Philosophy Now Forum

Pluto wrote:There is no point debating this. Power exists and is running a show that we know little if anything about. You have your idea I mine. If yours works for you then maybe it is all you can wish for.

You wish for a power to be running a show? Why, what does it gain you to believe this?

Some people think that what they imagine is true: it is not.

Yes, I agree.

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Pluto wrote:There is no point debating this. Power exists and is running a show that we know little if anything about. You have your idea I mine. If yours works for you then maybe it is all you can wish for.

Power does exist but your understanding of it is woefully childish.

Power is not a monolithic conspiracy, that is your delusion. It is complex, multifaceted, and capricious. Those in power are not characterised by joined up thinking.

"The ‘loose cliques’ now head institutions of a scale and power not then existing and, especially since World War I, the loose cliques have tightened up. We are well beyond the era of romantic pluralism."

Arising_uk wrote:

Pluto wrote:There is no point debating this. Power exists and is running a show that we know little if anything about. You have your idea I mine. If yours works for you then maybe it is all you can wish for.

You wish for a power to be running a show? Why, what does it gain you to believe this?

I don't wish it, but think it. I try to gain a realistic understanding so that I may create better more informed paintings.

Those in power are not characterised by joined up thinking.

If they weren't, it'd be the next step/development, naturally.

I saw this online and thought it quite good:

"Yes, like some banks are too big to fail, are some truths, too big to tell. People don’t want to know what it is you’re telling them. It doesn’t sit well. It’s too big. Make it smaller."

Not sure how you would make the communication smaller though.