Anagogy: I like the Star Trek:TNG example. Human beings often strive toward increased order or disorder and forget (or ignore) additional ways of seeing that could exist in between, such as completely random action. Why is it that people find "no meaning" or "randomness" difficult to accept? Maybe because it takes away the power and control we think we have or can exert.
Dive Bomb: It makes sense to draw from subjective and more objective kinds of perception. Do you believe any other approaches have value for you?
palimpsest: School curricula remind me of media stories. Students and the general public get fed information. Not everyone grows to become discerning and critical of these details. How many people do you know who question what they're told? When you're told one explorer "discovered" a particular place or your told one adversary caused a particular national or international conflict, do you necessarily believe what you're told? I agree with you the multi-lateral scenario adds stakeholders, but does the scapegoating not still exist there?
|