text:
Eyes Wide Shut

Will you ever recognise me as I walk towards you, rictus grin fixed across my face, eyes ablaze with love, passion and desire? Will you notice the way I keep you in my sights as my charm flows over you, seeping into your every pore and orifice? Will you take heed of the sugar-coated words as they spill from my mouth, telling you so remarkably all the things that you want to hear? Will you take note of the phrases which have been recycled again and again and possess the novelty of a cliché? Will you look deep into my eyes and see past your reflection or will you remain transfixed by what shines in these dulled, dark eyes? Will you question how is it that I know so much about you, where you live, where you work, your hobbies and your hates? Will you feel the chill down your spine as I appear once again without warning at a location you frequent or will you regard it as the tingling sensation of excitement and the thrill of my alluring personality? Will you question the platitudes that I issue, like confetti sprinkled on the breeze or will you smile and nod and savour the warmth that rises within you as I tell you how wonderful you are and that we belong together? Will you frown at my declaration of love within a day and a night and a day of meeting you or will you accept and swallow those carefully crafted words without a moment’s consideration? Will you wonder how my hands and mouth became so skilled or will you submit to their heady application and give breathless thanks that they are laid upon you? Will you query how this golden light continues to shine and wonder why you were chosen above all the others? Will you see through the veneer of scathing hatred for those who have gone before you or will you become co-conspirator and sneer at her or at him, disgusted by their lack of dignity in the way that they behave? Will you not ask yourself whether their words ring with truth and why they look as if their very essence has been sucked from them, leaving naught but a fractured shell? Will you wonder why the gifts keep on coming? Will you question the forbidden fruits that have been laid before you or will you gorge on them, delirious with desire and elated by the ecstasy of our largesse?

Will you recognise me when I turn my face from you when you try to kiss me? Will you know what is happening when you are left in a tearful heap on the floor for the third time in a week or will you flagellate yourself for your shortcomings? Will you notice as the triangles are weaved around you and your best friend becomes your supposed enemy, but by whose say so? Will you fight back against the control that is exerted on the way you look, what you choose to do and who you interact with or will you accept it and allow your sense of self to evaporate? Will you understand what is happening to you as you crawl alone into that ice-cold bed, this once haven of sexual congress that now lies like an empty tomb ? Will you realise what is going on as you blink back tears as the clock shows 3am and you have no idea where I am?  Will you stand up for yourself when you are labelled whore, slattern, idiot and fool or will you bow your head and retreat, thankful that your injuries are only verbal. This time. Will you remember what you once were ? Will you remain bound by the chains of confusion or will you break them across your knee and free yourself from your cruel bondage?

Will you recognise me as my hand grips your throat and my bile-infused words rain down on you, spittle flecked hatred peppering your face? Will you dial my number for the fiftieth time in two hours as you desperately try to hear my voice and ask me, beg me, plead for me to come home? Will you wince as another dinner set falls prey to my savage fury ? Will you kneel and pick up the pieces, fingers shaking as you fumble for the broken shards that lie scattered across the floor? Will you know what is being systematically done to you each and every day or will you obscure the reality by praying for that golden light to come back and dispel the darkness? Will you recognise me for what I truly am or will you make yet another excuse, wondering what will happen when you run dry of the excuses and hastily constructed explanations for my reign of terror?

Will you recognise me as I cast you aside, shoved into the dirt and sneered at? Will you look up from the smouldering ruins of what we once had and see her (or is it you?) looking back at you with disdain writ large across her made-up features? She seems so familiar, do you know her, there is such a fog now and it clouds so much. Will you understand why you have been forgotten about as your numbed fingers compose another searching e-mail, asking for explanations that will not come, expressing tearful anger that will be smiled at, detailing your abject hurt which will only ever receive a dismissive shrug?

Will you recognise me for what I am when I reach out a hand and lift you from your broken existence? Will you know what truly is going to happen as I lead you once more towards the brilliant, burning golden light? Will you feel the prick of caution in your mind or will you gladly race towards the promised land once again, concern and hesitation thrown to one side? Will you notice the rictus grin once again as you race ahead of me? Will you pay attention to the darkened glint in my baleful gaze or will you charge headlong towards the paradise,  addicted to its warmth and glorious sensations? Will you recognise me as I close the door behind us, bolt it and turn the heavy iron key in the lock as the thick drapes are pulled across the dirt-smeared windows? Will you notice the sharpened dagger that I have produced and hold behind my back?

Will you stop and glance in the shattered mirror that dominates this place and if you do, will you recognise yourself?

Listen to Eyes Wide Shut

54 thoughts on “Eyes Wide Shut”

  1. Is anyone having trouble receiving “New Comments” in their emails? I haven’t had one in 2 days! A friend of mine said the same thing. I’m going through withdrawals!

    1. Robin
      His work periodically prevents his reading and responding at all on the blog. Never has lasted more than a few days so far. The articles are set up to post automatically, so their appearance is not affected.

    2. Robin it’s called silent treatment. Feels horrible doesn’t to wake without the comments in your inbox.😊
      I am only kidding, H.G have other commitments and I have notice in the past Monday -Wednesday comments are left in moderation longer.

  2. Dear windstorm2
    Did you do some prayer for HG and all of us or it was just a thinking without a clear intention?

    1. Salome
      Not sure what comment of mine you are referring to. I do both. I hope that doesn’t offend anyone. It’s just an intrinsic part of me. There are several people I have done special prayers for, some brief and some over a period of days. I usually let them know this in advance. I’ve always felt it beneficial to know that someone is praying for you or sending you positive energy. So often we feel alone in our problems and knowing there are people who care can be a comfort and help.

      I’m a big believer in candles and I often light novena candles (9 day) to remind me to say prayers/send positive energy. Sometimes I just think positive energy out to everyone connected with the blog when I have an abundance. I have never specifically prayed for you, but I will now if you like. Unless it offends you in some way, I will pray that you always both find and give pleasure in movement and your dance. I often find much pleasure in the natural movements I see in nature. I pray/hope/wish that you do as well.

  3. Good evening Mona and the other nice people here

    This name-Salome suits me a lot but don’t worry- I was not abused as a child.

    It’s more about the power of dance!
    I started to do dancing performance on the stage at age of 3.
    Dancing I feel such a intense emotions and sensations…
    And I know it makes pleasure to te others to look at me when I dance.
    It drives them crazy!
    Especially the men…

  4. My heart is racing reading this……too many questions and not enough answers……..or maybe not the answers my mind wants to hear………I think I now know the meaning of the word catechizing……..

  5. Hey Yolo,

    I must correct myself. She was the stepdaughter of Herod and probably the daughter of his brother. It is not written in the bible that she kissed the head of John the Baptist. That was an invention of Oscar Wilde, who smeared her.
    I really believe that she was a victim of her mother. She wanted to please her and she was influenced by her. Why else would someone do an erotical dance in front of the own stepfather and why did she then asked her mother what she should ask for?
    The victim was the scapegoat.
    The name “Salome” was given to her 500 years after that event.

    It was an taboo to marry the wife of the brother even in that times. And John the Baptist pointed on that. Herod seemed to be a man with a conscience, he “only” put John in a prison. And he seemed to be a man who kept his promises. Maybe a dirty empath?

    1. I agree she was a victim of the obvious narc mother. The mother had so much content for him because she knew she was wrong and figured by having him killed she wouldn’t have to deal with it.

      I know in the movie things were either exaggerated or under stated. Do you know where its written that describes the erotic dance?

      1. Yolo,
        somewhere I read it was a veil dance. But maybe that is only fantasy. In the bible itself there are only a few lines and they talk about a dance and nothing else. I do not believe it was an innocent dance of a little child in front of his birthday guests.
        I just saw an interpretation of a priest and he spoke clearly about an intrigue of Salome`s mother. If we open our eyes and look at it, it seems to be pretty clear or not?
        I do not apologise Herod. Why did he marry his brother`s wife? Why did he promise Salome everything for a dance? There must have been some erotical interest. I have no other logical interpretation for that kind of behaviour.

        Please look at Wikipedia for a first overview and make up your own mind.

      2. Mona,

        I feel the same way as you do based on the many Salome’s, Herods, and matrinarcs that still exists. I genuinely believe that these stories have deeper meanings than one can imagine. Remember the guy who went to jail had all those wives and they would give their daughters to him for sex. Very dark and demonic, the hurt and pain these kid endure is very sad.

        Thank you Mona for being open to discussion.

        Thanks H.G.

        Eyes Wide Open

      3. Interesting that this is being discussed now. That was one of the Bible readings this past Sunday that Catholics all over the world heard. I was thinking about you all when I heard it at mass. 😊

  6. Just had an experience that seems to fit here. I saw an Archbishop in the flesh for the first time today. Apparently a priest at this Kansas church is being investigated for child abuse and the ArchB was explaining this at each mass today. He didn’t say “child abuse” though, he said “boundary violations with a minor.”

    He must have used that term “boundary violations” 15 or 20 times. At first I thought this was rather forward thinking – since the priest in question was most likely a narc and any abuse would have been boundary violations. He probably used that term, however, because it doesn’t sound as horrible – not because he understood narcissists.

    Though if you’re an Archbishop, I imagine you’d be pretty well acquainted with narcissists. Sad as it is to say, probably the higher you rise in the church, the more likely you are a narcissist yourself – and the more likely of the greater variety. In fact there’s a good chance this charismatic, seemingly caring, old Archbishop is himself a narc. The cynic in me acknowledged his adept façade management and damage control before, during and after mass.

    1. Wow Windstorm2! On the heels of watching that Emmy nominated documentary, “The Keepers”, and this story with the Arch Bishop personally doing damage control at this church you visited, I wish Catholic parishioners everywhere would just stop making their weekly monetary contribution until every boundary violating priest is turned in to authorities and dealt with as criminals instead of protected by the Church.

      1. It is certainly disturbing. This priest had been suddenly moved by the church to Pennsylvania before law enforcement began investigating. I wondered when I heard this if it had been an attempt to cover it up by the church. That’s such a traditional move to transfer a priest. Also the ArchB made one comment about how much he has enjoyed being their ArchB and hoped he would continue to be for many more years. Think he fears he sees the writing on the wall… also seemed like a narclike thing to say.

      2. I don’t know how the Church can keep getting away with just moving Priests around and people continue to have blinders on and follow the path of least resistance still, knowing how many scandals and abused children there were in the past. Mind officially blown.

      3. Your last comment reminded me of one of HGs articles about why other people won’t get involved in a friends/neighbors abusive narc relationship. One reason was people want to believe the best about other people, another was people don’t want to get involved in other people’s problems. Same dynamic going on here.

  7. Thanks to you HG, and your generosity and insight, I think the answer is now yes. I will see what that charming, too-good-to-be-true exterior hides (or at least enough to recognize that it’s a false front) and will make haste in the other direction as fast as possible.

    It is sad to go out into the world a little more cynical, a little less trusting, but in the end I will happily trade in my naive world-view rather than be fooled by one of your kind again.

  8. Salome, it is not necessary. I was only curios whether you used her name because you know the whole legend or you used her name because she demanded the head of ….for her beautiful dance. It is not so important for me to know. I am only a curious one.

    1. Excuse me Mona(Lisa?)
      but it’s not a legend…
      It really has happened about 2000 years ago!
      You can read more about in the most special book on the world.
      The book which can help you to reach the paradise…

      1. Hey Salome,
        yes it is written.
        Salome was abused by her own mother to seduce her own father Herod with a special dance (to “please” him) and to trick him out. He promised to give Salome what she wants.,,for that dance?,Her mother told her to demand the head of John the Baptist. And he did! Who is the scapegoat now?
        If you interprete it, they are speaking about incest and emotional abuse, nothing else. In the end the abused Salome is the one, who had to pay the price.She is famous for that now.
        Holy bible….

      2. Mona,

        I am intrigued by your interest. Do you think that Salome was Herods daughter or his niece? We focused on her request to behead him. Do you think her request was to please her mother? If I am not mistaken so think she kissed it before handing it over to the mother.

        Either way incest for sure. I find it extremely hard to get through the first testament. But, then I am reminded of Isaiah and know that his prophesies were real and fulfilled.

        When I see the name Tamar, I question if it’s intentional.

        One thing for sure, if we read and study the word narcissism before a.d. was the norm.

      3. Mona,

        I was thinking about how her step brother pretended like he was ill so he could rape her and then he discarded her like trash. And, the events that followed.

        I think of all the invisible victims that endure hurt from within their own family. Awareness is key to limit the damages that occur from being involved with a disordered person.

  9. Wide open but not sure if that makes me more stupid ? But I also don’t care 😬 Plus I always have you to help me HG 😊love you x

  10. Hello HG. Your writing is splendid. I admire how you elucidate such different and, to many, including myself, painfully difficult, thought processes with such eloquence.

    As a previously deeply empathetic woman who could be brought to tears by merely hearing about another person’s pain, I especially find it interesting how you mention in other parts of your writings how empaths and narcissists can be viewed as similar. Highly sensitive types who underwent childhood trauma. Initially I found this idea abhorrent. It made me angry. I felt an empath injury 😉 😂.

    Now is different. Post abuse. I understand with precision where my weaknesses are from my childhood. My own trauma bonds. But I feel so different. Detached. So much more seperate. Whether this is PTSD I don’t know but I do understand now how feeling distinct distance from people makes one care less. It isn’t for me a (non) feeling I want because joy, love, real happiness, the wish to dance in the rain and laugh so deeply….dissapates.

    Perhaps this is the ‘normal’ spectrum, or going further right. Whatever it is I can now imagine in my being how far right narcissistic behaviour simply has no concern for the pain inflicted on others. Before the abuse such an understanding was incomprehensible to me. I simply could not understand, however hard I tried. It was unfathomable because I only truly felt The Man with the Child in his Eyes when I was.with him. That lost child. It was deeply, profoundly unsettling. But nothing like the painful journey I am still taking.

    Now I can understand and feel so much more diverse, abusive perspectives, the world has become a more desolate place. Like the first bite of that apple. Why I feel like this after the awfulness of my childhood I can only explain as denial.

    Rather than a knife behind his back I wish I had armed myself with a wet kipper, slapped myself around the face with it a few times as the narcissist to be approached for the first time and ran in the other direction before a real encounter. Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

    But I will get stronger, happier and glowing with joy once again. I know I will. Given time.

    Thank you for your work HG.

    1. Hello Cath, welcome on board and thank you for your kind comments. It is evident from your comment that you are seizing the power.

  11. Wow!
    When it started with my Narc I saw exactly this in my dream: I’m in front of the mirror and I see the person I don’t know.This was for sure not my face.
    Now finally I understand this dream.
    The haeven have sent me a warning.

      1. Mona?
        Why does it interest you?
        Try to guess yourself…

        But now seriously… the answer could be verrrrrrrrrry long and maybe “Sir HuGe” doesn’t agree to make such a confession here…

      1. Now I really belive that, Twilight.

        I have had few more prophetic dreams.
        Once my Greater Elite have appeared in my dream trying to humilate me (he didn’t do it in real life before).
        Next day he made kind of sexual joke in front of the others. But after my dream I knew I have to keep calm.
        My answer was so well done that nobody was laughing of his stupid joke.
        He humiliated himself I think.

        Why do you ask?

  12. Hm, difficult to say. I believe I will fall for your kind again, because of the attention, that your kind gives me at first. Yes, that could be until the first strange thoughts are expressed by your kind. I will listen to them and go with some kind of excuse. An excuse full of lies. I will tell you how wonderful you are, but I do not deserve you …or I will tell you some other kind of nonsense. I will withdraw. No, I am not interested in your kind again. Your kind is too extreme.
    No, I have no need to heal or to fix problems of men or to deny their problems or to .believe I deserve that kind of behaviour.
    And I do not think that your kind will be interested in me very long. I am not disappointed about that.

  13. I will now! Extremely charming people make me suspicious now. If its too good to be true it probably is a narcissist!

    1. Me too! I had one come into where I work. He liked everything I liked, did everything I like to do, had a small dog in place of my cat etc. I even told him how my mother died and surprise! his mom died the same way. What a joke! I gave him my phone number to see what he would do and five minutes after he walked out the door he started texting. I blocked him. LOL I used to be so trusting. It’s sad we can’t be that way anymore.

      1. RS
        I like the old poker saying, “trust everyone, but cut the cards.” I still trust, but I’m trusting my eyes and senses as well. Sometimes that means trusting them to act like a narc.

      2. Good advice. Since finding out about them, that’s generally what I do now. What a world we live in.

      3. Rs….lol i had to laugh at how you tested him with your number. It is sad but also maturing to not be so naive. I hope to pass on my lifes lessons to my children so they dont make the same mistakes.
        Ive started seeing these types more readily and disengage. One friend in particular i no longer spend time with bc i recognize her as a covert midranger. Shes always complaining or crying victim. Her hubby and her insult each other and she bosses my kids around in front of me. Before knowing about narcissism id make excuses for this and feel i was too sensitive now i dont have time for negative people like this in my life. Its hard enough dealing with my narc so im simplifying my life and eliminating these types as much as i can.

  14. I am hopeful i will not, although I am still struggling with the need to feel in control . I am still trying to identify the person in the shattered mirror. It was cracked prior to intimate involvement with narcs. Putting the narc pieces together pales in comparison to piecing the puzzles of my life together (true me). Its not a pretty scene but the final pieces are coming together and it may not have the beauty of a Monet painting. But realizing there’s purpose and beauty in all experiences is priceless.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.


Content-Type: application/http; msgtype=response

WARC-Identified-Payload-Type: text/html

WARC-Type: response

text:
Eleven Months Part 5: Start Now

by Harry

Tisha B’Av begins at sundown tomorrow Saturday, July 28.

The saddest day of the Jewish year is one filled with tragedy upon tragedy. One of these tragedies, the destruction of the Second Temple is said to have been caused by sinat chinam, baseless hatred.

Is baseless hatred actually justified hatred that nets the hater nothing, as is concluded in the lesson I linked to just now? Or is it hatred for hatred’s sake?

You know what? It doesn’t matter. You know why? Because everyone gets angry and everyone has the potential to hate. Sometimes anger seems justified: You break my heart, I’m hurt and I’m angry with you. You hurt someone I love, I’m hurt and I’m really angry. And, if I hold on to that anger, it becomes hate.

One story behind the destruction of the Second Temple is a story of clinging to anger, public humiliation, more anger, and vengeance.

Hatred destroys. It destroys our cities, but it also destroys us. Hatred focuses ourselves on ourselves. Hatred removes the possibility of connection to each other from our consciousness.

Tisha B’Av is about remembering these tragedies, but not in order to cling to the pain they caused the Jewish people. We can note our tragedies without adding them to a scorecard of pain and suffering and reasons why we have the right to be angry.

It’s about remembering those tragedies so that we can move on. We are hurt. We are angry. We are bereaved. These are normal human states, but we can take this day and focus on moving forward. Letting go.

As usual, someone else said this much better and more succinctly:

Tisha b’Av is the beginning of Teshuvah, the point of turning toward this process by turning toward a recognition of our estrangement from God, from ourselves, and from others. ( Rabbi Alan Lew (z”l): This is Real and You Are Completely Unprepared, 2003, p. 52)

And so, in the middle of summer, in the middle of the heat and the bright, long days, we can consider those limitless possibilities that summer brings to mind, but first we should turn inward and do a little letting go.

warcinfo:
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2018-39
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for September 2018
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-45-127-147.ec2.internal
software: Apache Nutch 1.15 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 0.11-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: http://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/


WARC-Identified-Payload-Type: application/xhtml+xml

text:
Newly elected Chairman Senate Sadiq Sanjrani visited Pakistan Tehreek e Insaf’s chairman Imran Khan .

Chief Minister Abdul Quddus Bizenjo was also part of the half hour meeting that took place today in Bani Gala between Imran Khan and Sadiq Sanjrani .

During the meeting Chairman Senate thanked PTI and Imran Khan for supporting him and understanding the issues of Balochistan. While CM Balochistan too thanked PTI for standing with the people of the province.

The meeting was attended by various leaders of PTI also.

Backed by allied opposition , independent senator Sadiq Sanjrani and PPP’s Saleem Mandviwalla were elected chairman and deputy chairman of the upper house of parliament, on Monday.


text:
Friday, September 21, 2018

Control Your Entire System via Netgear WiFi Range Extender Setup

In today’s busy world, people take the process of setup for granted. They do not have much time in going through such annoying steps of troubleshooting. They are so much puzzled in their daily life that they forget the priorities in their life. They don’t have time to take care of their dear ones, so is it possible for them that they would waste time in Netgear WiFi Extender Setup Keeping this fact in mind, we have come up with this tutorial, just to help the people who don’t give time to their devices and in anger, they usually take a wrong decision that would ruin their life somehow.

Control Your Entire System via Netgear WiFi Range Extender Setup

So, dear users we actually want that the process Netgear WiFi Extender Setup takes a successful end. That is why we are here to keep our valuable views in front of you. The best and easy way that you can make your setup easy is to meet your devices with the upcoming latest technologies. When your devices are not up to date, how can you make the configuration successful? A kind of error message like “installation failed” is always shown. This process might take your little time but also provides benefits for a lifetime.

Control Your Entire System via Netgear WiFi Range Extender Setup

  • High-class security that controls your home network as well as the door-locks and CCTVs of your house.
  • Super-duper speed of Internet without any barrier in the field of signals.
  • Always keep you notified if you are crossing the limit of data usage.
  • Gives you full access to control the guest and parental access.
  • Do not allow intruders to enter your network, it kicks them out from the doorstep.
  • A pop-up appears itself when your device needs a dose of updation.

Enough about benefits let us proceed towards the device setup:

  • Take care of all your devices, and bring them enough closer to each other (extender and the router).
  • Your router plays an important role that leads to a successful setup, so you have to see that dust should not control it. If you see that dust is trying to cover it, kick that thing out with the help of a clean and dry cloth.
  • If your router is ugly, don’t be ashamed just set it free and receive the Live Internet connection from it and let your devices meet them. Also be sure that your router does not get hot and mess with other. If it is, it will shake its antennas to the horizontal position and can mess with your other devices and wires. So wait for a short while shutting it down and wait until it gets cool.
  • Now you can place your extender and the router to the same room and plug it into an electrical outlet.
  • Put them in an on mode and do not proceed until the power lights are stable. Once they are stiff at a place move towards your computer and launch a web browser. You can open any one of these Google Chrome, Mozilla Firefox or Internet Explorer and jump to the website by typing mywifiext into the address bar.

Netgear Genie Setup: Quick and Easy Home Networking

When you are logged in successfully, mywifiext is the most useful site that will help you in getting out of the brain-teaser situation of configuration by taking you to the Netgear Genie Setup page. Once you have reached your destination, it will ask you to show your default details of username and password to proceed forward. If you don’t have the login details, don’t worry. Just grab your phone and ask your Internet Service Provider for the same. As soon as you get them, fill them with all the required fields.

After that the page of Netgear Genie will do the job for you by showing you all the steps of troubleshooting, you just need to trust those steps and keep following its positive responses until it asks you to click finish to complete the setup.

For more assistance, you can share your views with us. You can also put any question in front of us in the comment box given below and we promise to solve them shortly.


text:
David Landy

Kant's Inferentialism: The Case Against Hume

David Landy, Kant's Inferentialism: The Case Against Hume, Routledge, 2015, 308pp., $49.95, ISBN 9781138062795.

Reviewed by Timothy Rosenkoetter, Dartmouth College

The interpretation on offer in this ambitious work is an attempt to build upon the insight that "Kant's theory is of a piece with Hume's: they are both theories according to which complex states of affairs are represented as such by forming pictures of such states of affairs" (107), pictures that Kant calls "intuitions." Moreover, Kant, in insisting against Hume that there is a species of representation that is categorically different from images, is not proposing a wholly independent mode of representation, as one finds in the classical rationalists. Instead, Kant conceives of the ability of concepts to represent as parasitic on the representational power of intuitions. While intuitions represent objects, "what a concept represents is not an object but the relations of the objects represented by intuitions" (75). Concepts are "a special kind of meta-representation" (183).

Given the starting point that he shares with Hume, why doesn't Kant just follow Hume and make do with intuitions alone? One of David Landy's many intriguing suggestions is that Kant introduces concepts because he realizes that Hume's account of how pictures represent cannot work. Kant enlists concepts in order to realize the true promise of the image-centered starting point. That is Kant's broad rationale for introducing concepts, according to Landy. In more detail: first, Hume held that an impression or idea of a triangle is of a triangle because the representation itself is triangular. Similarly, a perception can be of a time because the perception itself takes time to occur (Treatise, Bk. I, Pt. 2). Stated generally,

'a'R'b' represents xRy.

Second, Landy argues this proposal cannot explain how an imagistic representation can have determinate representational content. A mental picture of two differently sized triangles alongside one another could just as well be of their congruence as of the fact that one is larger than the other. Third, Kant correctly diagnoses this problem, according to Landy, and offers counterpart relations (as Sellars will later term them) that are sufficiently rich to specify a unique representational content for each intuition:

'a'R*'b' represents xRy.

Inferential relations serve as these counterpart relations, i.e., as instances of R*. It is as conceptualized that intuitions are complex representations of complex states of affairs. Inferential relations assume a central role in Landy's account because "a concept, by its very nature, is an interjudgmental function of unity of intuitions" (76). In particular, in predicating a concept of an intuition, <i is F>,[1] one is thereby licensing non-analytic ("material") inferences to other judgments that contain the same intuition (<i is G>, where <F> does not contain <G>, or vice-versa) -- and perhaps also requiring and forbidding yet other material inferences (66; cf. 69, 182). At least at the schematic level this is a philosophically rich proposal, which will be of tremendous importance if it can be filled out and shown to be correct -- or even just on the right track.

The book is laid out so that Chapter 1 contains the Humean background, much of which is not absolutely necessary for those interested in Landy's take on Kant. Chapters 2-4 are devoted to filling out the core of the inferentialist reading of Kant. They also feature a proposal for how sensations are synthesized to yield intuitions. This portion of the book is largely self-sufficient. The concluding chapters enrich that core proposal with a reading of the Analogies of Experience as central to a scientific realism regarding theoretical entities (Ch. 5), an inferentialist interpretation of Kant's theory of the self (Ch. 6), and a proposal for how to understand transcendental idealism (Postscript). Each of these concluding chapters presents inferentialism as the key to resolving a long-standing problem in Kant interpretation. I lack the space to engage with anything more than the absolute core of Landy's complex proposal. In what follows I must also ignore what will be one of the most salient features of the book for many readers, namely, the strong claims that Landy makes for Hume's direct influence on Kant. Landy argues that Kant had a subtle grasp of Hume's positions and why they fail, and that this grasp played a role in his development of an inferentialist theory of concepts. Even readers who concur regarding a strong Humean influence will bristle at some of Landy's specific suggestions. Without doing anything to settle this matter here, I'll just caution against dismissing Landy's substantive interpretation just because he overreaches in some claims of direct influence (if he does).

There can be no doubt that Kant attached great importance to the fact that any concept can be used inferentially. By itself, however, this is consistent with a model of concepts that takes their mode of representation to be broadly similar to the way in which intuitions represent: while intuitions represent objects, concepts represent abstract universals (cf. 75). In part, Landy finds evidence for Kant's rejection of this model in passages telling us that our ability to construe an imagistic representation as an F depends on "rules." In a passage from the first Critique we learn that "we think of a triangle as an object by being conscious of the composition of three straight lines in accordance with a rule according to which such an intuition can always be exhibited" (A105). Landy reads this as an allusion to material inference rules, explaining that "the concept 'triangle' would license the inference from 'This line segment is part of a triangle' to 'There are line segments that intersect each of the ends of this line segment that also intersect each other,'" among many others (140; cf. 77). Though Landy doesn't frame matters in this way, he is thereby offering a reductive proposal on Kant's behalf: in order to construe an image as an F it is necessary and sufficient to possess a set of rules (in addition to the image itself, of course). Which rules? Not merely those that make up <triangle> by being its constituent marks (e.g., <closed figure>). What we need to grasp are permissions, requirements, and prohibitions that cannot simply be analytically inferred from <triangle>. Once we possess these, however, we have everything required in order to construe an image as of a triangle.[2]

We do well to contrast Landy's proposal with a plausible non-reductive alternative, which he does not discuss. What makes it non-reductive is the insistence that rules alone -- of whatever kind, however multitudinous -- are not enough to enable us to construe an image as of a determinate kind. This is why Kant deems it necessary to add the power of judgment (Urteilskraft), alongside understanding (Verstand), to the list of our basic capacities. What the power of judgment enables us to do is to see whether this or that case is correctly subsumed under a rule, an ability that is related to intuitions because they are the epistemic medium through which we have access to any "this." In order to interpret intuitions as instances of a rule we need the power of judgment, which is precisely not reducible to understanding ("the faculty of rules," A126).

Once these two proposals are clearly delineated and contrasted, it is difficult, I think, to make a responsible interpretative case for Landy's reductive alternative. Consider first Kant's belief that there are physicians, judges, and statesmen who grasp an adequate stock of "rules" but lack a sufficiently well-developed power of judgment to use them. They understand "the universal in abstracto but cannot distinguish whether a case in concreto belongs under it . . . " (A134/B173). Kant's whole point in this discussion is to deny that their cognitive deficit can be made good through the acquisition of more rules. Landy could suggest that what Kant is really getting at is a distinction between two different sets of rules: (a) the rules that are equivalent to the marks of the concept itself, and (b) an indeterminately large number of material inferences, which are not analytically contained in the concept. One reason this suggestion is implausible is that Kant had at his disposal language that would have made this point clearly ("teach the statesman synthetic rules!"), but he chose instead to appeal to schemata and the power of judgment, while explicitly denying that these are reducible to the faculty of rules.

One might question my suggestion that Landy's account is reductive. After all, in order to construe an image as an F a subject does need to possess an image, and that is more than just possessing a set of rules. What this response misses is that the power of judgment is not the simple sum of sensibility and understanding. In other terms, one does not possess a schema simply by dint of having an image plus a concept (or any set of "conceptual necessities" equivalent to the latter [182]). However, let's forget this worry for the moment and simply grant that possessing a set of material inferences is sufficient for intuiting a triangle, so long as one also has an appropriate imagistic representation. In this case a new challenge arises. How can this account be made to cohere with Kant's views on the need for diagrammatic reasoning within mathematics?

I take Kant to hold that synthetic truths about triangles can be justified only because we have epistemic access to intuitions that represent triangles by virtue of our grasp of the schema for <triangle>, which grasp is an actualization of the power of judgment (cf. A135/B174f). It would seem that on Landy's account, by contrast, an intuition, <i>, that might otherwise represent various other things is an intuition of a triangle if and only if one takes a particular set of material inferences involving <i> to be permitted, required, or forbidden. Yet since these inferences are synthetic, mathematical reasoning on this model is more accurately represented as an analytic argument from a set of synthetic premises. Perhaps we find it psychologically necessary to consult images in the course of mathematical reasoning, but diagrammatic reasoning (which Kant clearly takes to be reducible neither to mere sensibility nor to our facility with rules) isn't doing any justificatory work on this account. I doubt that Landy's inferentialism can yield a plausible interpretation of Kant's views on mathematical cognition. Even so, it would be interesting to see an attempt to work out the model in detail, and this should be considered a key test for any inferentialist project such as Landy's. As it is, Landy devotes no real attention to how his reading can be made to cohere with Kant's views on mathematics.

Thus far I have focused on how concepts relate to intuitions. Kant's Inferentialism features an entire additional layer, in which inferential rules (i.e., concepts) guide an imaginative synthesis that converts sensations into intuitions. The presentation of this account centers on an inferentialist version of "Pippin's problem": this synthesis cannot have an inferential structure, since sensations are not the right sort of thing to figure as the relata in inferences (cf. 147). Landy's resolution of the problem is to hold that this perceptual synthesis is "blind," namely "rule governed" without being "rule following" (145):

Concepts-qua-inferential-rules create a certain structure among the judgments that they relate; the imagination imposes this same structure on sensations to form intuitions. It does not do so by forming judgments about sensations but rather by forming full-fledged conceptual intuitions, the structure of which is modeled on that of concepts-qua-inferential-rules. It neither merely conforms to these rules nor obeys them in its activity. Rather, it instantiates these rules: unites sensations in a way that models these rules, and does so because of those rules, but without representing either the rules or the sensations to itself as such. (153)

I find Landy's ideas regarding the blindness of this synthesis plausible and at points illuminating, but I don't see how his overall proposal solves the putative problem. If it makes sense for a manifold of sensations to instantiate "the same structure" that is found in a set of inferences, then what was the problem in the first place? And if there is a genuine problem about how sensations can provide justification rather than just causal influence, how can it be solved simply by noting that in some cases we instantiate rules without consciously following them? That said, those working in this area will certainly wish to consult the details of Landy's proposal.

I'll close with an observation on method. While reading through Kant's Inferentialism I was excited to find an unfamiliar Reflexion that is offered in support of the book's fundamental contention that Kant appeals to counterpart relations in order to account for representational power of intuitions. In arguing against G.F. Meier's contention that representations are mental pictures, Kant offers several striking counterexamples, one of which is musical notation, in which spatial relations between notes on a stave represent the musical relations between tones. By way of a general lesson Kant suggests that "since the representation borrows its ground from the represented thing, it agrees with the latter in that it is composed out of its partial concepts in the same way that the whole represented thing is composed out of its parts" (R. 1676, Ak. 16:78). Though it's far from clear that partial concepts bear material inferential relations to their whole concept, we can at least presume that the relation is going to be conceptual. Accordingly, Landy takes the note to capture Kant's counterpart theory of pictorial representation "in a nutshell" (65) and refers back to it periodically.

Looking closer, though, I was disappointed to find that R. 1676 provides precious little evidence for the counterpart model. First, Landy doesn't tell his readers that this note has been dated from the b-period (1753-59). Though by itself this would recommend plenty of caution when drawing conclusions regarding Kant's mature position, this isn't the end of the difficulties. There is every reason to think, namely, that at this point in his development Kant still adheres to the intellectualist position that Meier himself holds, according to which all representation is at base conceptual, so that apparently imagistic representations are really just indistinctly represented concepts. Consequently, it is entirely possible that this note is chiding Meier, who frequently explains representation by analogy with pictures,[3] for being a faint-hearted intellectualist[4] -- worlds away from using inferential relations to realize the true potential of an image-centered, Humean starting point! This isn't the only possibility. Kant seems also (or perhaps instead) to be concerned to point out that Meier's appeal to spatially extended pictures is inconsistent with the simplicity and non-spatiality of the soul. The point is that more work needs to be done to establish what Kant was really getting at, and that work will involve considering some possibilities other than Kant espousing a strong form of inferentialism. This is a particularly egregious case of something that I found at many points in the book. It features many evocative passages that might be pointing to some important role for inference. What is often needed is more patient analysis of those passages, supported by a more precise and rigorous specification of positions, inferentialist and otherwise, that Kant might be taking.

In comparison to this rather negative judgment regarding the book's achievements with respect to its main aim, I can report many positive experiences reading isolated portions of the text. The author offers interesting and illuminating analyses of this or that portion of Kant's project, and he often explains difficult material lucidly. The work is imaginative, and Landy is not afraid to take positions that are unpopular.

[1] Though it will meet with resistance in many quarters, I think Landy is completely correct to hold that intuitions can figure as constituents in judgments (cf. 115). This commitment figures in a logically independent account of how the categories relate to the functions of judgment (116). I lack space to discuss these topics.

[2] Since it is plausible that there could not be just one concept, perhaps concepts other than <triangle> are a condition for the possibility of its meaningfulness. But that's different from identifying the concept itself with a set of inferential permissions, requirements, and prohibitions, as Landy does. Once this step has been taken, questions regarding membership in this set arise. Does it include all of the true material inference rules? If not, what determines which are included? But if the set does include all of these rules, this implies that none of us possesses the concept <triangle> fully, and it suggests a scalar notion of concept possession. In contrast to the many subtle questions of this sort, Kant's view seems to be simple. One possesses <triangle> by virtue of thinking the conjunction of a small number of marks, each of which represents a universal.

[3] R. 1676 accompanies two characteristically laconic sections from Meier's Auszug aus der Vernunftlehre (§§10-11, repr., Ak. 16:76). For more expansive examples of Meier explaining representation by analogy with pictures, see Vol. III of his Metaphysik (Halle, 1757), passim, e.g., §489.

[4] The intellectualist can certainly allow that conceptual representation sometimes has an imagistic phenomenology. Yet for all that images are precisely not paradigm representations. The problem is that when Meier wants to explain representation he leads with its privative form.


text:
arrow grid linear view icon
The College of Arts Sciences

Prof. Powers Summer Speaking Engagements Abroad

By: Ayla K. Cline,
August 30, 2017

David S. Powers, Professor in the Department of Near Eastern Studies, keeps himself just as busy during summer break, as he does during the academic year.  He is Director of Graduate Studies in the Department of Near Eastern Studies, Adjunct Professor at the Cornell Law School, and Director of the Medieval Studies Program. This summer, with classes barely completed, he delivered a paper, “On the Abolition of Adoption in Islam,” at an international conference, “Living the End of Antiquity: Individual Histories from Byzantine to Islamic Egypt”, held in Basel, Switzerland. The goal of the conference was to bridge the gap between scholars who work on Byzantium and early Islam and to create a platform for scientific exchange. In June he led an Arabic-text reading-session (“The raid of Usāma b. Zayd”) at the Early Islamic Studies Seminar / 8th Nangeroni Meeting, New Perspectives and Contexts in the Studies of Islamic Origins, in Florence, Italy.

Powers is a native of Cleveland, Ohio and long-suffering Cleveland Indians fan. He received his Ph.D. from Princeton in 1979 and began teaching at Cornell in the same year. His courses deal with Islamic civilization, Islamic history and law, and classical Arabic texts, and his research focuses on the emergence of Islam and Islamic legal history. He is founding editor of the journal Islamic Law and Society.

Basel, Switzerland, at night on the river


text:
The Siegfried State of the Union

trumpsinging The vote to release of the House Intelligence Committee’s “secret” memo (and the vote to suppress Dem committee members’ minority report. The pressure on, resignation of, and subsequent humiliation of FBI Deputy Director McCabe, and the GOP and right wing media echo chamber’s FBI/Secret Society/Conspiracy Du Jour smearing of Mueller, while Mueller’s investigation of Trump’s high crimes and misdemeanors marches forward to a steady drumbeat….it feels operatic.  Will Trump stay ‘on script’ tonight, dutifully reading the teleprompter to media acclaim of his presidential and dignified address, or will we get the shrieking Valkyrie, calling doom upon his enemies?

More likely, given the low bar he (and his spiritual predecessor Bush) established,  he will mumble incoherently through a journeyman address, then go crazy tomorrow in the AM and tweet doom upon his enemies from the toilet.

Sadly, we’re still suffering through the Seigfried stage of the Ring Cycle, with the protagonist seemingly unstoppable, and we still have a ways to go before we watch his downfall in the Gotterdammerung, following the 2018 elections, victory of the Dems and subsequent impeachment hearings.

Weapons of Mass Murder

170813002022-34-charlottesville-white-nationalist-protest-0812-exlarge-169A popular false equivalence floated by guns nuts after every mass murder is that “X {shovels, kitchen knives, pipe wrenches, etc} can also be used to kill,” followed by the straw man “so are you saying that we must also ban X?”

This  begs the question “What is the best weapon of mass murder?”  If we are talking sheer numbers of victims, then everybody thinks Airplane and 9/11!  2,606 killed at the World Trade Center!  Clear winner, right?  Well you must consider that there were 2 planes involved, one per tower.  If we take a single airplane strike on the North Tower there were 1,402 direct victims.  But the attack required 5 terrorists, so the effective number of victims per terrorist is 280.

Bombs? Timothy McVeigh murdered 168 with a single truck bomb, fewer than the airplane reaping, although he did manage to injure an additional 600 people.

Cars & Trucks?  In 2016 Mohamed Lahouaiej-Bouhlel drove into a crowd in Nice, France and killed 86 (injuring 458).

Guns?  Stephen Paddock is the current leading mass killer, murdering 59 people (and injuring 527) with his legal semi-automatic rifles converted with legal bumper fire kits to full-automatic.  In line with runner-up Omar Mateen who killed 49 (and injured 58) at a nightclub in Florida in 2016.

Knives?  Not so common in gun-friendly U.S., but we have Satoshi Uematsu in Japan in 2016 who murdered 19 (and injured 25)…but keep in mind that he was stabbing disabled people.  More realistic is the recent attack in China where 10 people killed 29 (and injured 130) at a train station – the effective number of victims per killer is 3.

Shovels, pipe-wrenches, candlesticks, etc?  Seems like people have killed somebody with just about anything at one time or another…but I couldn’t find any evidence of massacres using ‘found objects’…perhaps because these things aren’t specifically designed to kill a lot of people.

In terms of price/performance, the airplane attacks were about $192/victim, McVeigh’s bomb was $30/victim, the rental truck $6/victim, and Paddock’s gun massacre $102/victim, knives $10/victim.

Post 9/11 security has made another commercial plane suicide attack unlikely, and the cost and planning are unrealistic for the lone-wolf killer.  The truck-bombing provides low cost with a high murder rate, but requires careful planning and execution to avoid ending up on a watch-list and foiled by Homeland Security.  The truck attack offers the best price performance with a significant mass-murder effect, very little planning, simple execution and limited skills required – the clear weapon of choice.  The gun attack was surprising pricey in comparison and requires basic shooting skills, but  doesn’t require much in the way of planning.

And found objects?  Pure wing-nut bullshit.

The Appalling Ignorance of Conservatives

facepalm_estatuaWonder why little aid is flowing to Puerto Rico in spite of the most devastating hurricane in its history?

A USA Today/Suffolk University poll conducted in March found that fewer than half of Americans (47%) believe that Puerto Ricans are U.S. citizens by birth.  They are.

Instead, 30% of the people surveyed thought residents of the island are citizens of Puerto Rico. Another 21% just didn’t know where the people of Puerto Rico belong.

Probably the same dumbshit 30% that believes in creationism, denies human activity as the cause of current climate change, and approve of Trump.

Cartoon Patriotism of the Conservatives

c05e10accafdd608f315434b0111b489--god-jesus-jesus-christWhat do these things have in common? NFL players ‘bending the knee’ during the national anthem to protest treatment of African Americans.  Removal of Confederate statues from public areas.  Black Lives Matter.  Muslims in America.

Simple – they cause wing nut outrage.  Throw in temper tantrums from the past over happy holidays coffee cups, flag burning, taking down Confederate flags from state capitals, not wearing flag lapel pins, transgender bathrooms for kids, etc.   Strange outbursts over seemingly petty issues – a conundrum to the educated liberal?

The key is rather banal.  The wing nut world view is a 2-dimensional comic book, formed in elementary school, before the introduction of critical thinking, where God, America, Soldiers and Football are all conflated.  Don’t look for any depth …the wing nut is fixated on the symbology and ritual behavior, the perspective of the 10 year old in Sunday School.

Theirs is a religion without theology, a patriotism without civics, opinions without consequence.  The crimes, or sins for them rest not in liberalism, but in disrespecting their sacred symbols and rituals – killing their sacred cows, so to speak.  And they react like any extremist religious group whose symbols are disrespected – by lashing out angrily and sometimes violently.

Is a special counsel for Trump-Russia really the best option??

(*tap, tap… is this thing still on?*)

As shown by the lack of posts from me here since Inauguration Day, I’ve had a hard time finding anything useful to say about the unprecedented dishonesty, unprecedented corruption, and unprecedented incompetence of the Trump administration.  There’s plenty of folks with bigger megaphones to decry the wrongness of their latest specific missteps, and the sheer unpredictability of Trump’s whims made it difficult to take a longer view.

But I’ve finally found a point where I dissent from the progressive consensus, so it feels like I should weigh in.  In the justified firestorm of outrage after Jim Comey’s firing as FBI director, the central demand among Democrats in Congress — and progressives in general — has been for the naming of a special prosecutor (or, to be technically accurate, a special counsel) to take control of the FBI’s investigation of connections between Russia and President Trump’s election campaign.

Being sufficiently old to remember previous investigations of Republican presidents, though, I wonder if that’s really the best thing to demand.  First of all, calling for a special counsel seems like an all-or-nothing bet on exactly who is named to do the job. If a loyal GOP hack whose highest priority is to neuter the investigation is picked (as happened when Joseph DiGenova was named to investigate the first Bush administration’s 1992 search for dirt on Bill Clinton), the pressure and demands will have backfired completely.

The independence and capability of the special counsel who is named will depend almost completely on the integrity of the person doing the picking — in this case, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who was either complicit in or exploited by the process of Comey’s firing.  And if Rosenstein has enough of a conscience and a spine to appoint a genuinely aggressive special counsel, why not simply let Rosenstein continue to oversee the existing FBI investigation?

Even in the best-case scenarios, special counsels going after GOP presidents have led to often-delayed investigations and meager results.  Patrick Fitzgerald was named in December 2003 to find out who leaked Valerie Plame’s covert CIA identity; it took almost two years to indict Scooter Libby, and another year and a half to get a conviction… which was promptly wiped away by George W. Bush’s commutation of the sentence before Scooter had served a single day.  Similarly, the Iran-Contra probe by Lawrence Walsh dragged on for six years, and had its key convictions overturned on appeal and remaining prosecutions erased by G.H.W. Bush’s Xmas eve pardons (bit of a family tradition there, eh?).

Is that really the route we want the Trump-Russia investigation to take?

I’m all in favor of pressure tactics to force an independent probe, but I think perhaps we should be pushing for a genuinely bipartisan congressional investigation, as well as whatever can be done to shield the existing FBI probe(s) from Trumpian influence.

I’m not going to pretend to be an expert about all of the alternative processes (including those I just mentioned), but it seems to me that the goal is to get as much information irrevocably out in public as soon as possible — and the hard lesson of experience seems to be that special counsels don’t provide this result.


text:
Kensington Leather in Rose Gold/Black

Kensington Leather in Rose Gold/Black

Out Of Stock

Sign up to be notified and we’ll send you an email when this product is back in stock.

From Nixon, a vintage inspired watch in Rose Gold and Black. Japanese quartz three hand movement. Stainless steel case with hardened mineral crystal. Stainless steel snap fit caseback and spring pin lugs. Genuine leather custom band with stainless steel buckle closure.

• 5 ATM
37 mm case
16 mm band width
Standard domestic flat rate of $7.95—free on orders of $100 or more.

Free return shipping within the US. Find out more.

View Domestic Rates

Priority international flat rate of $25.

View International Rates


text:
Monthly Archives: March 2007

More work, more progress

Here are the fruits of Bahiyyih‘s and my latest collaboration. To the tune of The first one is the first one: Oh, the fish swim in the ocean The sharks swim in the sea Won’t some kindly mer[maid/man] Come and … Continue reading

Posted in Tuneless | 1 Comment