phyllo wrote: ↑Fri Mar 31, 2023 12:49 pmBut tech just facilitates through meds and surgeries something that originates elsewhere. And I don't mean some sort of corporate or elite agenda. It's something that has always been there. It's a disconnect and alienation from reality.
Firstly, my primary argument is against the introduction of sexualized content and information into the public schools and into the public sphere (public spaces). You are free to have any opinion that is honest for you but I have come to the conclusion that this is a) wrong, b) unethical, c) socially and culturally destructive, and d) that I am therefore bound because of the values that I have defined to 1) oppose it, and 2) give my support to those who are also in a battle against it.
The sexual revolution is, for me, a topic of philosophical inquiry. I do not, at a starting point, merely accept the common view that says *It is good* and therefore should not be examined critically and as I say philosophically. With that put out in the open then I am free to consider many different sources of information and perspectives. I am also free to reject, or critique, those perspectives that seem to me determined by herd mentality and also projects of social programming. Again, I referred to
After The Ball as a text; an outline of social activism that was written by a psychologist and a PR man. So then, the use of propaganda to modify social attitude is then a valid topic for examination. Projects of social engineering in the Postwar period, and the involvement of elites and elite interests, is a valid area of examination from a philosophical perspective.
Though you seem to reject the set of views that Bilek has put forth -- you are completely free to do so -- I neither completely accept them but I also to not completely reject them. If the confluence of politics, social control, corporate collusion with government, throughout the pandemic period has not come to the fore of your own perspectives as something *worthy of consideration* and also as *concerning* you are once again fully within your rights to hold to that opinion. But in my opinion, which is not unreasoned and is not unreasonable, all of this stuff must be examined with a sober and yet a critical orientation. Therefore "corporate or elite agenda" is not immediately dismissed and especially when there is no doubt at all that we all live and experience 'reality' through the mediation of those giant corporations. If that is true, then the manipulation of opinion, and indeed the manipulation if idea and perception is beyond doubt something that should be under consideration of those with a philosophical orientation.
If you do accept that there is a "disconnect and alienation from reality" then it seems to me that you have at least some basis for beginning to consider the mechanisms through which a) this comes about, but also b) how the present (let's say) reigning powers either contribute to that or, perhaps, engineer that. At that point, again, social manipulation, idea manipulation, ideological manipulation and social engineering become not paranoid phantasies dependent on how one's
dasein is defined but immediate social and political concerns.
My view of what you have written is that your perspective is valid ... but shallow. But you are
absolutely entitled to have it.
