teo spiller on Tue, 29 Jul 1997 10:28:05 +0200 (MET DST)

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

<nettime> Blaming or defending Mr. Soros?

This morning I recieved 6 messages deffending mr. Soros in affair about
Burmese currency.

I know nothing about that. I am sure, you also know only, what you have
read in newspapers. It is certainly not "the Truth by itself" but only the
picture, reporters wrote about, using their own perception and their
editor's trends.

	But I am not interested about "truth" or truth on this level.

I know also very little about Mr. Soros; He is known as a great
philanthropist, on the other side, some are connecting his career with
secret-services, money-washing etc. I only know it is a game of big money
and big power and I am sure, we will never know the truth about it.

	I am also not interested about "truth" or truth on this level.

What I was surprised about, were 6 (six) mails in few hours, all supporting
Mr. Soros and blaming Burmese junta. As I've said, I am not interested on
this conflict; I am interested about the need of six nettimers, to defend
Mr. Soros with such a zeal (it reminds me on a religion a bit?!).
I ask you: (not blaming Mr. Soror at all-affair about himself just gave me
the cause to write this reflection) if an other multimillionaire would be
in this affair on Mr. Soros's place (Bill Gates for example), would you try
to prove his innocence with the same zeal?

In this point I am trying to touch a relation, I am very interest about:
the Myth and the human perception, connected with it. 

What I see is a thinking mechanism, known also as an "intelligence trap". A
person begins getting informations. Because of very fast thinking, just
after few impressions, that person makes conclusions, based on her a priori
perception. Because of ability to make fast and "reasonable" conclusions,
that person "analises" the situation (using phrases, she understands more
intuitive than analitical), answering fast and "reasonable", reaping the
approval of audience (understanding the same phrases the same shallow).
That's why most "intelectual" polemics are only verbal  self-satisfactions,
bringing no employable sollutions. They are all based on the same kind of
perception and there is an absorbed, constructive analysing method

I would wish to accent again, I am not interested in truth about Mr. Soros
and affair in Burma, but six mails this morning provocated me to write in
this form, what I found out about most (not only nettime) "intelectual"
polemics. My disinclination to institutions, ideologies and saints may be
an additional reason too...

Sincerely yours

		Teo Spiller

 Teo Spiller:  teo.spiller@fractal.si

ESMERALDA http://www.fractal.si/teo/esmerlda/index.htm
Caprices for Netscape http://www.fractal.si/teo/netart/index.htm
WebGuide  http://www.fractal.si/teo/links/index.htm
Gallery  http://www.fractal.si/teo/galerija.htm
VRML  http://www.fractal.si/teo/vrml/index.htm

#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: majordomo@icf.de and "info nettime" in the msg body
#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner@icf.de