistenty (try to) impose(d) restrictions
to other humans by respective "legal" physical violence:
cf. catholic inquisition 1000 years ago, or islamic radicalism today
or "war religions" dominating europe/1940ies, korea/1950ies,
vietnam/1960ies, cambodia/1970ies, africa/1980ies-1990ies,
and europe again.
2) considering the philosophy-society relation
regardless of social structure:
if the above onclusions are true -- where esp. 1a) should not be
misunderstood as an depreciation of philosophers to be "querulant"
objects of mobbing who take revenge with intellectual means --
then a very discomfortable thought would be the consequence,
i.e.
2a) that the combination of hierarchically "positive" personalities
and intellectual output would solely be the result of
negative experiences of the philosopher with ruling hierarchies,
either wanted by mobbing (to produce formulation for further suppression)
or unwanted (in the sense of democratic opposition or dissidents)
-- this would mean that the most dangerous "time bomb" for democratic
basis and life of a society exists in its school system, where
teachers usually are only employed when they are extremely loyal
to prevailing hierarchies of "public" employers' and parents' structures,
this misrelation still sharpened by usual job shortness effects
such as "competition" for (not enough) jobs,
while their pushing production of intellectual output (of their students)
creates further vicious circles (german: teufelskreis) of
hierarchies with their inherent (anti-demcratic)> effects.
2b) that philosophers become only then (known) philosophers,
if their work either seizes and "speaks out of the soul" of
"enough" people (reading and communicating their work)
-- being "enough" under hierarchic pressure themselves,
i.e. preferredly in anti-democratic periods, dictatorships,
absolute monarchies etc. --
or if their work or personalities puts (key figures themselves, of)
reigning "ruling" hierarchies under fear and pressure
for some actual or weird reason
-- otherwise those would, step by step, ignore, or ridiculize,
or suppress philosophers and other intellectuals
by either censoring their intellectual output or by personal
suppression (damaging personal credibility, sympathy "accounts" etc.):
cf. the "case" of medical doctor Ignaz Semmelweis ca. 100 years ago
who "landed" in a closed psychiatric clinic,
having recommended to his colleagues to wash their hands
after work on dead bodies in anatomy section rooms when walking over
to birth rooms:
this later lowered deadly blood poisoning of women giving birth,
and of their babies, by 50% at that time,
but recognition came still much later, while Semmelweis' advice
obviously first led to enemyship of hierarchies of "colleagues" ...
3) the real sad thing comes now:
if those assumptions and conclusions are true within statistical
"truth" probabilities (i.e. with "mean value", standard deviation,
and "exception from the rule" considerations as any "truth"
in science)
then (of course these lines are subject to the hierarchy influence,
too, "positively" or negatively)
this would mean that no philosophy so far would (have) exist(ed)
for the sake of alterating oneself, o.s.'s thinking nor thinking frames,
but that almost all philosophical output is initiated by hierarchy
pressure, either consciously with defined purpose (in the sense of
an "advocatus diaboli" tom-and-jerry-game)
or by accident (unwanted or unconsciously initiated) leading to
thinking (frames) where thinking originally was undesired.
except if there is a logical error in this above chain,
this would mean that humans "in power" (politics) should opt
for a quick reduction of the (still in modern) society cheat basis
they live from:
because if one more logical step (of analogy) is true,
then earlier or later the logical development of thinking
will go from "religion(s)" to "eclairation" and "philosophy"
to (analytic, logical, "philosophical") thinking as a common
property of practically all humans.
(cf. development qualities and speeds of mechanical energy,
transportation, communication, sciences etc. from inquisition
to internet)
since even longterm cheating concepts in human interaction
(from "politics" to "laws" to "markets") have an end of their
life cycles, "cheaters beware" will come perhaps quicker than expected:
jean baudrillard (1929- ) states that "power donates life" and that
"economy makes slaves to workers", where power and economy exist only
as long as death is delayed.
killing the "undesired" (physically, spiritually, mentally, monetary etc.)
does not extinguish the "undesired" at all (cf. hitler + his view of jews)
but makes problems conscient. (cf. martyrs)
and thinking workers as well as thinking slaves (or their modern
counterparts, "subcontractors") earlier or later seize their suppressors.
historically there is a strong example in this ceased 20th century:
beside german military war preparation and the catastrophic hierarchy
(anti-democratic) situation 1918-38, theodor herzl's concept of a
jewish national state (1901-1904, then continued to a jewish renaissance
movement) could easily have been an additional thrive to nazi strength
-- i.e. a thrust to "defend catholic europe" against non-catholics,
thereby giving the nazis broad (catholic = mass media in churches)
infrastructure support, without which hitler might have only continues
his speeches at pub beer tables.
(cf. martin buber, 1878-1965, on chassidism, bible, and language
philosophers johann georg hamann, soeren kierkegaard, ludwig feuerbach
and georg simmel)
======================================================================
children:
contemporary slaves (of soul violence)
-- a child's creativity could initiate the greatest developments,
("why can't you carry a phone or a radio like a watch at your arm?")
but will never get a cent of payment for that.
-- mechanism is recognition exploitation
(seeking recognition by adults in the insecure emotional world
of a child -- insecured consciously by adults --
moreover is additionally exploited arbitrarily by adults
and their increasing pressure onto childs, increasing further
children's emotional insecurity thereby)
======================================================================
(which the philosopher experiences personally,
emotionally and/or rationally, and negatively).
various philosophers go through various developments.
======================================================================
"inherited"
===========
<=> "reducing" an individual person onto the level/horizon/environment
of that person's parents/family
("reducing" is chosen as an appropriate expression, because
the following deals with social effects where a
parents'/family's level/horizon/environment is used to impose
r e s t r i c t i o n s on that person, such as
dependence directly, or restrictions as basis for other purposes
e.g. starting with dependencemaking before coming to the purpose itself).
THEORIES of "inherited" properties (diseases, mental or character
properties, social environment problematics etc.):
no wonder that credibility was achieved by such nonsense
-- one of the most "important" elements of dependencemaking
is hierarchymaking,
-- and hierarchymaking is not only an element to prevent
democratic development, it is also an important "tool" of
dependencemaking, because e.g. mobbing as one "tool" of dependencemaking
is much simpler if the actual "doing" can be delegated
(and delegation works only if some sort of at least functional
hierarchy is present, e.g. with "excuse" of a "work" purpose)
-- and the oldest (and most primitive, though most efficient)
hierarchy(making method) is age hierarchy
-- and the oldest (and still 100% established, with esp. children
hardly to escape) age hierarchy is being exposed to parents.
putting these thoughts into context implies consciousness by
either (at least one of) the persons socially participating
in the above social mechanisms,
(e.g. any of the hierarchy members for any personal reason),
or (at least one of) the persons(s) establishing/operating
the whole structure (consisting of the persons
socially participating in the above social mechanisms).
(and check those concepts above, what for they serve still today,
just check it in your own cercles of acquaintances and family)
q:
a:
recommended software:
(no liability can be taken, but all listed programs are virusfree and troianfree in their 1999 versions)
* nuts+bolts or norton 2000 or firstaid (elder version)
* memturbo
* DU meter webtacho
* cpuCool and cpuIdle mainboard coolers
* diskKeeper 503 full version + server defragmenter
* FTP voyager (WS_FTP available but case sensitivity troubles happen)
* "pro" versions of ferretsoft's "ferret" searchers
* ssspider, sssiter and ssscanner metacrawlers
* pcAnywhere remote training helper
* offlineExplorer and teleportPro offline browsers
* clipHistory
cannot find txtserve pages? please search "txtserve" at www.altavista.com,
www.alta-vista.net, www.lycos.com or other search engines.
see also the ("real":) freeware list at www.t0.or.at/~txtserve/download
(not complete yet!!) and www.freeware.at shareware at
www.download.com www.shareware.com www.zdnet.com www.tucows.com
or searching for what you look for, at www.altavista.com
www.altavista.de www.yahoo.com www.yahoo.de www.ask.com
www.lycos.com www.alltheweb.com www.fireball.de
(or searching +search +engine at any of those)
feedback at angelfire.com (USA) or t0.or.at (europe)
please sponsor + support txtserve.org by clicking as many e-cards, as possible,
from THIS page -- they are FREE -- and send them to your friends!
(e-cards has promised to pay for each click from here)
thank you --
Choose these FREE e-cards from our sponsor, for example:
Anniversary Birthday Special Occasions Valentine's Day Invitations
Animals Cartoons Arts and Culture Interactive New Cards
notes:
======
veto for each
montesquieu
monetary
weizsaecker
democratic <-> freedom
"consequences cheat" ("consequ" = harassment of others:
depending on "power" = staatsgewalt, mobbing, ..)
harassments, mobbing, bossing, smit.99c, reacti~3.txt
notizen