Looking-Glass Selves

In defining oneself, one should, in my view, always begin with the general and then move to the specific. In other words, discuss oneself deductively, not inductively. For instance, I would define myself as a critical sociologist, an advocacy journalist, and a radical historian. Critical sociology is the general term. From it, I can say I am a sociologist of religion, a social theorist, a public sociologist, and a clinical sociologist. Similarly, advocacy journalism is the general term. From it, I can refer to my focus on radical journalism or critical journalism. (That last term has so many usages, including referring to critical theory, that it is probably best avoided.) Finally, radical history is the general term. From it, I can refer to new cultural history (Foucault, etc.), to social history, to intellectual history, to a variety of Marxist approaches, and, regarding time period, to contemporary history. The advantage of this approach is that it allows the other person to immedia...

Here are two quotations from the inimitable Aleister Crowley, the originator of the system of Thelemic Magick. In both of them, Crowley asserts that he is a nominalist. I request that you read them carefully. I will comment afterwards. In philosophy I was a realist of the Cabbalistic school. In 1900 I left England for Mexico, and later the Far East, Ceylon, India, Burma, Baltistan, Egypt and France. It is idle there to detail the corresponding progress of my thought; and passing through a stage of Hinduism, I had discarded all deities as unimportant, and in philosophy was an uncompromising nominalist. I had arrived at what I may describe as the position of an orthodox Buddhist; but with the following reservations. I cannot deny that certain phenomena do accompany the use of certain rituals; I only deny the usefulness of such methods to the White Adept. I consider Hindu methods of meditation as possibly useful to the beginner and should not therefore recommend them to be discar...

Metanarratives – totalizing schemes or language games – are, like medieval first principles, frequently circular. The end, triumphantly, confirms the beginning, However, the circularity of Ken Wilber's integralism , even more so than the better-known version (in my field) by Pitirim A. Sorokin, is particularly vicous. Wilber's model begins with the mythic premodern, continues with the modern and, then, the postmodern, and culminates in the integral. To Wilber, the integral incorporates, and explains, the previous stages. Here is Wilber : Instead of attacking the paucity of the modern and postmodern worldviews—which is the standard move by spiritual and new-paradigm advocates—it is perhaps more adept to reformulate and reconstruct the premodern interpretations of Spirit in light of modern and postmodern developments, such that the enduring fundamentals of the premodern, modern, and postmodern forms of Spirit's own display can all be honored by trimming their absolutisms and ...

There was only relevant one post in this blog (from February 5, 2009). It was titled, Villains and Others : "Villains who twirl their mustaches are easy to spot. Those who clothe themselves in good deeds are well camouflaged." --Star Trek: TNG, "The Drumhead" The other posting is in my autism blog .

This is my first entry in DeadJournal. Actually, I really do not have a whole lot to say right now. As soon as I can think of something, I will post ie. ;-) Take a look at my recent article on religious terrorisms. Its approach is different and decidedly anti-American in its policy arguments. (By the way, I am an American.) http://terrorism.religionsnet.com. Cheers, Mark A. Foster, Ph.D. The time will come when the evils of the present U.S. administration will be exposed. My prediction (based on my readings and observations, not on some imagined psychic readings!!!) is that George H.W. Bush will go down in history as the most corrupt president in American history. Enough said for now. I know that some writers have made comparisons between Pakistan-India (vis-a-vis Kashmir) and Palestine-Israel. In my view, however, such comparisons have little merit. Neither Pakistan nor India are colonial powers. On the contrary, prior to their independence, they constituted a single colony (India) go...

Hermeneutics or Herman U. Tics ;-) From a historical standpoint, there is no evidence for many seemingly historical statements in certain world scriptures (one way or the other). Histories are mirrors, and those mirrors reflect the perspectives of specific individuals and populations. Various academic and traditional systems are operating within different constructions of reality, and there is no point in trying to connect them. As an example: Adam can be viewed in the context of diverse religious narratives. Affirming his existence serves a function in those narratives. As to whether Adam existed - that is a matter for which can only be answered in those narratives (relative truth). We are not, therefore, talking about "what happened." Who knows what happened? Even eyewitnesses to current events, like auto accidents, may, for various reasons (including racial and gender prejudice), not agree. We can only speak in the context of different stories as expressions of power a...

Welcome to the new home of the SocioSphere Editorials Blog. I am now publishing the blog using Blogger. The desktop software I had been using (called, simply, Blog ) was good, in its time, but, as the Internet goes, quite old and, therefore, limited. I also imported/merged into this blog my older Blogger blog (and then deleted it), which explains the earlier postings.