What is the alternative to the capitalism?

A place to bring a contemplative / Dharmic perspective and opinions to current events and politics.
User avatar
Leeuwenhoek2
Posts: 193
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2017 10:24 pm

Re: What is the alternative to the capitalism?

Post by Leeuwenhoek2 » Sun Jan 28, 2018 1:07 pm

Pseudobabble wrote:
Sun Jan 28, 2018 12:14 pm
I feel you have missed something: the rule of law. A precondition for fair exchange is the enforcement of contracts, which requires the rule of law.
I was working on the basis of wikipedia's list of characteristics that it highlighted.
But, yes, some form of rule of law is arguably a precondition for a civil society, safety, and civil rights too.
... no nation can have a strong market economy without adequate participation in an information framework that records ownership of property and other economic information. Unreported, unrecorded economic activity results in many small entrepreneurs who lack legal ownership of their property, making it difficult for them to obtain credit, sell the business, or expand. They cannot seek legal remedies to business conflicts in court, since they do not have legal ownership.

... two parallel economies, legal and extra legal. An elite minority enjoys the economic benefits of the law and globalization, while the majority of entrepreneurs are stuck in poverty, where their assets—adding up to more than US$10 trillion worldwide—languish as dead capital in the shadows of the law.

Since the fall of the Berlin Wall, responsible nations around the developing world have worked hard to make the transition to a market economy, but have in general failed. Populist leaders have used this failure of the free market system to wipe out poverty in the developing world to beat their "anti-globalization" drums. But the ILD believes that the real enemy is within the flawed legal systems of developing nations that make it virtually impossible for the majority of their people—and their assets—to gain a stake in the market. The people of these countries have talent, enthusiasm, and an astonishing ability to wring a profit out of practically nothing`.

What the poor majority in the developing world do not have is easy access to the legal system which, in the advanced nations of the world and for the elite in their countries, [b]is the gateway to economic success, for it is in the legal system where property documents are created and standardized according to law[/b]. That documentation builds a public memory that permits society to engage in such crucial economic activities as identifying and gaining access to information about individuals, their assets, their titles, rights, charges and obligations; establishing the limits of liability for businesses; knowing an asset's previous economic situation; assuring protection of third parties; and quantifying and valuing assets and rights. These public memory mechanisms in turn facilitate such opportunities as access to credit, the establishment of systems of identification, the creation of systems for credit and insurance information, the provision for housing and infrastructure, the issue of shares, the mortgage of property and a host of other economic activities that drive a modern market economy.
--https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hernando_de_Soto_Polar
The Institute for Liberty and Democracy (or ILD) is a Lima-based think tank devoted to the promotion of property rights in developing countries. It was established in 1979 by Peruvian economist Hernando de Soto. The ILD works with developing countries to implement property and business rights reforms that provide the legal tools and institutions required for citizens to participate in the formal economy. ... The ILD's initiative began in 1979 when de Soto was running a group of small Peruvian mining companies headquartered in Lima and believed he was spending too much of his time grappling with red tape and climbing over regulatory barriers. He found this to be a nationwide problem, resulting from excessive government regulation. This meant that the lion's share of the Peruvian economy was an informal one.

When the Shining Path began to gain power during the 80s, the ILD started a campaign to raise awareness about "the informal sector." In 1986, de Soto published his first book, The Other Path, calling for legal reforms. ... By 1987, ILD's research had determined that the value of real estate assets that were not duly titled or could not be leveraged to generate capital was in the neighborhood of US$ 70 billion. Such "extralegal" homes could not be used in the legal market to obtain credit or produce surplus value. Therefore, for their owners, this enormous investment was "dead capital."

The ILD then drafted the "Property Registry Law", presenting it to the Peruvian parliament in 1988. Simultaneously, the ILD was conducting a national campaign to create public awareness of the issue and the advantages of integrating such a huge amount of extralegal property into the legal system, which reached its pitch when Peruvian pollsters confirmed that 80 to 90 percent of the population supported "formalization" of the poor's real estate assets.

The Peruvian parliament unanimously enacted the ILD's draft into law (Ley del Registro Predial) in November 1988. To assure that extralegal property was titled and recorded, the ILD helped to create a new organization - Registro Predial - and then proceeded to run it on behalf of the Government from 1990 until 1996. ... In February 1992, the ILD proposed to the Peruvian public and government a draft of a new law that would allow all parties in conflict the option of an arbitration procedure that would solve their problems in a quick, inexpensive, fair and predictable way. Although the ILD draft was not accepted, its provisions were included in General Arbitration Law No. 25935 in December of the same year. In addition, the agency in charge of formalizing property, COFOPRI, which was created in 1996, adopted the rules for resolving informal property border and ownership disputes from the ILD proposal and incorporated them into COFOPRI's regulations.
-- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute ... _Democracy

User avatar
manas
Posts: 2454
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 3:04 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: What is the alternative to the capitalism?

Post by manas » Sun Jan 28, 2018 1:28 pm

SarathW wrote:
Fri Jan 26, 2018 10:30 am
I think this is the worst case of capitalism.

This is so wrong and sad. The 'ownership' of slaves was commonplace in the Buddha's time, just wondering if there is any record in the suttas, of any statements he might have made regarding it?
Knowing this body is like a clay jar,
securing this mind like a fort,
attack Mara with the spear of discernment,
then guard what's won without settling there,
without laying claim.

- Dhp 40

chownah
Posts: 7329
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: What is the alternative to the capitalism?

Post by chownah » Sun Jan 28, 2018 1:31 pm

manas wrote:
Sun Jan 28, 2018 1:28 pm
SarathW wrote:
Fri Jan 26, 2018 10:30 am
I think this is the worst case of capitalism.

This is so wrong and sad. The 'ownership' of slaves was commonplace in the Buddha's time, just wondering if there is any record in the suttas, of any statements he might have made regarding it?
Doesn't the teaching on right livlihood specifically rule out trade in humans.
chownah

User avatar
Bundokji
Posts: 1536
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2014 11:57 pm

Re: What is the alternative to the capitalism?

Post by Bundokji » Sun Jan 28, 2018 4:01 pm

Leeuwenhoek2 wrote:
Sun Jan 28, 2018 11:58 am
I credit Bundokji for the clarity and awareness of thought. But Bundokji adds a criteria to wikipedia's list.
Furthermore Bundokji's criteria requires quite a bit of value judgments or subjective judgement -- a judgement knowledge by the phrases "punish the so-called success" and "more capitalistic or i would say feudal".

----------
Again, I don't see a easy, clear contradiction with wikipedia's list.

As to "pure capitalism" being only in theory. What makes it "pure" or not pure?
I'm skeptical about the pursuit of "pure" ideas because wars between the "pure" and the "true" play out in between the advocates of most 'isms.

My idea of "pure capitalism" is more like Anarcho-capitalism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-capitalism
But even there I think I'm adding characteristics to wikipedia's list.
I am not sure if Wikipedia is an authoritative source of information or that we agreed on using it as a reference/criteria when we engaged in this discussion.

The term "punishing the rich" is a slogan that i came across in my life more than once and it was used by capitalists defending policies that do not impose high taxes on the wealthy and/or big corporations claiming that "we should not punish success but encourage it". Maybe I and you use different approaches to investigate in the sense that i tend to believe that even though such slogans might not be an official definition of capitalism but they indicate how those who identify themselves as capitalists understand it. It might appear subjective, but it is more telling than an official definition we might find in a dictionary or Wikipedia. Also when you refer to the context, i started the sentence with "One of the criteria people use to determine to what extent a certain system is capitalistic" so i was not conveying my own personal view but merely my understanding of the term capitalism based on how its being used by self-identifying capitalists.

Ultimately, Wikipedia is written by people who sometimes cite the sources of what they say and sometimes they do not. Either way, it is something we eventually receive as second hand knowledge, so we seem to be bound by what we perceive as "authoritative sources". You might also notice that you perceive them as authoritative because you was told so! So i admit that your approach is conventionally disciplined, and is useful within academic circles, but i doubt that it is necessarily closer to truth.

I described the situation in developing countries feudal because the rule of law is not as well established as in developed countries. Also unions are not as powerful. The social structure and value system also play a role in abusing workers to the point of slavery at times.

The Wikipedia list includes competitive markets, and if you refer to Dr. David's input you would see that he referred to market economy which implies allowing the market forces (supply, demand and self interest) to do its work without interfering. The bail out of big corporations during the GFC was against the free market principle as it was a direct intervention to save the asses of corporate America when they screwed up. I hope that clarifies the last paragraph in my previous post.
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"

This was the last word of the Tathagata.

User avatar
Leeuwenhoek2
Posts: 193
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2017 10:24 pm

Re: What is the alternative to the capitalism?

Post by Leeuwenhoek2 » Sun Jan 28, 2018 10:54 pm

Bundokji wrote:
Sun Jan 28, 2018 4:01 pm

I am not sure if Wikipedia is an authoritative source of information or that we agreed on using it as a reference/criteria when we engaged in this discussion.
Well, stand up and offer your preferred more or less comprehensive, well thought out description.!

I'd prefer to avoid "re-inventing the wheel" and refer to perspectives that have been already exposed to public critique / peer review.
Yes, the wikipedia process has it's problems but it does encourage a public exchange probably from a wider, more experience circle than this forum. I prefer not to "re-invent the wheel" as they say.

The term "punishing the rich" is a slogan that i came across in my life more than once and it was used by capitalists defending policies ... Maybe I and you use different approaches to investigate in the sense that i tend to believe that even though such slogans might not be an official definition of capitalism but they indicate how those who identify themselves as capitalists understand it. It might appear subjective, but it is more telling than an official definition we might find in a dictionary or Wikipedia.
Yes, they identify how some who identify as capitalists talk that way. Many others don't. Big difference. I'd say the "punishing the rich" slogan mostly comes from one swath of the range of political perspectives of capitalists. The saying is more characteristic of a branch of the political right rather than capitalists in general. There are a lot of politically moderate and left wing capitalists.
... but it is more telling than an official definition we might find in a dictionary or Wikipedia.
There are good reasons, such as what I wrote above, as to why some ideas aren't included.
I say it's more telling regarding your personal views and says less about an understanding of a wider, public conversation.

chownah
Posts: 7329
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: What is the alternative to the capitalism?

Post by chownah » Mon Jan 29, 2018 3:03 am

I think that capitalism is usually thought of as being a "fair" system of economic development; "fair" meaning that everyone has a chance to enter the free market and compete with everyone else. IN theory anyone could start a business and work their way up to being a magnate in any industry.

That was somewhat true in the past when the earth had vast swaths of land with resources that had not been developed. This is no longer the case. Now pretty much all of the land is owned and all easily accessable resources are being exploited.

All of the good stuff is already owned.....and the owners now are in the position to dominate world trade just because their ownership of existing resources precludes new entry into the market place by anyone other than those who already control a huge amount of resources. There have been recent exceptions like information technology but now even that is every year being more dominated by established enterprises who can afford to outspend any new entrant.

The free market basis for capitalism is rapidly dissappearing if it is not gone already. THere is no free market access to resources except through established industry. Established industry controls pretty much all of the world's resources and now we are seeing how established industry is pretty much running the world. In my mind this is no longer capitalism....or maybe it is the natural end state of capitalism: established enterprises owning the world.
chownah

SarathW
Posts: 9404
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: What is the alternative to the capitalism?

Post by SarathW » Mon Jan 29, 2018 5:16 am

Living with the dead.
Whose fault is this?
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”

User avatar
Bundokji
Posts: 1536
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2014 11:57 pm

Re: What is the alternative to the capitalism?

Post by Bundokji » Mon Jan 29, 2018 8:17 am

Leeuwenhoek2 wrote:
Sun Jan 28, 2018 10:54 pm
Well, stand up and offer your preferred more or less comprehensive, well thought out description.!
I don't think i am in a position to introduce a criteria or measurement for people, i have no monopoly over the truth. The only one who is entitled to bind people over a specific definition is Sarath because he opened this thread.

All i can do is to explain how i came to see things. We all go to schools and universities and get spoon fed with all sort of information, until we finish our formal education and engage with the world to find out that things in practice are quite different than what we have been taught, and that we have to figure out how to proceed as reality unfolds. In other words, what we learned through formal channels is nothing more than rubbish, yet an inevitable starting point.

Imagine you study a course in psychology and you get introduced to the term "sex addiction". You memorize the exact description which is given and presented to you as "true" and the criteria to determine what constitutes a sex addict. Then you go to the exam, parrot what you have been taught in order to pass, but after that what you are left with is the general meaning of the term (as opposite to the technical term) which should enable you to use it when you communicate with other people.

As reality unfolds, you encounter two humans who identify themselves as sex addicts, and as you are left with the general understanding of the meaning (as you no longer have to parrot the technical meaning to pass exams or outside academic circles) you want to determine who is more addicted to sex using the general meaning in your mind. Neither the general meaning nor the technical definition tell you what a "pure" sex addict is but a general description of behavior, beliefs and symptoms. So each of the two will start to talk about their beliefs and behavior, how many times they engage in sexual activities, with how many people, how they feel when they cannot do it, how much money and time they spend to feed their addiction ...etc and by listening, you assess their input against the general meaning and you determine which of the two is more addicted to sex than the other. When you assess individual cases you focus on degree to determine kind.

Once we are free from the delusion that there is a pure sex addiction or capitalism, context becomes everything. We tend to trust how people express themselves than technicalities. We hold meaning but we no longer attach to it.

To share my view of what you are doing, may i use another analogy? Imagine you want to learn how to swim, then you go and buy a book about swimming, you read what the book says, you get the general idea, then you jump into the water, and you start to struggle, but with practice, you start to trust the water and deal with it in a harmonious way until you completely forget about the book. Then imagine someone who wants to learn how to swim and ask you what to do, you would describe your experience! Then imagine someone who believes that the real act of swimming is in the book, not in the water! he would accuse of projecting your opinion, because your description of "swimming" does not accurately match the book of which where he is stuck.
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"

This was the last word of the Tathagata.

User avatar
Leeuwenhoek2
Posts: 193
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2017 10:24 pm

Re: What is the alternative to the capitalism?

Post by Leeuwenhoek2 » Mon Jan 29, 2018 10:51 am

I read your response as avoiding and deflecting the suggestion that you offer a more or less comprehensive, well thought out description that you prefer. They exist and seems a sound starting place for a discussion with more nuance.
Or to the idea that you join in a centuries long dialog -- a dialog that is similar to the dialog of the dharama that has been on going on for many centuries in lineages, sangas, commentaries and teachings. Your writing indicates that you are familiar with, and acknowledge, this type of discourse. So I don't understand why your response doesn't recognize a rightful place for it.
Bundokji wrote:
Mon Jan 29, 2018 8:17 am
To share my view of what you are doing,
Your view of what I am doing and my view are distinctly different. In many ways they complement each other.

Also, it's weird how you write of the importance of context while quoting me out of context. (Read the paragraph after the one sentence that you quoted).
Bundokji wrote:
Mon Jan 29, 2018 8:17 am
I don't think i am in a position to introduce a criteria or measurement for people ...
And yet, it seems that you do introduce criteria.
Bundokji wrote:
Mon Jan 29, 2018 8:17 am
All i can do is to explain how i came to see things.
And yet you surely came to understanding about some things presumably by reading or hearing the words of the Buddha. And you went to school which influenced how you came to see things.
Motte and bailey switch wrote:Motte and bailey (MAB) is a combination of bait-and-switch and equivocation in which someone switches between a "motte" (an easy-to-defend and often common-sense statement, such as "culture shapes our experiences") and a "bailey" (a hard-to-defend and more controversial statement, such as "cultural knowledge is just as valid as scientific knowledge") in order to defend a viewpoint. Someone will argue the easy-to-defend position (motte) temporarily, to ward off critics, while the less-defensible position (bailey) remains the desired belief, yet is never actually defended.

In short: instead of defending a weak position (the "bailey"), the arguer retreats to a strong position (the "motte"), while acting as though the positions are equivalent.
It's weird how you write of the importance of context while quoting me out of context. (Read the paragraph after the one sentence that you quoted).

Your analogy to swimming describes views or processes of learning that I did not express and that I do not hold. I am/was a certified lifeguard. I have a first hand appreciation of the value of verbal and written instructions as well as the value of time in the water. Both are valuable.

User avatar
Bundokji
Posts: 1536
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2014 11:57 pm

Re: What is the alternative to the capitalism?

Post by Bundokji » Mon Jan 29, 2018 1:49 pm

Leeuwenhoek2 wrote:
Mon Jan 29, 2018 10:51 am
I read your response as avoiding and deflecting the suggestion that you offer a more or less comprehensive, well thought out description that you prefer. They exist and seems a sound starting place for a discussion with more nuance.
Or to the idea that you join in a centuries long dialog -- a dialog that is similar to the dialog of the dharama that has been on going on for many centuries in lineages, sangas, commentaries and teachings. Your writing indicates that you are familiar with, and acknowledge, this type of discourse. So I don't understand why your response doesn't recognize a rightful place for it.
Everything has a rightful place for it, but the way you introduced Wikipedia as a criteria to measure the accuracy of other discussants input, this did not seem the right place for it but rather an expression of a subtle sense of entitlement and/or unwarranted certainty.
Your view of what I am doing and my view are distinctly different. In many ways they complement each other.
How different?
Also, it's weird how you write of the importance of context while quoting me out of context. (Read the paragraph after the one sentence that you
I did not quote you out of context but was merely explaining why your "preference" is only yours and not mine, this is why from the outset i stated that "All i can do is to explain how i came to see things.", so this was not a fixed position to prove which would motivate me to quote you out of context
And yet, it seems that you do introduce criteria.
Can you point it out?
And yet you surely came to understanding about some things presumably by reading or hearing the words of the Buddha. And you went to school which influenced how you came to see things.
I have never denied that! I can assure you that nothing original here.
Motte and bailey (MAB) is a combination of bait-and-switch and equivocation in which someone switches between a "motte" (an easy-to-defend and often common-sense statement, such as "culture shapes our experiences") and a "bailey" (a hard-to-defend and more controversial statement, such as "cultural knowledge is just as valid as scientific knowledge") in order to defend a viewpoint. Someone will argue the easy-to-defend position (motte) temporarily, to ward off critics, while the less-defensible position (bailey) remains the desired belief, yet is never actually defended

In short: instead of defending a weak position (the "bailey"), the arguer retreats to a strong position (the "motte"), while acting as though the positions are equivalent.
How do you view the above? Is the above an opinion or a statement of truth? Is it objective or subjective (or a false dilemma)? Is it a "motte" or "bailey" (to use the same vocabulary for the sake of amusement)?
Your analogy to swimming describes views or processes of learning that I did not express and that I do not hold. I am/was a certified lifeguard. I have a first hand appreciation of the value of verbal and written instructions as well as the value of time in the water. Both are valuable.
Finally we have something to agree on! But when you emphasize one of them over the other you get a reaction in the opposite direction, and that would be your Kamma :toast:
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"

This was the last word of the Tathagata.

User avatar
Leeuwenhoek2
Posts: 193
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2017 10:24 pm

Re: What is the alternative to the capitalism?

Post by Leeuwenhoek2 » Tue Jan 30, 2018 4:26 am

Bundokji wrote:
Mon Jan 29, 2018 1:49 pm
Everything has a rightful place for it, but the way you introduced Wikipedia as a criteria to measure the accuracy of other discussants input, this did not seem the right place for it but rather an expression of a subtle sense of entitlement and/or unwarranted certainty.
Ironically it seems your comment commits the same error you accuse me of, if an error it is. But if your critique is relevant and apposite to what I wrote then it should also be to your writing above. In either case, really, so what? This illustrates IMO the futility of this level of discourse.

It's not surprising that Capitalism, or any concept, when it is flexibly defined by detractors as nearly anything, can become the focus every charge. That is the nature of nearly infinitely expanding mental conceptions. They serve more as justifications for pre-determined outcomes rather than points of common understanding. This is an implication of the 4 noble truths.

It seems that in your reading, proposing a common understanding of the idea that were are punitively discussing becomes something sinister.
I think you have resorted to guessing or projecting, ad hominem, a alleged motivating subtle mental state -- the resort to which is a plausibly a reflection of the poverty of whatever it is you are pushing.

User avatar
Bundokji
Posts: 1536
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2014 11:57 pm

Re: What is the alternative to the capitalism?

Post by Bundokji » Tue Jan 30, 2018 6:35 am

Leeuwenhoek2 wrote:
Tue Jan 30, 2018 4:26 am
Ironically it seems your comment commits the same error you accuse me of, if an error it is. But if your critique is relevant and apposite to what I wrote then it should also be to your writing above. In either case, really, so what? This illustrates IMO the futility of this level of discourse.

It's not surprising that Capitalism, or any concept, when it flexibly defined by detractors as nearly anything even somewhat plausibly related can be pointed to as a source of evil. That is the nature of nearly infinitely expanding mental conceptions. They serve more as justifications for pre-determined outcomes rather than points of common understanding. This is an implication of the 4 noble truths.

It seems that in your reading, proposing a common understanding of the idea that were are punitively discussing becomes something sinister.
I think you have resorted to guessing or projecting, ad hominem, a alleged motivating subtle mental state -- the resort to which is a plausibly a reflection of the poverty of whatever it is you are pushing.
Hello Leeuwenhoek2,

My posts was not meant as a personal attack against you, and if it appeared this way, i apologize.

Indeed, concepts serve as justifications of pre-determined outcome, and i agree that this is an implication of the four noble truths. I think the only difference between me and you is our use and understanding of the term "objective". From my understanding, we are objective to the extent that we are aware that views are ultimately not ours. But your use of the term if i am reading you correctly is to differentiate between personal opinions/values and truth, which is not completely wrong, but can be misleading.

To deny that there is truth is a wrong view, but i think to believe in a universal truth that can be found in conventional reality is equally wrong. So, my exchange with you was an attempt to show this subtle difference in a playful, yet friendly way.

People can cite a source for the right or wrong reasons. For example, citing a sources out of intellectual honesty or as an attempt to introduce meaning analysis is praiseworthy, but citing a source to measure people's objectivity or accuracy of input (before ensuring mutual acceptance of the source as a reference point) can be an expression of a deluded mind.
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"

This was the last word of the Tathagata.

Circle5
Posts: 878
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 2:14 am

Re: What is the alternative to the capitalism?

Post by Circle5 » Wed Jan 31, 2018 9:35 pm

Bundokji wrote:
Tue Jan 30, 2018 6:35 am
To deny that there is truth is a wrong view, but i think to believe in a universal truth that can be found in conventional reality is equally wrong. So, my exchange with you was an attempt to show this subtle difference in a playful, yet friendly way.
Is the world flat ?

User avatar
Leeuwenhoek2
Posts: 193
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2017 10:24 pm

Re: What is the alternative to the capitalism?

Post by Leeuwenhoek2 » Thu Feb 01, 2018 12:50 am

Bundokji wrote:
Tue Jan 30, 2018 6:35 am
People can cite a source for the right or wrong reasons. For example, citing a sources out of intellectual honesty or as an attempt to introduce meaning analysis is praiseworthy, but citing a source to measure people's objectivity or accuracy of input ... can be an expression of a deluded mind.
Assuming that the reasons or motivations that you impute to others are real or accurate descriptions of someone else's motivations is an scheme that tends to illusion and mistakes.
It's noteworthy that you acknowledge that "citing a sources out of intellectual honesty or as an attempt to introduce meaning analysis is praiseworthy". It seems to me that you assumed the first possibility and gave little to no acknowledgement of the second.
Bundokji wrote:
Tue Jan 30, 2018 6:35 am
To deny that there is truth is a wrong view, but i think to believe in a universal truth that can be found in conventional reality is equally wrong. So, my exchange with you was an attempt to show this subtle difference in a playful, yet friendly way.
Again, I think you make inferences and then assume they are true. I'm a hardcore post-modernist (maybe post-post-modern), dialectical thinker. So what did I write that made you think I was reaching for a "universal truth"?

I say you are missing some unsubtle and even more basic thinking mistakes.
And, of course, I'm attempting to show them to you in a playful, yet friendly way.
Do you believe that? Tee hee. :roll:
I am actually laughing out loud.
but citing a source ... (before ensuring mutual acceptance of the source as a reference point) ... can be an expression of a deluded mind.
Interesting point you made about ensuring mutual acceptance of a definition for instance. So if you quote a common dictionary definition of a word how would you write it to ensure mutual acceptance of the definition?

But in my reading of your last couple of posts "ensuring mutual acceptance" of your inferences doesn't describe what you wrote.

User avatar
Bundokji
Posts: 1536
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2014 11:57 pm

Re: What is the alternative to the capitalism?

Post by Bundokji » Thu Feb 01, 2018 6:09 am

Circle5 wrote:
Wed Jan 31, 2018 9:35 pm
Bundokji wrote:
Tue Jan 30, 2018 6:35 am
To deny that there is truth is a wrong view, but i think to believe in a universal truth that can be found in conventional reality is equally wrong. So, my exchange with you was an attempt to show this subtle difference in a playful, yet friendly way.
Is the world flat ?
Depends on what you mean by the "world" but from the context of your question, i think you mean planet earth?

Planet earth from a scientific perspective is round, and it would be unreasonable to doubt that. Human beings have thought that the world is flat because this is how it appears to their senses, and some individuals who investigated a bit deeper found that the earth is round by observing the sky and the movement of stars and other planets, then they used deductive logic and concluded that the world is round, and when humans invented the ability to travel to space, they have seen it first hand, so they eliminated reasonable doubt about that.

However, from a pragmatic point of view, we deal with the world (most of the time) as it appears (flat). When we go to work everyday, we don't use the fact that the world is round. Imagine you have a tourist in your country who asked you how to go from point A to point B, you don't give him directions based on the astral movements of the planets, and you don't take into account that the earth spins around its self and around the sun. You, as a reasonable person, would give directions as if the world does not move, and as if it were flat, and if you do otherwise, you would be most likely twisted!

Based on the above, would it be accurate to claim that the directions you gave to the tourist as subjective? would not that be misleading?

To deny that the world is round is as stupid as using it to judge the accuracy of people's communications in everyday use.

This is what i have been trying to explain to Leeuwenhoek2 in relation to capitalism, which based on his last reply, seems to not fully get it, which is a bit unfortunate.

Sarath opened the thread, and if he wanted to bind us by a particular use of the term "capitalism" he would have done so.
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"

This was the last word of the Tathagata.

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests