Sunday, April 28, 2013
Saturday, April 27, 2013
Friday, April 26, 2013
The "Facts" Keep Changing About the Boston Bombings -- And It"s Fueling a Conspiracy Theory Industry
In the aftermath of massive, complicated crimes it’s not uncommon for a bit of crucial information to be immediately put forward by police, only to be contradicted later on. While it’s understandable that initial leads and assertions might end up being wrong in a dynamic situation like the aftermath of the Boston Marathon bombing, wholesale contradictions can encourage skepticism of the motives of those releasing inaccuracies — as with initial, false reports that Osama bin Laden hid behind his wife when U.S. forces shot him. Another effect of changing details can be to encourage conspiracy theorists who latch onto inconsistencies, and to undermine trust in authorities.
Now, almost a week after the Tsarnaev brothers fought a rolling street battle with dozens of heavily armed police officers, we learned Wednesday night that they had only a single handgun, according to sources who spoke with ABC News and the AP, something that directly contradicts what officials had previously said.
Here are some of the biggest changes to facts released in this investigation:
- Suspects’ arms – After the manhunt, Boston Police Commissioner Ed Davis said the brothers were “heavily armed” and numerous reports detailed a fairly extensive arsenal. According to a New York Times report from April 21 citing a law enforcement official, “The authorities found an M-4 carbine rifle … two handguns and a BB gun.” Now unnamed sources say there was only a single 9mm pistol between the two brothers. Indeed, photos of the shootout suggest only one brother had a weapon.
- Boat gunfight? – Police initially reported that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev fired on police when they found him hiding in a boat Friday night. “It was back and forth … yes — he was firing,” Watertown Police Chief Ed Deveau told CNN Saturday (though the FBI cautioned at the time that only federal authorities had official information). In its definitive “tick tock” of the events, the Washington Post reported that the suspect inside the boat “was shooting back.” But later, the Washington Post and the AP reported yesterday that Tsarnaev was unarmed when police found him after what what was described as a gunfight. As it turns out, police may have been spooked by an errant shot, and fired into the boat, but apparently zero shots came out.
- 7 -Eleven and the MIT officer – Initial reports suggested the brothers tried to hold up a 7-Eleven, and then killed an MIT officer who either responded to the robbery or just happened to be in the area. But days later, authorities revealed that the holdup was committed by different suspects and the confusion was caused by the close proximity of the two events. It’s still unknown exactly why the brothers killed the police officer.
- Carjacking – Some reports indicate that the person whom the brothers carjacked escapedwhile they inexplicably went into a store to buy snacks, while others say the brothers let the victim go because he wasn’t American. It’s also still unclear which brother stole the black SUV, and which drove the Honda that followed.
- Trip to NYC - What the suspects did after the bombing remains a mystery, but one detail that emerged was that they were planning to head to New York City — to party. That’s what New York Police Commissioner Ray Kelly said yesterday. But today, NBC News reports the brothers discussed trying to detonate a bomb in Times Square, but that the plan was not well developed and “aspirational at most.”
We’ll update this post as more examples emerge.
Related Stories
- The Facts Keep Changing About the Boston Bombings — And It"s Fueling a BConspiracy Theory Industry
- Watch: Jon Stewart Lambastes Constitution-Obsessed Fox News for Turning on the Constitution
- Medical Examiners Confirm Death of Missing Brown Student Misidentified as Boston Bomber
The "Facts" Keep Changing About the Boston Bombings -- And It"s Fueling a Conspiracy Theory Industry
Thursday, April 25, 2013
Tuesday, April 23, 2013
Monday, April 22, 2013
Saturday, April 20, 2013
Friday, April 19, 2013
Wednesday, April 17, 2013
Tuesday, April 16, 2013
Monday, April 15, 2013
Jean-Paul Sartre and the Theory of Individualism
The condition of society in the 21st century has a pronounced fear of individual freedom.
Photo: Pink Sherbet Photography
by Sartre
Intellihub.com
April 15, 2013
The relevance of Sartre’s philosophy remains intact because we desperately need a counterweight to a world that promotes dictatorial compliance. As a seminal thinker and most celebrated existential proponent, Sartre stirred a post World War II generation to view their existence from a non-traditional perspective that caused extensive establishment criticism and apprehension. The liberation and awareness celebration that distinguishes the realization of personal freedom during the 1960’s counter culture revolution owes a debt of gratitude to the French philosopher.
The co-ed schoolhouse version says, “Sartre would say that every single action and decision is made purely by free will. With no transcendent force “fating” what you do humans are left to make decisions that make who they are. Humans have no pre-defined purpose or future, by free will people make who they are. This goes with his belief of individualism, society or other forces don’t make who you are decisions that you make, make who you are.” Somewhat of a limited and simplistic interpretation of a far more profound and elegant insight, Sartre’s existentialism deserves a widespread revival.
A primer of his thought and description of the essence of his writing is well represented in the BBC video, Documentary on the life of Jean-Paul Sartre, The Road to Freedom. Viewing the numerous interviews and narrative provides an excellent summary.
In a scholarly essay by Dr. Latif Hussain Kazmi, Sartre on Human Freedom and Creativity, acknowledges the significance of his original approach.
“It provides a new conception of man, and a new outlook by making “human existence” the real frame of reference. For Sartre human reality or human subjectivity is the foundation of all thought and action. He says that man first of all exists, encounters himself, surges up in the world and consequently defines himself afterwards.”
Touching on the inwardness of admission that our existence makes no sense at all on many levels, it is up to us to give it meaning. We are condemned to confront our being. Each individual has not only the right to choice but has the duty to choose. The freedom to reinvent one’s self is universal and necessary. Who you are is what you do. Actions are indispensable on the road to freedom.
The awareness of dread that depicts the futility of beingness within a perceived absurd world is often expressed as a sense of sickness. In one of the canonical works of existentialism, La Nausée, the novel takes place in ‘Bouville,’ a town similar to Le Havre, and it concerns a dejected historian, who becomes convinced that inanimate objects and situations encroach on his ability to define himself, on his intellectual and spiritual freedom, evoking in the protagonist a sense of nausea.
In order to overcome this state of misery, the substantive Sartre - being and nothingness ? strive for individual authenticity. You are already involved even if you do not think you are. This theme is present in his most notable play, No Exit Theme of Life, Consciousness, Existence.
“As an existentialist play, No Exit necessarily embodies the Sartrean adage “existence precedes essence.” As humans, we first exist, with no preconceived expectations, purpose, or ideals to which we must live up. We then define our essence (i.e., who we are) through choice and action. The self is re-created every moment by a conscious choice, and only action dictates our essence and beliefs.”
No exit is the plight, which we all share as we experience the harsh reality that hell is other people. Thus, the inescapable conflict between the individual and the social order in human affairs is inevitable and the main threat to individual freedom comes from the state.
A basic question is how to accommodate individual freedom into a free society? Sartre’s imprisonment during WWII made him question the extreme individualism of his thinking. The need to link ideas on individual freedom to society as a whole, from his internment experience, caused a transition that drove a moral component in his philosophy. His flitting association with a collectivist vision of Marxism demonstrated a failed attempt to separate his philosophy from the politics.
Yet, Sartre’s Political Philosophy is not the primary focus of his worldview. The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy offers an astute assessment.
“Liberals who defend the primacy of autonomy typically claim that positive notions of freedom assume substantive, controversial conceptions of the good life. Indeed, Sartre’s rejection of human nature and his thin conception of universal human goods are consistent with liberalism. However, Sartre criticizes classical liberalism, especially in Critique, arguing against asocial, atomistic notions of selfhood (p. 311). Further, like civic republican philosophers (such as Aristotle and Rousseau), Sartre contends that controlling the social forces to which one is subject is a valuable type of human freedom. Republican philosophers variously call such freedom “self-government” or “non-domination.” Whether Sartre’s view of freedom is a better fit with contemporary liberalism or civic republicanism is a matter of speculation. Sartre’s discussion of freedom in Critique is highly abstract and does not translate simply into one public policy or another. However, his preference for mass movements and bottom-up social organization suggest that he would favor radical participatory democracy.”
In an entertaining and creative theoretical debate, Joseph L. Pappin II sets forth a fictional dialogue between Tradition and Radical Individualism: Burke and Sartre in Dialogue.
“Burke obviously sets out the case for tradition, especially in his Reflections, and Sartre sets out the case for radical individualism in Being and Nothingness. Although Sartre’s later work, Critique of Dialectical Reason, focuses more specifically on social structures and charts his enthrallment with Marxism, it is still the case that ontological priority is given to the individual.”
SARTRE: “My position is that freedom, under the conditions of scarcity and the alienating social structures, which are the heritage of the past, can occur only within the group, jettisoning the chains of traditions. Further, I deny that this is simply a negative freedom, for my ideal entails the positive reciprocity of freedom and it is best represented in the activity of the revolutionary worker. Since this requires group action, it is necessary that Terror or the threat of Terror provide the cohesion and fraternity of the group in order to insure common action and the freedom, which can only be realized in common with others. While someone must decide for the group and others must follow, the one who decides is essentially the same as me. In an authentic socialist society, thus, “there will be free men who will decide matters on which each could be considered the author.”
Consequently, the Western European edition, especially the French version of socialism has an unavoidable inconsistency that often favors the social order over the individual. Even so, Sartre expounds a mild variant of revolutionary anarchism for a perpetual revolt. Not surprising the establishment press attacked him for moral corruption and spreading hopelessness, while avoiding the appearance of being afraid of individual freedom. The threat of liberty challenges the dictates of the established order.
Sartre advocated that an individual should criticize everything that is given to you as part of your culture. Freedom is not an end in itself, but is an action and the road, that you take to get to it, is the expression of the existential experience. His legacy is that of an ethical compass with a noble attitude that does not let the elites off the hook for their transgressions against the Inherent Autonomy of the individual.
A philosophy of NO to the social order becomes the beauty of resistance. Sartre’s defense of self under siege is his strongest lasting contribution. The construct that Sartre was a pop celebrity of his era and a hero to the liberty movement is undeniable. The fact that his message is buried in the ash heaps of cultural pollution and mass media genocide is a fitting commentary of the meaninglessness in the emerging new world order.
Individual authenticity is urgently required not only in the personal lives of people, but needs to become the focal objective for a society, that is on the tract for ultimate desolation. “Being and Nothingness” has never been more visible. This appraisal is not an admission of despair but is a plea out of desperation for the survival of humanity.
In a review of Annie Cohen-Solal’s Sartre biography, Roger Kimball notes, “Sartre’s “happiness” at the “collective life” in prison camp was able to transform his “vague feeling of regret” into open nostalgia, writing after the Liberation that “We were never as free as under the German Occupation” because the very fact of oppression made every “just thought” a “real conquest.”
Who among the amenable servitude have the individual fortitude to rebel against the elites, who are methodically destroying the remnants of bourgeois society? Jean-Paul Sartre Properly Understood adds to the discussion.
BREAKING ALL THE RULES is an apt sentiment for commentary written under the nom de plume.
*****
Sartre is a contributor to Intellihub.com and writes for BATR
Intellihub.com
Jean-Paul Sartre and the Theory of Individualism
Jean-Paul Sartre and the Theory of Individualism
The condition of society in the 21st century has a pronounced fear of individual freedom.
Photo: Pink Sherbet Photography
by Sartre
Intellihub.com
April 15, 2013
The relevance of Sartre’s philosophy remains intact because we desperately need a counterweight to a world that promotes dictatorial compliance. As a seminal thinker and most celebrated existential proponent, Sartre stirred a post World War II generation to view their existence from a non-traditional perspective that caused extensive establishment criticism and apprehension. The liberation and awareness celebration that distinguishes the realization of personal freedom during the 1960’s counter culture revolution owes a debt of gratitude to the French philosopher.
The co-ed schoolhouse version says, “Sartre would say that every single action and decision is made purely by free will. With no transcendent force “fating” what you do humans are left to make decisions that make who they are. Humans have no pre-defined purpose or future, by free will people make who they are. This goes with his belief of individualism, society or other forces don’t make who you are decisions that you make, make who you are.” Somewhat of a limited and simplistic interpretation of a far more profound and elegant insight, Sartre’s existentialism deserves a widespread revival.
A primer of his thought and description of the essence of his writing is well represented in the BBC video, Documentary on the life of Jean-Paul Sartre, The Road to Freedom. Viewing the numerous interviews and narrative provides an excellent summary.
In a scholarly essay by Dr. Latif Hussain Kazmi, Sartre on Human Freedom and Creativity, acknowledges the significance of his original approach.
“It provides a new conception of man, and a new outlook by making “human existence” the real frame of reference. For Sartre human reality or human subjectivity is the foundation of all thought and action. He says that man first of all exists, encounters himself, surges up in the world and consequently defines himself afterwards.”
Touching on the inwardness of admission that our existence makes no sense at all on many levels, it is up to us to give it meaning. We are condemned to confront our being. Each individual has not only the right to choice but has the duty to choose. The freedom to reinvent one’s self is universal and necessary. Who you are is what you do. Actions are indispensable on the road to freedom.
The awareness of dread that depicts the futility of beingness within a perceived absurd world is often expressed as a sense of sickness. In one of the canonical works of existentialism, La Nausée, the novel takes place in ‘Bouville,’ a town similar to Le Havre, and it concerns a dejected historian, who becomes convinced that inanimate objects and situations encroach on his ability to define himself, on his intellectual and spiritual freedom, evoking in the protagonist a sense of nausea.
In order to overcome this state of misery, the substantive Sartre - being and nothingness ? strive for individual authenticity. You are already involved even if you do not think you are. This theme is present in his most notable play, No Exit Theme of Life, Consciousness, Existence.
“As an existentialist play, No Exit necessarily embodies the Sartrean adage “existence precedes essence.” As humans, we first exist, with no preconceived expectations, purpose, or ideals to which we must live up. We then define our essence (i.e., who we are) through choice and action. The self is re-created every moment by a conscious choice, and only action dictates our essence and beliefs.”
No exit is the plight, which we all share as we experience the harsh reality that hell is other people. Thus, the inescapable conflict between the individual and the social order in human affairs is inevitable and the main threat to individual freedom comes from the state.
A basic question is how to accommodate individual freedom into a free society? Sartre’s imprisonment during WWII made him question the extreme individualism of his thinking. The need to link ideas on individual freedom to society as a whole, from his internment experience, caused a transition that drove a moral component in his philosophy. His flitting association with a collectivist vision of Marxism demonstrated a failed attempt to separate his philosophy from the politics.
Yet, Sartre’s Political Philosophy is not the primary focus of his worldview. The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy offers an astute assessment.
“Liberals who defend the primacy of autonomy typically claim that positive notions of freedom assume substantive, controversial conceptions of the good life. Indeed, Sartre’s rejection of human nature and his thin conception of universal human goods are consistent with liberalism. However, Sartre criticizes classical liberalism, especially in Critique, arguing against asocial, atomistic notions of selfhood (p. 311). Further, like civic republican philosophers (such as Aristotle and Rousseau), Sartre contends that controlling the social forces to which one is subject is a valuable type of human freedom. Republican philosophers variously call such freedom “self-government” or “non-domination.” Whether Sartre’s view of freedom is a better fit with contemporary liberalism or civic republicanism is a matter of speculation. Sartre’s discussion of freedom in Critique is highly abstract and does not translate simply into one public policy or another. However, his preference for mass movements and bottom-up social organization suggest that he would favor radical participatory democracy.”
In an entertaining and creative theoretical debate, Joseph L. Pappin II sets forth a fictional dialogue between Tradition and Radical Individualism: Burke and Sartre in Dialogue.
“Burke obviously sets out the case for tradition, especially in his Reflections, and Sartre sets out the case for radical individualism in Being and Nothingness. Although Sartre’s later work, Critique of Dialectical Reason, focuses more specifically on social structures and charts his enthrallment with Marxism, it is still the case that ontological priority is given to the individual.”
SARTRE: “My position is that freedom, under the conditions of scarcity and the alienating social structures, which are the heritage of the past, can occur only within the group, jettisoning the chains of traditions. Further, I deny that this is simply a negative freedom, for my ideal entails the positive reciprocity of freedom and it is best represented in the activity of the revolutionary worker. Since this requires group action, it is necessary that Terror or the threat of Terror provide the cohesion and fraternity of the group in order to insure common action and the freedom, which can only be realized in common with others. While someone must decide for the group and others must follow, the one who decides is essentially the same as me. In an authentic socialist society, thus, “there will be free men who will decide matters on which each could be considered the author.”
Consequently, the Western European edition, especially the French version of socialism has an unavoidable inconsistency that often favors the social order over the individual. Even so, Sartre expounds a mild variant of revolutionary anarchism for a perpetual revolt. Not surprising the establishment press attacked him for moral corruption and spreading hopelessness, while avoiding the appearance of being afraid of individual freedom. The threat of liberty challenges the dictates of the established order.
Sartre advocated that an individual should criticize everything that is given to you as part of your culture. Freedom is not an end in itself, but is an action and the road, that you take to get to it, is the expression of the existential experience. His legacy is that of an ethical compass with a noble attitude that does not let the elites off the hook for their transgressions against the Inherent Autonomy of the individual.
A philosophy of NO to the social order becomes the beauty of resistance. Sartre’s defense of self under siege is his strongest lasting contribution. The construct that Sartre was a pop celebrity of his era and a hero to the liberty movement is undeniable. The fact that his message is buried in the ash heaps of cultural pollution and mass media genocide is a fitting commentary of the meaninglessness in the emerging new world order.
Individual authenticity is urgently required not only in the personal lives of people, but needs to become the focal objective for a society, that is on the tract for ultimate desolation. “Being and Nothingness” has never been more visible. This appraisal is not an admission of despair but is a plea out of desperation for the survival of humanity.
In a review of Annie Cohen-Solal’s Sartre biography, Roger Kimball notes, “Sartre’s “happiness” at the “collective life” in prison camp was able to transform his “vague feeling of regret” into open nostalgia, writing after the Liberation that “We were never as free as under the German Occupation” because the very fact of oppression made every “just thought” a “real conquest.”
Who among the amenable servitude have the individual fortitude to rebel against the elites, who are methodically destroying the remnants of bourgeois society? Jean-Paul Sartre Properly Understood adds to the discussion.
BREAKING ALL THE RULES is an apt sentiment for commentary written under the nom de plume.
*****
Sartre is a contributor to Intellihub.com and writes for BATR
Intellihub.com
Jean-Paul Sartre and the Theory of Individualism