tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post5410902609254412405..comments2024-03-28T17:44:11.289+00:00Comments on Bruce Charlton's Notions: What is a disease? Or, living in a madhouseBruce Charltonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09615189090601688535noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-49319491053994690062013-01-18T02:58:33.771+00:002013-01-18T02:58:33.771+00:00Philosopher Philip Devine here remarks:
http://ph...Philosopher Philip Devine here remarks:<br /><br />http://philipdevine.wordpress.com/2013/01/10/progress-decadence-apocalyptic/<br /><br />"<b>Decadence</b>, as I understand it is a cultural phenomenon, that of a community that has lost the capacity to transmit itself, biologically and culturally. Of all the writers in the Western canon, Thomas Mann had the best sense of the meaning of decadence. For his sensibility was on both sides of the question. We see decadence in <i>The Magic Mountain</i> as a temptation to lie down in the snow and die, in <i>Buddenbrooks</i> as the decline of a family and, most frighteningly, in Death in Venice as a passion for a beautiful and multiply unattainable boy. And he provides a succinct definition: <b>“wrestling … with life to attain death”</b>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-46330386909903768902013-01-18T01:38:15.151+00:002013-01-18T01:38:15.151+00:00Fascinating, as was your previous thoughts on chro...Fascinating, as was your previous thoughts on chronic disease being caused by chemical poisoning.<br /><br />Is it possible the primary nature of the disease is instead a kind of chemical poisoning, in food, water, directly through drugs, perhaps also through viruses and parasites? Many people appear to be weakened in will, thought, and body and even if they avoid addiction, it doesn't mean they are truly healthy enough to attract a viable mate and live healthily in the modern world.Thinkingnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-74564964808808713582013-01-17T17:14:18.683+00:002013-01-17T17:14:18.683+00:00NBS - well, I can't get *everything* into a sh...NBS - well, I can't get *everything* into a short blog posting ;-)<br /><br />But it is very striking how all the versions of modernity (Anglosphere, European, Russian, East Asian...) lead to this same outcome. <br /><br />The primary cause is secularization, I suspect - at any rate devout traditional (and Patriarchal) religiousness is the only known antidote. Bruce Charltonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09615189090601688535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-79907641629764671592013-01-17T16:56:13.061+00:002013-01-17T16:56:13.061+00:00You have established that sub-replacement fertilit...You have established that sub-replacement fertility is a disease--a pathology. And may grant that sub-replacement fertility (along side of material abundance) is peculiar to modernity. But you haven't shown that modernity, qua modernity, is a disease. It <i>may</i> be, but this doesn't show it. I suspect that sub-replacement fertility is more a symptom of some other pathology. That pathology could be modernity, but that depends on how you define "modernity".<br />Nick B Steveshttp://www.octanecreative.com/ducttape/stump/stump.htmlnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-38192991240585281932013-01-16T16:54:43.502+00:002013-01-16T16:54:43.502+00:00@Catherine - see my response to Donald. @Catherine - see my response to Donald. Bruce Charltonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09615189090601688535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-58569891794282251932013-01-16T16:53:59.624+00:002013-01-16T16:53:59.624+00:00@Donald - I'm writing from a Christian perspec...@Donald - I'm writing from a Christian perspective, so that is implicit. But while individuals are of course called to celibacy, this is never the case for the society as a whole. Voluntary suppression of reproduction at a societal level is pathological - when it is not straightforwardly sinful. In our society the pathology is a consequence of sin (I mean un-repented sin). <br /><br />You seem, perhaps, to be worried that I may be saying that because sterility is sinful then fecundity is virtuous - but that is (obviously!) not true and nonsense'; or else the likes of Genghis Khan (a mass rapist with millions of modern descendants) or Sultans with harems would be regarded as thereby virtuous! <br /><br />As I have said before, a society or group which is voluntarily sub-fertile over a generational timescale is sick, wicked, or both - and that applies to supposed Christians as much as anyone else.<br /><br />Any Christian groups (and this would include *most* self-identified Christians) who find themselves in this situation urgently need to repent and reform.Bruce Charltonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09615189090601688535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-31414607778096857842013-01-16T16:41:20.152+00:002013-01-16T16:41:20.152+00:00I'm not sure I follow the definition. Choosing...I'm not sure I follow the definition. Choosing not to reproduce has been a part of Christianity from the beginning - it's even recommended in the Bible. By your definition, wouldn't convents be dangerously contagious madhouses?Catherinenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-591984352708184762013-01-16T16:32:00.824+00:002013-01-16T16:32:00.824+00:00It seems to me that it is an instantiation of the ...It seems to me that it is an instantiation of the good to reproduce (marriage, children, family) but for humans this must be kept in perspective or subordinated to the higher good of our immortal nature/salvation. Thus polygamy/serial monogamy/fornication whilst perhaps (in certain circumstances) increasing biological reproduction, are at odds with ultimate destiny and thus must be suppressed. Similarly monasticism is a higher, otherworldly good some are meant to pursue at odds with the biological good.<br /><br />I'd be interested in your thoughts Bruce.Donaldnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-445911590698747232013-01-16T14:47:04.962+00:002013-01-16T14:47:04.962+00:00This would clarify why mainstream behavior is not ...This would clarify why mainstream behavior is not only wrong, but also completely illogical and irrational - quite consistently so. <br /><br />It appears while this mental disease clearly harms the general populace, it allows a parasite class to make use of, manipulate, and live off the host. The mental patient's behavior is nowhere restricted, but everywhere encouraged, supported, and misrepresented as healthy.George Goerlichhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07916687977887167466noreply@blogger.com