virus: Religion, Zen, post-structuralism, and the failureof logic

Reed Konsler (konsler@ascat.harvard.edu)
Fri, 13 Jun 1997 11:19:24 -0400 (EDT)


Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 00:04:24 -0400
From: "John ''!Boolean'' Williams" <prefect@tricon.net>

At 08:58 PM 6/12/97 -0600, David wrote:
>> Actually, I don't think such a game would last very long. The non rule
>> bound person would win as soon as s/he chose to. "Check mate" This of
>
>Claiming a win by just saying "Checkmate" is sort of pointless, don't
>you think?

Hummmm...

I envision a chess game; one person says, "look at us, sitting here, moving
these little pieces around, all concerned whether we loose this pawn or
that rook. It's a nice sunny day outside. Let's go toss a frisbee. What's
the point of this game anyway?"

The other says, "shut up and move."

---------------------------------------------------------------------
You know, I envision a game of frisbee; one person says, "look at us here,
tossing and catching this stupid frisbee...a fucking DOG can catch a frisbee.
Lets go inside and play a game of chess...at least that's something only
we can do. what is the point of frisbee, anyway?"

The other says, "Dork. Shut up and catch."
---------------------------------------------------------------------

I think a certain type of post-structuralist thinking is not so much about
declaring winners and losers, as it is insisting that the world is much
larger than a chess game and we ought to get out and play in it more often.
My complaint is that the logocentric position -- and the mythocentric
position -- is similar to the kid in the playground that directs
everything. "Okay, now you say... okay, now go over there... okay, I shot
you, you're dead..." Both insist that the world be interpreted the same,
all around.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Perhaps. Foucault would say we "play" the larger world all the time;
to the extent we view it as a chess game we are manipulable and our
freedoms are compromised. So perhaps Post-structuralist thinking is
simply the attempt to reveal an "underlying" but counter-intuitive
structure. This is the same with science, and the same with memetics.
I dare say the "underlying but counter-intuitive structure" is a good
meme, as a lot of successful systems seem to utilize it.

Reed

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Reed Konsler konsler@ascat.harvard.edu
---------------------------------------------------------------------