Friam

[[Narcissism Again]again]

Classic

List

Threaded

50 messages Options

123

Nick Thompson

[[Narcissism Again]again]

Hi everybody,

I kind of got buried by the list last week, but we seem to keep coming back to this topic, even when we are talking about globalism.

So. Let me just share one thought. I have said a hundred times that I think the great achievement of the Right in my life time has been to problematize (Ugh!) the Deweyan consensus of the 1950’s One of the elements of that consensus was that there is a truth of most matters and if we gather inclusively, talk calmly, reason closely, study carefully, investigate rigorously, we will, together , come to it. What was, at the time of my coming of age, the shared foundation of argument, became over last 50 years, a position in the argument. The alternative to this Deweyan position seems to be something like, “There is no truth of the matter; there is only the exercise of power. He who wins the argument, by whatever means, wins the truth. Truth is not something that is arrived at; it is won.”

So. My sense of trump is that in fact, he is not lying. On the contrary, he does not share the view of discourse that makes lying a possibility. From Trump’s point of view, “Whatever I can win with is true.” Hence, if he wins with what we call “a lie”, it is true.

I feel we are straying along the edge of some Nietzschean chasm here. Unfortunately I haven’t read any Nietzsche . A brief rummage in Wikipedia, led me to The Parable of the Madman. And THAT led me to wonder if the TV Series, Madmen, about marketing execs in the 60’s, was written with Nietzsche in mind. In any case, if there is ever a domain in which the truth is that which wins, it would be marketing.

So, if we are going to counter Trump, it cannot be by demonstrating that he lies. It has to be by demonstrating that liars don’t win.

Heavy lift.

Nick

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Owen Densmore

Re: [[Narcissism Again]again]

Administrator

problematize (Ugh!) the Deweyan

to see as problematic?

On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 5:57 PM, Nick Thompson <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi everybody,

I kind of got buried by the list last week, but we seem to keep coming back to this topic, even when we are talking about globalism.

So. Let me just share one thought. I have said a hundred times that I think the great achievement of the Right in my life time has been to problematize (Ugh!) the Deweyan consensus of the 1950’s One of the elements of that consensus was that there is a truth of most matters and if we gather inclusively, talk calmly, reason closely, study carefully, investigate rigorously, we will, together , come to it. What was, at the time of my coming of age, the shared foundation of argument, became over last 50 years, a position in the argument. The alternative to this Deweyan position seems to be something like, “There is no truth of the matter; there is only the exercise of power. He who wins the argument, by whatever means, wins the truth. Truth is not something that is arrived at; it is won.”

So. My sense of trump is that in fact, he is not lying. On the contrary, he does not share the view of discourse that makes lying a possibility. From Trump’s point of view, “Whatever I can win with is true.” Hence, if he wins with what we call “a lie”, it is true.

I feel we are straying along the edge of some Nietzschean chasm here. Unfortunately I haven’t read any Nietzsche . A brief rummage in Wikipedia, led me to The Parable of the Madman. And THAT led me to wonder if the TV Series, Madmen, about marketing execs in the 60’s, was written with Nietzsche in mind. In any case, if there is ever a domain in which the truth is that which wins, it would be marketing.

So, if we are going to counter Trump, it cannot be by demonstrating that he lies. It has to be by demonstrating that liars don’t win.

Heavy lift.

Nick

Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
Clark University
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Marcus G. Daniels

Re: [[Narcissism Again]again]

In reply to this post by Nick Thompson

Nick writes:

“There is no truth of the matter; there is only the exercise of power. “

[..]

“So, if we are going to counter Trump, it cannot be by demonstrating that he lies. It has to be by demonstrating that liars don’t win.”

He’s old and nearing the last round of his iterated Prisoner’s Dilemma game. He wants everyone to know about his power and -- this is perhaps giving him too much credit -- his defection. As far as objective consequences to denying the truth, what are possible ways he could go down?

1) He fails to make policies that are consistent with economic possibility and creates a serious global recession.

2) He insults the GOP leadership and bullies them when they are not going to move.

3) He does more illegal things thinking no one will notice, and is forced out in disgrace like Nixon.

4) He deregulates to the point that there is a conspicuous health or safety crisis that impacts millions.

Climate change probably won’t get him in the next four years unless there is some big tipping point.

If any of these things happen, it would probably unspool the whole administration, but not necessarily.

Marcus

Owen Densmore

Re: [[Narcissism Again]again]

Administrator

Just a thought: Don't emergency rooms have to treat anyone who walks through the door?

I recall seeing a *lot* of that when my mom-in-law was in the hospital. These were folks with fairly minor problems like a rash or the flu. And I'm delighted they got care.

So all minimizing ACA will do is up the federal dollars going to hospitals, right?

-- Owen

On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 6:41 PM, Marcus Daniels <[hidden email]> wrote:

Nick writes:

“There is no truth of the matter; there is only the exercise of power. “

[..]

“So, if we are going to counter Trump, it cannot be by demonstrating that he lies. It has to be by demonstrating that liars don’t win.”

He’s old and nearing the last round of his iterated Prisoner’s Dilemma game. He wants everyone to know about his power and -- this is perhaps giving him too much credit -- his defection.   As far as objective consequences to denying the truth, what are possible ways he could go down?

1)      He fails to make policies that are consistent with economic possibility and creates a serious global recession.

2)      He insults the GOP leadership and bullies them when they are not going to move.

3)      He does more illegal things thinking no one will notice, and is forced out in disgrace like Nixon.

4)      He deregulates to the point that there is a conspicuous health or safety crisis that impacts millions.

Climate change probably won’t get him in the next four years unless there is some big tipping point.

If any of these things happen, it would probably unspool the whole administration, but not necessarily.

Marcus

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Nick Thompson

Re: [[Narcissism Again]again]

In reply to this post by Owen Densmore

Sorry. It’s one of those words I use because I thought everybody ELSE knows what it means. I guess I meant, “To cause what had hitherto been seen as straightforward to be thought of as a problem.” To undermine a consensus. N

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Owen Densmore
Sent: Friday, January 27, 2017 6:40 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Cc: penny thompson <[hidden email]>; Bruce Simon <[hidden email]>; Dix McComas <[hidden email]>; Grant Franks <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] [[Narcissism Again]again]

problematize (Ugh!) the Deweyan

to see as problematic?

On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 5:57 PM, Nick Thompson <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi everybody,

I kind of got buried by the list last week, but we seem to keep coming back to this topic, even when we are talking about globalism.

So. Let me just share one thought. I have said a hundred times that I think the great achievement of the Right in my life time has been to problematize (Ugh!) the Deweyan consensus of the 1950’s One of the elements of that consensus was that there is a truth of most matters and if we gather inclusively, talk calmly, reason closely, study carefully, investigate rigorously, we will, together , come to it. What was, at the time of my coming of age, the shared foundation of argument, became over last 50 years, a position in the argument. The alternative to this Deweyan position seems to be something like, “There is no truth of the matter; there is only the exercise of power. He who wins the argument, by whatever means, wins the truth. Truth is not something that is arrived at; it is won.”

So. My sense of trump is that in fact, he is not lying. On the contrary, he does not share the view of discourse that makes lying a possibility. From Trump’s point of view, “Whatever I can win with is true.” Hence, if he wins with what we call “a lie”, it is true.

I feel we are straying along the edge of some Nietzschean chasm here. Unfortunately I haven’t read any Nietzsche . A brief rummage in Wikipedia, led me to The Parable of the Madman. And THAT led me to wonder if the TV Series, Madmen, about marketing execs in the 60’s, was written with Nietzsche in mind. In any case, if there is ever a domain in which the truth is that which wins, it would be marketing.

So, if we are going to counter Trump, it cannot be by demonstrating that he lies. It has to be by demonstrating that liars don’t win.

Heavy lift.

Nick

Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
Clark University
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Frank Wimberly-2

Re: [[Narcissism Again]again]

Glen said I hadn't provided enough evidence. Arguing by citing authority I offer:

http://bipartisanreport.com/2017/01/27/johns-hopkins-top-psychotherapist-releases-terrifying-diagnosis-of-president-trump/

Frank

Frank Wimberly
Phone (505) 670-9918

On Jan 27, 2017 7:04 PM, "Nick Thompson" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Sorry. It’s one of those words I use because I thought everybody ELSE knows what it means. I guess I meant, “To cause what had hitherto been seen as straightforward to be thought of as a problem.” To undermine a consensus. N

Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
Clark University
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Owen Densmore
Sent: Friday, January 27, 2017 6:40 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Cc: penny thompson <[hidden email]>; Bruce Simon <[hidden email]>; Dix McComas <[hidden email]>; Grant Franks <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] [[Narcissism Again]again]

problematize (Ugh!) the Deweyan
to see as problematic?

On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 5:57 PM, Nick Thompson <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi everybody,

I kind of got buried by the list last week, but we seem to keep coming back to this topic, even when we are talking about globalism.

So. Let me just share one thought. I have said a hundred times that I think the great achievement of the Right in my life time has been to problematize (Ugh!) the Deweyan consensus of the 1950’s One of the elements of that consensus was that there is a truth of most matters and if we gather inclusively, talk calmly, reason closely, study carefully, investigate rigorously, we will, together , come to it. What was, at the time of my coming of age, the shared foundation of argument, became over last 50 years, a position in the argument. The alternative to this Deweyan position seems to be something like, “There is no truth of the matter; there is only the exercise of power. He who wins the argument, by whatever means, wins the truth. Truth is not something that is arrived at; it is won.”

So. My sense of trump is that in fact, he is not lying. On the contrary, he does not share the view of discourse that makes lying a possibility. From Trump’s point of view, “Whatever I can win with is true.” Hence, if he wins with what we call “a lie”, it is true.

I feel we are straying along the edge of some Nietzschean chasm here. Unfortunately I haven’t read any Nietzsche . A brief rummage in Wikipedia, led me to The Parable of the Madman. And THAT led me to wonder if the TV Series, Madmen, about marketing execs in the 60’s, was written with Nietzsche in mind. In any case, if there is ever a domain in which the truth is that which wins, it would be marketing.

So, if we are going to counter Trump, it cannot be by demonstrating that he lies. It has to be by demonstrating that liars don’t win.

Heavy lift.

Nick

Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
Clark University
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Frank Wimberly-2

Re: [[Narcissism Again]again]

Anti-social behavior. Trump University, grabbing "women".
Sadism. Mocking disabled person
Aggressiveness. Kicking people out of his rallies.
Paranoia. The press is against me.
Grandiosity. I will be the greatest...Ever.
Entitled. Having affairs during three marriages.
Regressed. Tantrums.
Manipulative. Using distractions.
Destructive. Dismantling ACA.
Egocentric. I know more than the generals.
Use of projection. Ted Cruz and Hillary are liars.
Lack of conscience. Stiffing contractors.
Narcissistic. All of the above. I am the only one who can solve these problems.

Examples by me.

Frank

Frank Wimberly
Phone (505) 670-9918

On Jan 27, 2017 7:14 PM, "Frank Wimberly" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Glen said I hadn't provided enough evidence. Arguing by citing authority I offer:

http://bipartisanreport.com/2017/01/27/johns-hopkins-top-psychotherapist-releases-terrifying-diagnosis-of-president-trump/

Frank

Frank Wimberly
Phone <a href="tel:(505)%20670-9918" value="+15056709918" target="_blank">(505) 670-9918

On Jan 27, 2017 7:04 PM, "Nick Thompson" <[hidden email]> wrote:
Sorry. It’s one of those words I use because I thought everybody ELSE knows what it means. I guess I meant, “To cause what had hitherto been seen as straightforward to be thought of as a problem.” To undermine a consensus. N

Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
Clark University
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Owen Densmore
Sent: Friday, January 27, 2017 6:40 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Cc: penny thompson <[hidden email]>; Bruce Simon <[hidden email]>; Dix McComas <[hidden email]>; Grant Franks <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] [[Narcissism Again]again]

problematize (Ugh!) the Deweyan
to see as problematic?

On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 5:57 PM, Nick Thompson <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi everybody,

I kind of got buried by the list last week, but we seem to keep coming back to this topic, even when we are talking about globalism.

So. Let me just share one thought. I have said a hundred times that I think the great achievement of the Right in my life time has been to problematize (Ugh!) the Deweyan consensus of the 1950’s One of the elements of that consensus was that there is a truth of most matters and if we gather inclusively, talk calmly, reason closely, study carefully, investigate rigorously, we will, together , come to it. What was, at the time of my coming of age, the shared foundation of argument, became over last 50 years, a position in the argument. The alternative to this Deweyan position seems to be something like, “There is no truth of the matter; there is only the exercise of power. He who wins the argument, by whatever means, wins the truth. Truth is not something that is arrived at; it is won.”

So. My sense of trump is that in fact, he is not lying. On the contrary, he does not share the view of discourse that makes lying a possibility. From Trump’s point of view, “Whatever I can win with is true.” Hence, if he wins with what we call “a lie”, it is true.

I feel we are straying along the edge of some Nietzschean chasm here. Unfortunately I haven’t read any Nietzsche . A brief rummage in Wikipedia, led me to The Parable of the Madman. And THAT led me to wonder if the TV Series, Madmen, about marketing execs in the 60’s, was written with Nietzsche in mind. In any case, if there is ever a domain in which the truth is that which wins, it would be marketing.

So, if we are going to counter Trump, it cannot be by demonstrating that he lies. It has to be by demonstrating that liars don’t win.

Heavy lift.

Nick

Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
Clark University
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Nick Thompson

Re: [[Narcissism Again]again]

In reply to this post by Marcus G. Daniels

By the way, all.

What nick said was, “[For such a person as trump,] there is no truth of the matter, there is only the exercise of power.”

Nick, himself, is irrationally dedicated to there being a truth, and that, with effort and good will, people can arrive at it.

[signed]

Nick

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Marcus Daniels
Sent: Friday, January 27, 2017 6:41 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Cc: penny thompson <[hidden email]>; 'Bruce Simon' <[hidden email]>; 'Dix McComas' <[hidden email]>; 'Grant Franks' <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] [[Narcissism Again]again]

Nick writes:

“There is no truth of the matter; there is only the exercise of power. “

[..]

“So, if we are going to counter Trump, it cannot be by demonstrating that he lies. It has to be by demonstrating that liars don’t win.”

1) He fails to make policies that are consistent with economic possibility and creates a serious global recession.

2) He insults the GOP leadership and bullies them when they are not going to move.

3) He does more illegal things thinking no one will notice, and is forced out in disgrace like Nixon.

4) He deregulates to the point that there is a conspicuous health or safety crisis that impacts millions.

Climate change probably won’t get him in the next four years unless there is some big tipping point.

If any of these things happen, it would probably unspool the whole administration, but not necessarily.

Marcus

Gillian Densmore

Re: [[Narcissism Again]again]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2YLS80Nmls

On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 8:31 PM, Nick Thompson <[hidden email]> wrote:

By the way, all.

What nick said was, “[For such a person as trump,] there is no truth of the matter, there is only the exercise of power.”

Nick, himself, is irrationally dedicated to there being a truth, and that, with effort and good will, people can arrive at it.

[signed]

Nick

Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
Clark University
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Marcus Daniels
Sent: Friday, January 27, 2017 6:41 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Cc: penny thompson <[hidden email]>; 'Bruce Simon' <[hidden email]>; 'Dix McComas' <[hidden email]>; 'Grant Franks' <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] [[Narcissism Again]again]

Nick writes:

“There is no truth of the matter; there is only the exercise of power. “

[..]

“So, if we are going to counter Trump, it cannot be by demonstrating that he lies. It has to be by demonstrating that liars don’t win.”

He’s old and nearing the last round of his iterated Prisoner’s Dilemma game. He wants everyone to know about his power and -- this is perhaps giving him too much credit -- his defection.   As far as objective consequences to denying the truth, what are possible ways he could go down?

1)      He fails to make policies that are consistent with economic possibility and creates a serious global recession.
2)      He insults the GOP leadership and bullies them when they are not going to move.
3)      He does more illegal things thinking no one will notice, and is forced out in disgrace like Nixon.
4)      He deregulates to the point that there is a conspicuous health or safety crisis that impacts millions.

Climate change probably won’t get him in the next four years unless there is some big tipping point.
If any of these things happen, it would probably unspool the whole administration, but not necessarily.

Marcus

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Marcus G. Daniels

Re: [[Narcissism Again]again]

In reply to this post by Nick Thompson

< What nick said was, “[For such a person as trump,] there is no truth of the matter, there is only the exercise of power.” >

I was capturing the essential bit. Nothing good ever comes from attribution.

Marcus

Nick Thompson

Re: [[Narcissism Again]again]

No problem, Marcus,

I think Friam’s thread-shortening algorithm cuts off at two, so I wanted to make sure that I had the last word.

No Nietszchean, I.

Nick

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Marcus Daniels
Sent: Friday, January 27, 2017 8:42 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] [[Narcissism Again]again]

< What nick said was, “[For such a person as trump,] there is no truth of the matter, there is only the exercise of power.” >

I was capturing the essential bit. Nothing good ever comes from attribution.

Marcus

David Eric Smith

Re: [SPAM] Re: [[Narcissism Again]again]

In reply to this post by Owen Densmore

Thank you for forwarding this Owen,

I didn’t receive the original.

> So. Let me just share one thought. I have said a hundred times that I think the great achievement of the Right in my life time has been to problematize (Ugh!) the Deweyan consensus of the 1950’s One of the elements of that consensus was that there is a truth of most matters and if we gather inclusively, talk calmly, reason closely, study carefully, investigate rigorously, we will, together , come to it. What was, at the time of my coming of age, the shared foundation of argument, became over last 50 years, a position in the argument. The alternative to this Deweyan position seems to be something like, “There is no truth of the matter; there is only the exercise of power. He who wins the argument, by whatever means, wins the truth. Truth is not something that is arrived at; it is won.”
>
> So, if we are going to counter Trump, it cannot be by demonstrating that he lies. It has to be by demonstrating that liars don’t win.

Nick, with the little clipping (done above) of what felt to me like a digression within this gem, it seems to me perfect. It is the return to a clear focus on the center of the problem that I have been looking for and not been able to express.

The thing is (acknowledging Marcus’s replies also, and the ensuing discussion of the scoping of the claim):

1. Regarding trump itself, I don’t care about it except as I would care if someone told me a vial of Marburg virus had been spilled on the kitchen floor. I would feel a sense of urgency to get a strong disinfectant to try somehow to scrub it out. If I felt I couldn’t get rid of it short of cutting out and replacing a part of the floor, that would be within bounds of the discussion. etc. at that level. I care a little more about several of the craven rats in the congress, enough to be angry at them, but again they can go into the autoclave with my blessing, and not much more interest than that. (I believe this is what the NYT editorial called the dehumanizing motive of contempt, and argued is a bad choice; it feels to me like they have more than earned the category on their own.)

2. But I read Nick as saying that The Problem, and the central accomplishment of the Right, has been to install this shift in position as a feature of the population and whatever one calls the “culture” of this (and probably several other) nation(s). That is what worries me, and drives a sense of urgency to fix a problem I do not know how to fix because I don’t understand how it can exist, much less be ascendent or robust. It’s not the same as losing piety or losing god (loss of mere cultural luxuries), to lose the sense of factual truth as something larger than one’s own petit ambitions or the scope of the tribe. In a big and complicated world where people have the impact they do, losing the factual sense of truth is commitment to an undignified form of suicide (emphasis on undignified, otherwise do as you like), alongside a lot of other -cides that are not morally defensible in any terms. To have arrived at a large number of people who have managed to somehow get on the wrong side of this point requires a kind of blindness that it is hard to see how to break through. The “demonstration that liars don’t win” is to be a demonstration to them (as I read Nick), to somehow flush out the narcotic that has them in this bizarre non-mental state, and make room for the common sense they routinely use when (for instance) not sticking their hands into the kitchen broiler or diving head-first onto the back patio, to again become the driver of decisions.

Any animal (that has a brain) has a part of its brain that is subservient to the consistency of nature that we call fact (filtered and processed, of course, but I claim still the point stands). The heavily social animals start to develop bigger veneers in which power starts to become a major motivator, and partitions tasks with those motivated by an awareness of fact. But even as socialized as people are, as long as they are not self-mutilators in a clinical sense, that part still seems no bigger than a veneer. Somehow it seems that cultures can, over decades, perform enough decadance that the scope of control of the veneer balloons and that pattern gets both frozen in to behavior and reified in a lot of constructed cultural supports. What is the manual for the needed task of jointly tearing out what needs it, and re-building what has been built wrongly?

Eric

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Jochen Fromm-5

Re: [[Narcissism Again]again]

In reply to this post by Nick Thompson

Yes, agree. Trump’s point of view is “Whatever I can win with is true.” And if he wins with what we call “a lie”, it is true for him. Exactly.

If you ask how we can counter and resist him, then I would say peaceful protests are the right way. The women's march was impressive, and the rebellion of the social media managers from the national parks is really refreshing. Who would have thought that the national parks would strike back? Like Treebeard who becomes alive.

In JK Rowling's novels it is the little creatures like the house elves that beat the evil in the end. In Tolkien's Lord of the Rings it is the Hobbits that beat the evil enemy. I think in this case people like Ken Bone are the Hobbits of the 21st century. The modern Hobbits are adverage midwestern guys who support Mr. T-Rump and his "party" on Twitter and hope to get a bit rich and famous along the way.

People like Ken Bone are like Frodo the Hobbit, Mr. T-Rump is Sauron and Jack Dorsey is the ringwraith. Will Ken Bone throw the ring into Mt. Doom, i.e. will he stop following Trump on Twitter and/or quit Twitter completely? If we all stop following and listening him he loses his power. This includes the senior Republican politicians who do not speak up against him because they hope for a job in his administration.

Cheers,

Jochen

Sent from my Tricorder

-------- Original message --------

From: Nick Thompson <[hidden email]>

Date: 1/28/17 01:57 (GMT+01:00)

To: Friam <[hidden email]>

Cc: penny thompson <[hidden email]>, 'Bruce Simon' <[hidden email]>, 'Dix McComas' <[hidden email]>, 'Grant Franks' <[hidden email]>

Subject: [FRIAM] [[Narcissism Again]again]

Hi everybody,

I kind of got buried by the list last week, but we seem to keep coming back to this topic, even when we are talking about globalism.

So, if we are going to counter Trump, it cannot be by demonstrating that he lies. It has to be by demonstrating that liars don’t win.

Heavy lift.

Nick

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

Nick Thompson

Re: [[Narcissism Again]again]

Dear All,

I have been teasing the Local Congregation about our role in the Narcissistic Revolution of the last 30 years … cable TV, the “personal” computer, the I-mac, the I-phone, You-tube, facebook, etc. What sort of bots and memes could people of our power and talent unleash into the world that would break this relentless cycle of positive reinforcement for narrowness of mind? Perhaps a video game where facts matter?

What can WE hobbits do?

Nick

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Jochen Fromm
Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2017 1:39 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>; Friam <[hidden email]>
Cc: penny thompson <[hidden email]>; 'Bruce Simon' <[hidden email]>; 'Dix McComas' <[hidden email]>; 'Grant Franks' <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] [[Narcissism Again]again]

Yes, agree. Trump’s point of view is “Whatever I can win with is true.” And if he wins with what we call “a lie”, it is true for him. Exactly.

Cheers,

Jochen

Sent from my Tricorder

-------- Original message --------

From: Nick Thompson <[hidden email]>

Date: 1/28/17 01:57 (GMT+01:00)

To: Friam <[hidden email]>

Cc: penny thompson <[hidden email]>, 'Bruce Simon' <[hidden email]>, 'Dix McComas' <[hidden email]>, 'Grant Franks' <[hidden email]>

Subject: [FRIAM] [[Narcissism Again]again]

Hi everybody,

I kind of got buried by the list last week, but we seem to keep coming back to this topic, even when we are talking about globalism.

So, if we are going to counter Trump, it cannot be by demonstrating that he lies. It has to be by demonstrating that liars don’t win.

Heavy lift.

Nick

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

Steve Smith

Re: [[Narcissism Again]again]

What can WE hobbits do?

Scratch our hairy knuckles and indulge in second dinnerses?

Fun aside, I DO appreciate your sentiment here and agree that the Narcissist in Chief is at least partly a (focused) reflection of our own worst qualities, and *perhaps* if we tend our own garden even a little, it will help with the greater picture.

- Candide

Nick

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

From: Friam [[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Jochen Fromm
Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2017 1:39 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group [hidden email]; Friam [hidden email]
Cc: penny thompson [hidden email]; 'Bruce Simon' [hidden email]; 'Dix McComas' [hidden email]; 'Grant Franks' [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] [[Narcissism Again]again]

Yes, agree. Trump’s point of view is “Whatever I can win with is true.” And if he wins with what we call “a lie”, it is true for him. Exactly.

If you ask how we can counter and resist him, then I would say peaceful protests are the right way. The women's march was impressive, and the rebellion of the social media managers from the national parks is really refreshing. Who would have thought that the national parks would strike back? Like Treebeard who becomes alive.

In JK Rowling's novels it is the little creatures like the house elves that beat the evil in the end. In Tolkien's Lord of the Rings it is the Hobbits that beat the evil enemy. I think in this case people like Ken Bone are the Hobbits of the 21st century. The modern Hobbits are adverage midwestern guys who support Mr. T-Rump and his "party" on Twitter and hope to get a bit rich and famous along the way.

People like Ken Bone are like Frodo the Hobbit, Mr. T-Rump is Sauron and Jack Dorsey is the ringwraith. Will Ken Bone throw the ring into Mt. Doom, i.e. will he stop following Trump on Twitter and/or quit Twitter completely? If we all stop following and listening him he loses his power. This includes the senior Republican politicians who do not speak up against him because they hope for a job in his administration.

Cheers,

Jochen

Sent from my Tricorder

-------- Original message --------

From: Nick Thompson <[hidden email]>

Date: 1/28/17 01:57 (GMT+01:00)

To: Friam <[hidden email]>

Cc: penny thompson <[hidden email]>, 'Bruce Simon' <[hidden email]>, 'Dix McComas' <[hidden email]>, 'Grant Franks' <[hidden email]>

Subject: [FRIAM] [[Narcissism Again]again]

Hi everybody,

I kind of got buried by the list last week, but we seem to keep coming back to this topic, even when we are talking about globalism.

So. Let me just share one thought. I have said a hundred times that I think the great achievement of the Right in my life time has been to problematize (Ugh!) the Deweyan consensus of the 1950’s One of the elements of that consensus was that there is a truth of most matters and if we gather inclusively, talk calmly, reason closely, study carefully, investigate rigorously, we will, together , come to it. What was, at the time of my coming of age, the shared foundation of argument, became over last 50 years, a position in the argument. The alternative to this Deweyan position seems to be something like, “There is no truth of the matter; there is only the exercise of power. He who wins the argument, by whatever means, wins the truth. Truth is not something that is arrived at; it is won.”

So. My sense of trump is that in fact, he is not lying. On the contrary, he does not share the view of discourse that makes lying a possibility. From Trump’s point of view, “Whatever I can win with is true.” Hence, if he wins with what we call “a lie”, it is true.

I feel we are straying along the edge of some Nietzschean chasm here. Unfortunately I haven’t read any Nietzsche . A brief rummage in Wikipedia, led me to The Parable of the Madman. And THAT led me to wonder if the TV Series, Madmen, about marketing execs in the 60’s, was written with Nietzsche in mind. In any case, if there is ever a domain in which the truth is that which wins, it would be marketing.

So, if we are going to counter Trump, it cannot be by demonstrating that he lies. It has to be by demonstrating that liars don’t win.

Heavy lift.

Nick

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Nick Thompson

Re: [SPAM] Re: [[Narcissism Again]again]

In reply to this post by David Eric Smith

Thank you, Eric,

Well clipped!

Nick

Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
Clark University
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

-----Original Message-----
From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Eric Smith
Sent: Friday, January 27, 2017 9:29 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] [SPAM] Re: [[Narcissism Again]again]

Thank you for forwarding this Owen,

I didn’t receive the original.

> So. Let me just share one thought. I have said a hundred times that I think the great achievement of the Right in my life time has been to problematize (Ugh!) the Deweyan consensus of the 1950’s One of the elements of that consensus was that there is a truth of most matters and if we gather inclusively, talk calmly, reason closely, study carefully, investigate rigorously, we will, together , come to it. What was, at the time of my coming of age, the shared foundation of argument, became over last 50 years, a position in the argument. The alternative to this Deweyan position seems to be something like, “There is no truth of the matter; there is only the exercise of power. He who wins the argument, by whatever means, wins the truth. Truth is not something that is arrived at; it is won.”
>
> So, if we are going to counter Trump, it cannot be by demonstrating that he lies. It has to be by demonstrating that liars don’t win.

Nick, with the little clipping (done above) of what felt to me like a digression within this gem, it seems to me perfect. It is the return to a clear focus on the center of the problem that I have been looking for and not been able to express.

The thing is (acknowledging Marcus’s replies also, and the ensuing discussion of the scoping of the claim):

1. Regarding trump itself, I don’t care about it except as I would care if someone told me a vial of Marburg virus had been spilled on the kitchen floor. I would feel a sense of urgency to get a strong disinfectant to try somehow to scrub it out. If I felt I couldn’t get rid of it short of cutting out and replacing a part of the floor, that would be within bounds of the discussion. etc. at that level. I care a little more about several of the craven rats in the congress, enough to be angry at them, but again they can go into the autoclave with my blessing, and not much more interest than that. (I believe this is what the NYT editorial called the dehumanizing motive of contempt, and argued is a bad choice; it feels to me like they have more than earned the category on their own.)

2. But I read Nick as saying that The Problem, and the central accomplishment of the Right, has been to install this shift in position as a feature of the population and whatever one calls the “culture” of this (and probably several other) nation(s). That is what worries me, and drives a sense of urgency to fix a problem I do not know how to fix because I don’t understand how it can exist, much less be ascendent or robust. It’s not the same as losing piety or losing god (loss of mere cultural luxuries), to lose the sense of factual truth as something larger than one’s own petit ambitions or the scope of the tribe. In a big and complicated world where people have the impact they do, losing the factual sense of truth is commitment to an undignified form of suicide (emphasis on undignified, otherwise do as you like), alongside a lot of other -cides that are not morally defensible in any terms. To have arrived at a large number of people who have managed to somehow get on the wrong side of this point requires a kind of blindness that it is hard to see how to break through. The “demonstration that liars don’t win” is to be a demonstration to them (as I read Nick), to somehow flush out the narcotic that has them in this bizarre non-mental state, and make room for the common sense they routinely use when (for instance) not sticking their hands into the kitchen broiler or diving head-first onto the back patio, to again become the driver of decisions.

Any animal (that has a brain) has a part of its brain that is subservient to the consistency of nature that we call fact (filtered and processed, of course, but I claim still the point stands). The heavily social animals start to develop bigger veneers in which power starts to become a major motivator, and partitions tasks with those motivated by an awareness of fact. But even as socialized as people are, as long as they are not self-mutilators in a clinical sense, that part still seems no bigger than a veneer. Somehow it seems that cultures can, over decades, perform enough decadance that the scope of control of the veneer balloons and that pattern gets both frozen in to behavior and reified in a lot of constructed cultural supports. What is the manual for the needed task of jointly tearing out what needs it, and re-building what has been built wrongly?

Eric

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Nick Thompson

Re: [[Narcissism Again]again]

In reply to this post by Steve Smith

Ok Steve,

The only reason to accept responsibility is to Take Charge.

I have been able to think of only one concrete thing that I can do with my limited set of skills: Write Apple and tell them to stop calling new products “I-this” and “I-that.” When are they going to release the WE-phone.

You must have something in your tool kit more effective than that!

Nick

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Steven A Smith
Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2017 9:38 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] [[Narcissism Again]again]

What can WE hobbits do?

Nick
Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
Clark University
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

From: Friam [[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Jochen Fromm
Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2017 1:39 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group [hidden email]; Friam [hidden email]
Cc: penny thompson [hidden email]; 'Bruce Simon' [hidden email]; 'Dix McComas' [hidden email]; 'Grant Franks' [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] [[Narcissism Again]again]

Yes, agree. Trump’s point of view is “Whatever I can win with is true.” And if he wins with what we call “a lie”, it is true for him. Exactly.

If you ask how we can counter and resist him, then I would say peaceful protests are the right way. The women's march was impressive, and the rebellion of the social media managers from the national parks is really refreshing. Who would have thought that the national parks would strike back? Like Treebeard who becomes alive.

In JK Rowling's novels it is the little creatures like the house elves that beat the evil in the end. In Tolkien's Lord of the Rings it is the Hobbits that beat the evil enemy. I think in this case people like Ken Bone are the Hobbits of the 21st century. The modern Hobbits are adverage midwestern guys who support Mr. T-Rump and his "party" on Twitter and hope to get a bit rich and famous along the way.

People like Ken Bone are like Frodo the Hobbit, Mr. T-Rump is Sauron and Jack Dorsey is the ringwraith. Will Ken Bone throw the ring into Mt. Doom, i.e. will he stop following Trump on Twitter and/or quit Twitter completely? If we all stop following and listening him he loses his power. This includes the senior Republican politicians who do not speak up against him because they hope for a job in his administration.

Cheers,

Jochen

Sent from my Tricorder

-------- Original message --------
From: Nick Thompson <[hidden email]>
Date: 1/28/17 01:57 (GMT+01:00)
To: Friam <[hidden email]>
Cc: penny thompson <[hidden email]>, 'Bruce Simon' <[hidden email]>, 'Dix McComas' <[hidden email]>, 'Grant Franks' <[hidden email]>
Subject: [FRIAM] [[Narcissism Again]again]

Hi everybody,
I kind of got buried by the list last week, but we seem to keep coming back to this topic, even when we are talking about globalism.
So. Let me just share one thought. I have said a hundred times that I think the great achievement of the Right in my life time has been to problematize (Ugh!) the Deweyan consensus of the 1950’s One of the elements of that consensus was that there is a truth of most matters and if we gather inclusively, talk calmly, reason closely, study carefully, investigate rigorously, we will, together , come to it. What was, at the time of my coming of age, the shared foundation of argument, became over last 50 years, a position in the argument. The alternative to this Deweyan position seems to be something like, “There is no truth of the matter; there is only the exercise of power. He who wins the argument, by whatever means, wins the truth. Truth is not something that is arrived at; it is won.”
So. My sense of trump is that in fact, he is not lying. On the contrary, he does not share the view of discourse that makes lying a possibility. From Trump’s point of view, “Whatever I can win with is true.” Hence, if he wins with what we call “a lie”, it is true.
I feel we are straying along the edge of some Nietzschean chasm here. Unfortunately I haven’t read any Nietzsche . A brief rummage in Wikipedia, led me to The Parable of the Madman. And THAT led me to wonder if the TV Series, Madmen, about marketing execs in the 60’s, was written with Nietzsche in mind. In any case, if there is ever a domain in which the truth is that which wins, it would be marketing.
So, if we are going to counter Trump, it cannot be by demonstrating that he lies. It has to be by demonstrating that liars don’t win.
Heavy lift.
Nick

Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
Clark University
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Robert J. Cordingley

Re: [[Narcissism Again]again]

The Washington Post has an interesting essay from a Venezuelan on what to do and mostly what not to do.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2017/01/27/in-venezuela-we-couldnt-stop-chavez-dont-make-the-same-mistakes-we-did

Robert C

On 1/28/17 11:21 AM, Nick Thompson wrote:

Ok Steve,

The only reason to accept responsibility is to Take Charge.

I have been able to think of only one concrete thing that I can do with my limited set of skills: Write Apple and tell them to stop calling new products “I-this” and “I-that.” When are they going to release the WE-phone.

You must have something in your tool kit more effective than that!

Nick

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

From: Friam [[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Steven A Smith
Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2017 9:38 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] [[Narcissism Again]again]

What can WE hobbits do?

Scratch our hairy knuckles and indulge in second dinnerses?

Fun aside, I DO appreciate your sentiment here and agree that the Narcissist in Chief is at least partly a (focused) reflection of our own worst qualities, and *perhaps* if we tend our own garden even a little, it will help with the greater picture.

- Candide
Nick

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

From: Friam [[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Jochen Fromm
Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2017 1:39 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group [hidden email]; Friam [hidden email]
Cc: penny thompson [hidden email]; 'Bruce Simon' [hidden email]; 'Dix McComas' [hidden email]; 'Grant Franks' [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] [[Narcissism Again]again]

Yes, agree. Trump’s point of view is “Whatever I can win with is true.” And if he wins with what we call “a lie”, it is true for him. Exactly.

If you ask how we can counter and resist him, then I would say peaceful protests are the right way. The women's march was impressive, and the rebellion of the social media managers from the national parks is really refreshing. Who would have thought that the national parks would strike back? Like Treebeard who becomes alive.

In JK Rowling's novels it is the little creatures like the house elves that beat the evil in the end. In Tolkien's Lord of the Rings it is the Hobbits that beat the evil enemy. I think in this case people like Ken Bone are the Hobbits of the 21st century. The modern Hobbits are adverage midwestern guys who support Mr. T-Rump and his "party" on Twitter and hope to get a bit rich and famous along the way.

People like Ken Bone are like Frodo the Hobbit, Mr. T-Rump is Sauron and Jack Dorsey is the ringwraith. Will Ken Bone throw the ring into Mt. Doom, i.e. will he stop following Trump on Twitter and/or quit Twitter completely? If we all stop following and listening him he loses his power. This includes the senior Republican politicians who do not speak up against him because they hope for a job in his administration.

Cheers,

Jochen

Sent from my Tricorder

-------- Original message --------

From: Nick Thompson <[hidden email]>

Date: 1/28/17 01:57 (GMT+01:00)

To: Friam <[hidden email]>

Cc: penny thompson <[hidden email]>, 'Bruce Simon' <[hidden email]>, 'Dix McComas' <[hidden email]>, 'Grant Franks' <[hidden email]>

Subject: [FRIAM] [[Narcissism Again]again]

Hi everybody,

I kind of got buried by the list last week, but we seem to keep coming back to this topic, even when we are talking about globalism.

So. Let me just share one thought. I have said a hundred times that I think the great achievement of the Right in my life time has been to problematize (Ugh!) the Deweyan consensus of the 1950’s One of the elements of that consensus was that there is a truth of most matters and if we gather inclusively, talk calmly, reason closely, study carefully, investigate rigorously, we will, together , come to it. What was, at the time of my coming of age, the shared foundation of argument, became over last 50 years, a position in the argument. The alternative to this Deweyan position seems to be something like, “There is no truth of the matter; there is only the exercise of power. He who wins the argument, by whatever means, wins the truth. Truth is not something that is arrived at; it is won.”

So. My sense of trump is that in fact, he is not lying. On the contrary, he does not share the view of discourse that makes lying a possibility. From Trump’s point of view, “Whatever I can win with is true.” Hence, if he wins with what we call “a lie”, it is true.

I feel we are straying along the edge of some Nietzschean chasm here. Unfortunately I haven’t read any Nietzsche . A brief rummage in Wikipedia, led me to The Parable of the Madman. And THAT led me to wonder if the TV Series, Madmen, about marketing execs in the 60’s, was written with Nietzsche in mind. In any case, if there is ever a domain in which the truth is that which wins, it would be marketing.

So, if we are going to counter Trump, it cannot be by demonstrating that he lies. It has to be by demonstrating that liars don’t win.

Heavy lift.

Nick

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

-- 
Cirrillian 
Web Design & Development
Santa Fe, NM
http://cirrillian.com
281-989-6272 (cell)
Member Design Corps of Santa Fe

Gillian Densmore

Re: [[Narcissism Again]again]

In reply to this post by Jochen Fromm-5

Glenn really Saromon? Naw not, Saromon, he's more like, plotting and scheming Sith or Romulan that can't quit get it.Saramon, is giving him a little bit too much credit from what I've seen. He's more like a Gul Ducacut from Star Trek. Or the Duras Sisters and going all Evil dude from the Simpsons LOL!

I'm expecting him to go all Zoom or legends of tomorrow. LOL

he really needs to watch his blood pressure or something because he looks like he's about to explode from the Tevor Noah show. LOL

Somone

LOL Someone might offer him some Diazapam.

On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 1:39 AM, Jochen Fromm <[hidden email]> wrote:

Yes, agree. Trump’s point of view is “Whatever I can win with is true.” And if he wins with what we call “a lie”, it is true for him. Exactly.

If you ask how we can counter and resist him, then I would say peaceful protests are the right way. The women's march was impressive, and the rebellion of the social media managers from the national parks is really refreshing. Who would have thought that the national parks would strike back? Like Treebeard who becomes alive.

In JK Rowling's novels it is the little creatures like the house elves that beat the evil in the end. In Tolkien's Lord of the Rings it is the Hobbits that beat the evil enemy. I think in this case people like Ken Bone are the Hobbits of the 21st century. The modern Hobbits are adverage midwestern guys who support Mr. T-Rump and his "party" on Twitter and hope to get a bit rich and famous along the way.

People like Ken Bone are like Frodo the Hobbit, Mr. T-Rump is Sauron and Jack Dorsey is the ringwraith. Will Ken Bone throw the ring into Mt. Doom, i.e. will he stop following Trump on Twitter and/or quit Twitter completely? If we all stop following and listening him he loses his power. This includes the senior Republican politicians who do not speak up against him because they hope for a job in his administration.

Cheers,

Jochen

Sent from my Tricorder

-------- Original message --------
From: Nick Thompson <[hidden email]>
Date: 1/28/17 01:57 (GMT+01:00)
To: Friam <[hidden email]>
Cc: penny thompson <[hidden email]>, 'Bruce Simon' <[hidden email]>, 'Dix McComas' <[hidden email]>, 'Grant Franks' <[hidden email]>
Subject: [FRIAM] [[Narcissism Again]again]

Hi everybody,
I kind of got buried by the list last week, but we seem to keep coming back to this topic, even when we are talking about globalism.
So. Let me just share one thought. I have said a hundred times that I think the great achievement of the Right in my life time has been to problematize (Ugh!) the Deweyan consensus of the 1950’s One of the elements of that consensus was that there is a truth of most matters and if we gather inclusively, talk calmly, reason closely, study carefully, investigate rigorously, we will, together , come to it. What was, at the time of my coming of age, the shared foundation of argument, became over last 50 years, a position in the argument. The alternative to this Deweyan position seems to be something like, “There is no truth of the matter; there is only the exercise of power. He who wins the argument, by whatever means, wins the truth. Truth is not something that is arrived at; it is won.”
So. My sense of trump is that in fact, he is not lying. On the contrary, he does not share the view of discourse that makes lying a possibility. From Trump’s point of view, “Whatever I can win with is true.” Hence, if he wins with what we call “a lie”, it is true.
I feel we are straying along the edge of some Nietzschean chasm here. Unfortunately I haven’t read any Nietzsche . A brief rummage in Wikipedia, led me to The Parable of the Madman. And THAT led me to wonder if the TV Series, Madmen, about marketing execs in the 60’s, was written with Nietzsche in mind. In any case, if there is ever a domain in which the truth is that which wins, it would be marketing.
So, if we are going to counter Trump, it cannot be by demonstrating that he lies. It has to be by demonstrating that liars don’t win.
Heavy lift.
Nick

Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
Clark University
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Marcus G. Daniels

Re: [[Narcissism Again]again]

In reply to this post by Robert J. Cordingley

Well, I find this article depressing but plausible. Specifically,

Andrés Miguel Rondón writes:

“But it took opposition leaders 10 years to figure out that they needed to actually go to the slums and the countryside. Not for a speech or a rally, but for a game of dominoes or to dance salsa — to show they were Venezuelans, too, that they weren’t just dour scolds and could hit a baseball, could tell a joke that landed. That they could break the tribal divide, come down off the billboards and show that they were real. This is not populism by other means. It is the only way of establishing your standing. It’s deciding not to live in an echo chamber. To press pause on the siren song of polarization.”

Figuratively, I don’t want to play dominoes, dance salsa, or play baseball. I have different interests. I shouldn’t have to pretend. They won’t pretend to me, that’s for sure. This is not about polarization; this is about not wanting to get pulled into that attractor. We have different lives. That should be fine. This is the United States and individualism is kind of a big thing here.

Now what politicians and opposition leaders do to manage this problem is a different matter. That is about appearances not reality.

Marcus

From: Friam <[hidden email]> on behalf of "Robert J. Cordingley" <[hidden email]>
Reply-To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Date: Saturday, January 28, 2017 at 11:34 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] [[Narcissism Again]again]

The Washington Post has an interesting essay from a Venezuelan on what to do and mostly what not to do.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2017/01/27/in-venezuela-we-couldnt-stop-chavez-dont-make-the-same-mistakes-we-did

Robert C

On 1/28/17 11:21 AM, Nick Thompson wrote:

Ok Steve,

The only reason to accept responsibility is to Take Charge.

I have been able to think of only one concrete thing that I can do with my limited set of skills: Write Apple and tell them to stop calling new products “I-this” and “I-that.” When are they going to release the WE-phone.

You must have something in your tool kit more effective than that!

Nick

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

From: Friam [[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Steven A Smith
Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2017 9:38 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] [[Narcissism Again]again]

What can WE hobbits do?

Scratch our hairy knuckles and indulge in second dinnerses?

Fun aside, I DO appreciate your sentiment here and agree that the Narcissist in Chief is at least partly a (focused) reflection of our own worst qualities, and *perhaps* if we tend our own garden even a little, it will help with the greater picture.

- Candide
Nick

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

From: Friam [[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Jochen Fromm
Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2017 1:39 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group [hidden email]; Friam [hidden email]
Cc: penny thompson [hidden email]; 'Bruce Simon' [hidden email]; 'Dix McComas' [hidden email]; 'Grant Franks' [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] [[Narcissism Again]again]

Yes, agree. Trump’s point of view is “Whatever I can win with is true.” And if he wins with what we call “a lie”, it is true for him. Exactly.

If you ask how we can counter and resist him, then I would say peaceful protests are the right way. The women's march was impressive, and the rebellion of the social media managers from the national parks is really refreshing. Who would have thought that the national parks would strike back? Like Treebeard who becomes alive.

In JK Rowling's novels it is the little creatures like the house elves that beat the evil in the end. In Tolkien's Lord of the Rings it is the Hobbits that beat the evil enemy. I think in this case people like Ken Bone are the Hobbits of the 21st century. The modern Hobbits are adverage midwestern guys who support Mr. T-Rump and his "party" on Twitter and hope to get a bit rich and famous along the way.

People like Ken Bone are like Frodo the Hobbit, Mr. T-Rump is Sauron and Jack Dorsey is the ringwraith. Will Ken Bone throw the ring into Mt. Doom, i.e. will he stop following Trump on Twitter and/or quit Twitter completely? If we all stop following and listening him he loses his power. This includes the senior Republican politicians who do not speak up against him because they hope for a job in his administration.

Cheers,

Jochen

Sent from my Tricorder

-------- Original message --------

From: Nick Thompson <[hidden email]>

Date: 1/28/17 01:57 (GMT+01:00)

To: Friam <[hidden email]>

Cc: penny thompson <[hidden email]>, 'Bruce Simon' <[hidden email]>, 'Dix McComas' <[hidden email]>, 'Grant Franks' <[hidden email]>

Subject: [FRIAM] [[Narcissism Again]again]

Hi everybody,

I kind of got buried by the list last week, but we seem to keep coming back to this topic, even when we are talking about globalism.

So. Let me just share one thought. I have said a hundred times that I think the great achievement of the Right in my life time has been to problematize (Ugh!) the Deweyan consensus of the 1950’s One of the elements of that consensus was that there is a truth of most matters and if we gather inclusively, talk calmly, reason closely, study carefully, investigate rigorously, we will, together , come to it. What was, at the time of my coming of age, the shared foundation of argument, became over last 50 years, a position in the argument. The alternative to this Deweyan position seems to be something like, “There is no truth of the matter; there is only the exercise of power. He who wins the argument, by whatever means, wins the truth. Truth is not something that is arrived at; it is won.”

So. My sense of trump is that in fact, he is not lying. On the contrary, he does not share the view of discourse that makes lying a possibility. From Trump’s point of view, “Whatever I can win with is true.” Hence, if he wins with what we call “a lie”, it is true.

I feel we are straying along the edge of some Nietzschean chasm here. Unfortunately I haven’t read any Nietzsche . A brief rummage in Wikipedia, led me to The Parable of the Madman. And THAT led me to wonder if the TV Series, Madmen, about marketing execs in the 60’s, was written with Nietzsche in mind. In any case, if there is ever a domain in which the truth is that which wins, it would be marketing.

So, if we are going to counter Trump, it cannot be by demonstrating that he lies. It has to be by demonstrating that liars don’t win.

Heavy lift.

Nick

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

--

Cirrillian

Web Design & Development

Santa Fe, NM

http://cirrillian.com

281-989-6272 (cell)

Member Design Corps of Santa Fe

123