############################Thanks, Cole.
At some point, it might be interesting to have an open TOK Zoom session devoted to Jordan Peterson from a Unified Framework lens. If folks are interested, let me know and I will set something up.
Best,
Gregg
From: tree of knowledge system discussion <[log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of Cole Butler
Sent: Thursday, May 7, 2020 9:15 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: FAQ with Waldemar in Blog form
Hi all,
I really appreciate all of these reflections, and, in regard to the sense-making crisis, I'm seeing it everywhere. I certainly broke down when I asked my supervisor to lay me off, thinking that I was more of a burden than a value. One of my best friends, quarantined in New York for 2 months now, was institutionalized for 4-days for yelling at her boyfriend to give her all of his Xanax so she could "not be awake for the rest of this." Another one of my best friends quit his job yesterday and drove 3-hours with everything he owns to come see me and try and figure things out. My mom is high-risk and has been forced to return to the clinic she works at, doing yoga therapy and stress management for holistic cardiac rehab, so that the business doesn't go under, while space is too-limited to implement proper safety measures.
Indeed, these are just personal cases, and I'm sure that several of you have seen similar experiences in your lives. My point is that it seems the massive crisis has shaken the substructure of our realities and forced us to question, again, where is the true information in all of this, and what is my (our) personal narrative? In all of the above referenced cases, the coronavirus situation served to exacerbate pre-existing psychological concerns. For me: meaning & direction. For my NY friend: trauma and living out her abusive father-relationship with her severe substance abusing boyfriend. For my friend who quit his job: finding out what he wants to do and whether or not he's valuable. For my mom: wanting to stay healthy so that she can provide for everyone in her family that needs her.
I see many people here referencing Jordan Peterson, and, while I don't want to be the "Jordan Peterson Guy" in the group, I am a big-fan and am currently devoting all of my book-reading time to understanding Maps of Meaning in depth. I came across this passage yesterday that I found particularly relevant during our situation, and I think it will highlight what his position would be (roughly speaking - ha) if he were to speak on this issue, though I don't think he's in good enough health for it. Right before this quote, he laid out how information is acted out in play, imitated, ritualized, put into narrative, transformed into myth, converted to religion, and philosophized. See:
“Every novelty-inspired, exploratory driven “learning experience” has a revolutionary element; it is just that those reconstructions that involve stories with very limited “sizes” (that is, spatial-temporal areas) release only a proportionate amount of emotion. The “normal/revolutionary” dichotomy is, therefore, not valid—it is always a matter of degree. Small-scale inconveniences require minor life-story modifications. Large-scale catastrophes, by contrast, undermine everything. The “biggest disasters” occur when the largest stories that we play out are threatened with dissolution, as a consequence of radical “environmental” transformation. Such transformation may occur in the natural course of things, when an earthquake or similar “act of God” takes place; may be generated internally, as a consequence of heretical action...”
- Jordan Peterson; Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of Belief; p.87"
Hope this is helpful,
Cole Butler
TPAC Project Coordinator
University of Maryland
2103W, Cole Field House | College Park, MD 20742
tel 301.405.6163
On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 6:50 AM Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Dear Joe,
Thanks for this heartfelt reflection. I will offer some brief remarks in response. I see this as a key issue and something of deep interest to the TOK Society’s mission and ethos.
First, the video was removed, so I did not get a chance to watch it. As such, I cannot form an opinion.
Second, I would describe the experience you are sharing here as a perfectly understandable crisis in sense-making. Anyone who has not had a crisis in sense-making is not paying attention (or worse). There is so much that we want to know and even need to know that we cannot know.
Third, central to the TOK Society’s overall mission is to foster ways of being that enable us to see the world in a way that affords greater sense making. This is, of course, what the Tree of Knowledge attempts to. It offers a novel descriptive metaphysical language system for organizing our modern naturalistic scientific justification systems. By putting on these glasses, we can sift through much noise and start to home in on the important behavioral frequencies across the various dimensions and levels of analysis. The idea of why we need an Enlightenment 2.0 Now (riffing off Pinker) is that our sense making ecology is being overwhelmed and we lack the schema necessary. The ToK attempts to fill the conceptual gaps that modernity left empty.
Fourth, individuals are hopeless in trying to make sense of the kind of phenomena we need to make sense of in the 21st Century. As such, we need collective intelligence systems operating on good faith to enable to have data-information-knowledge-wisdom ecologies that afford us high quality living in a sustainable, resilient, and anti-fragile way.
Fifth, the folks over at Rebel Wisdom are asking these kind of questions in earnest. Indeed, I would say that the last four or so videos have been focused on exactly the genre of the question you are raising here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G70qtM66iY8&t=23s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDM1wTGOjOw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omiD6WkTKak
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZcO-B_y4aY
See also Jordan Hall’s reflections on The Stoa. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPcQ6igOTZ4
Sixth, we are stepping into a liminal space, a time between worlds, to use Zak S’s phrase. We must give up the idea that we know. We must embark on a new sensemaking journey, with sense making systems that are up to the task and our commitment to being good faith actors attempting to enhance dignity and well-being with integrity. As such, there are no easy answers. The best we can do is cultivate the right knowledge systems with the right attitudes and do what we can toward cleaning up the information ecology and moving toward valued states of being.
Best,
Gregg
From: tree of knowledge system discussion <[log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of Joseph Michalski
Sent: Thursday, May 7, 2020 2:43 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: FAQ with Waldemar in Blog form
Greetings ToK Society Colleagues:
First, please feel free to ignore this lengthy message entirely if you're not interested. I'm writing this in the wee hours of the morning after being troubled by the odd convergence of reviewing Jason's post precisely at the same time that my wife came up and told me "OMG, did I send you that link? I just finished watching that video because my friend said I had to see this right away!"). So, I decided to dive in. But, I confess, I'm a bit confused. Hence my lengthy post here.
I am trained as a sociologist -- a weak science at best, if anyone else truly knows my field. But I'm trained as a scientist nevertheless, even though I don't think any other sociologists in my own department would use that word to describe themselves! So, that means I strive to understand the links between theory, methodology, and evidence in whatever I investigate. The end result is that I tend to be quite "conservative" in making "causal" claims about human social behavior, since we typically lack rigor and experimental controls in most sociological studies, even when we are committed to doing "real science" (and, believe me, many sociologists are hyper-critical of anything claiming to be "scientific" and/or are explicitly ideological rather than scientific in their pursuits). My main point is that the "royal we" of sociologists are not especially insightful in terms of identifying the mechanisms that lead to behavioral consequences. That's perhaps the main reason I became enamored of the ToK approach. Plus, I have always read widely across all disciplines, partly from frustrations with my own field's limited explanatory capacity, which includes too the limitations of my own work. I've been "searching" for a more unified understanding of all facets of "behavior" in the universe. My apologies for such self-indulgence, but I mention all of this to set the stage for my query of this list. For despite my status as a "full professor" and despite being an "ABD" in a cognate field from the University of Toronto, I'm confused by the total range of COVID-19 info currently being circulated.
Can someone perhaps distill for me and the list the key info being circulated? From a ToK perspective, we are dealing with biological behavior (the stuff Waldemar mainly addresses), the psychological behavior (e.g., issues ranging from widespread fear to cognitive biases and conspiracy theories - and whatever triggers our brains to "think" certain ways) to the cultural issues surrounding justifications and our embeddedness in cultural systems that promote certain worldviews (i.e., we are all "socially located" and thus inevitably "influenced" by the social "vorces" to which we are subjected, including this listserv!). Thus we can see that there are many moving parts. But we are at an unprecedented moment, certainly in my lifetime. The last several weeks have seen a change literally in how we conduct our daily lives, and millions of people have lost their jobs. Our university, of course, ended up shutting down and we're anticipating the loss of many students and millions of dollars, jeopardizing our fiscal future as well. At the same time, I'm supportive of the notion that if we rally around these issues together, we can protect our collective health and secure a more optimistic future. But that requires that our key actors are "acting in good faith" and that we are basing decisions on the "best science" too. So, here's the problem. I was born in the early '60s and thus grew up in the '60s and '70s, where we first started to question that our government might not be telling the truth in all matters of importance. That didn't mean we all became "conspiracy theorists," but, not surprisingly, my own discipline (sociology) shifted to more anti-establishment and "critical" approaches to understanding the production of truth and knowledge. The long and the short of these developments?
We realized, I think with some reasonable degree of insight and skepticism, that there might indeed be some truth to the notion that scientific research and the production of knowledge more generally might be tied at least in some respects to certain financial and political interests. More benignly, we at least came to establish the subfield of the sociology of science to examine those social forces the might affect the production of knowledge and truth claims, without denying the possibility of some forms of "objectivity" or "brute facts" altogether. And this is where we could have and should have been working much more closely with the psychologists! But, alas, we were too arrogant and too territorial -- and we have remained siloed and rather alienated from each other as a result, though I'm sure the psychologists have been probably equally arrogant and dismissive too of sociologists (well, at least people like Jordan Petersen despise sociology because apparently we're ALL Marxists and post-modernists, and there's nothing of value to be found within those paradigms in his view). All of which brings me back to COVID-19 and the "conspiracy theorists" and "deep state" folks. How is a reasonable person, genuinely curious and open-minded in the pursuit of knowledge, supposed to make sense out of these two antithetical positions:
Position A: The "Plandemic" theory being touted here and spreading, ahem, "virally":
Position B: These are all crackpots, anti-vax, pseudo-scientists, like Mikovits:
I've just spent two hours trying to understand these sharply contrasting perspectives and, despite (because of?) my education, I cannot discern what the science is "really" telling us about the causal mechanisms involved in the spread of viruses. I have a limited knowledge of virology. How can I possibly or credibly assess the veracity of what I'm "being told" or what the "best science" truly says about the causal mechanisms associated with the virus and immune responses? Mikovits apparently had some early career success with her doctoral work re: HIV: "...recent studies (have shown) patients in which plasma virus is reduced to undetectable levels following highly active triple drug antiretroviral therapy, but soon after cessation of therapy high viral titers are again detected, suggesting long lived reservoirs of latent virus exist. Therefore, we have focused our efforts on examining infectivity of HIV-1 and HTLV-1 and defining cytokines and other cellular mechanisms involved in maintaining a balance between human retroviral expression and latency." Her subsequent work, however, did not appear to achieve the same standards of success. Her own Science article has been retracted, especially after other researchers failed to replicate her work. More recently, Mikovits has "questioned whether the use of animal tissue in medical research were unleashing devastating plagues of chronic diseases, such as autism and chronic fatigue syndrome." Is that even possible or, if not, as she seems to imply, intentional?
I also am concerned from a psychological perspective about the strength of the possible cognitive biases involved as people defend their positions with such extremism (but nor do I want to concede that it's all "relative" and purely a matter of how one sees the world). More to the point, the scientist in me recoils when I see such monolithic pronouncements or all-encompassing "explanations" that lack nuance or discussions or careful consideration of alternative voices and a careful review of the evidence. In short, why should I or anyone else simply listen to "Mikovits" (Position A), whom I'd never heard of previously, or "Orac" (Position B), whom I'd never heard of previously? For that matter, I've certainly heard of Bill Gates, but should I trust him either in regard to his pronouncements about COVID-19 or vaccination? I mean, I like Microsoft platforms well enough, but that's a rather different field. More generally, how does one assess the degree of "mis-information" and "dis-information" that regularly spreads on the internet? Equally problematic: how can one possibly trust the political leadership that may not always be driven by "the public interest"? I've only recently watched the Ken Burns Vietnam war documentary, where I was struck by a number of observations, but perhaps none more than the Vietnam vet Karl Marlantes (U.S. Marines) quoted on camera: “My bitterness about the political powers at the time was, first of all, the lying. I mean, I can understand the policy error that is incredibly, incredibly painful and kills a lot of people out of a mistake if they made that with noble hearts. That was, you know, when Eisenhower and Kennedy were trying to figure things out. And you read that, you know, McNamara knew by ’65, that was three years before I was there, that the war was unwinnable? That’s what makes me mad. Making a mistake, people can do that. But covering up mistakes. Then,you’re killing people for your own ego – and that makes me mad.”
I hate to think we are being directly misled on matters as serious as COVID-19, but we surely must ask which groups stand to benefit for the dissemination of which types of information. Yet if we are reduced to asking only that question, then that doesn't really help us understand the medical issues involved or even the policy implications that might follow. I'd welcome anyone and everyone's insights to help us develop a more coherent view of what's happening from a medical and population health standpoint, as well as in constructing the most accurate and helpful "narrative" or "justifications" that we might offer moving forward. I mean, God knows I just put my own "life" and "family" at risk earlier today (yesterday now!) spending hours helping a guy currently dealing with a drug addiction move into a wretched apartment in the most "dangerous" part of my own city -- where there was no "social distancing" or masks, or much of anything else one sees in "polite" or "educated" society. What's the rate of infectious disease in that part of town? We know it's relatively high, since we opened up the first "safe injection site" just blocks from where I was working today. In any event, I'm almost 60 and I came home and literally shed tears at the misery I had just spent several hours witnessing, even though I was "helping" one poor soul. For whatever the reasons or the underlying causes, we are literally dealing with life and death issues here. I, for one, would benefit from any additional insights folks on this list could offer to make sense out of what we're really facing here. Peace and health, -Joe
Dr. Joseph H. Michalski
King’s University College at Western University
266 Epworth Avenue, DL-201
London, Ontario, Canada N6A 2M3
Tel: (519) 433-3491
Email: [log in to unmask]
______________________
eiπ + 1 = 0
From: tree of knowledge system discussion <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Lene Rachel Andersen - Nordic Bildung / Fremvirke <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, May 6, 2020 11:41 PM
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: FAQ with Waldemar in Blog form
There is an entire 'subculture' out there that believes what I gather to be the following narrative: Bill Gates created the virus in order to sell governments a chip that can be implanted in all of us and keep us under constant surveillance. This is predicted in the Bible that says something about a mark on the hand (the chip) and a mark on the forehead (masks). The WHO is in on this and is run by communists who want to destroy the economy and keep everybody locked up in their homes. The WHO is also the main source of misinformation. There is also something about a socialist world government and losing the right to guns mixed up in the story.
I am a member of a Jordan B. Peterson support group on Facebook where I have gathered the bits and pieces, but I have not pursued all the details.
If anybody knows Jordan B. Peterson and has access to him, and if he still believes in science and government institutions - and if he is in good heath - please tell him that he could save many lives by making a video explaining why people should pay attention to government health information.
/ Lene
On 07-05-2020 04:04, nysa71 wrote:
Hi Waldemar,
Yes, that FAQ was very helpful, and I made sure to share it on my Facebook timeline.
However, something that seems disturbing just came to my attention. It would seem there's some new "conspiracy theory" video on the virus that's being spread around social media. YouTube has taken it down once, but it keeps popping up. Phrases like "Big Pharma" and "The Deep State" get mentioned, and that, of course, sets off some red flags for me.
Since this pandemic is bad enough, this kind of nonsense is the last thing we need.
I just wanted to bring this to your attention. Perhaps your expertise is needed to address this, as well. We don't need any more misinformation out there. There's enough of that already.
Plandemic Documentary The Hidden Agenda Behind Covid 19
Plandemic Documentary The Hidden Agenda Behind Covid 19
Reminder: This documentary is a reupload. I did not make this. Please share and download this video. it will mos...
Again, thanks Waldemar & Gregg,
Jason Bessey
On Tuesday, May 5, 2020, 02:48:39 PM EDT, Cole Butler <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Thank you Gregg and Waldemar. This is very useful. I've shared it with my facebook friends.
Best,
Cole Butler
TPAC Project Coordinator
University of Maryland
2103W, Cole Field House | College Park, MD 20742
tel 301.405.6163
On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 1:28 PM Joseph Michalski <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Thanks Waldemar. I've shared this with my family as well! All the best, -joe
Dr. Joseph H. Michalski
King’s University College at Western University
266 Epworth Avenue, DL-201
London, Ontario, Canada N6A 2M3
Tel: (519) 433-3491
Email: [log in to unmask]
______________________
eiπ + 1 = 0
From: tree of knowledge system discussion <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 5, 2020 2:23 PM
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: FAQ with Waldemar in Blog form
Hi Waldemar,
Thanks for the latest.
They made your blog an essential read, so it is now on the homepage of Psych Today. Thanks and congrats!
Best,
Gregg
From: tree of knowledge system discussion <[log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of Waldemar Schmidt
Sent: Tuesday, May 5, 2020 1:04 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: FAQ with Waldemar in Blog form
As mentioned in the blog, humility and skepticism is in order when dealing with nCoV-2 and COVID-19.
nCoV-2 has mutated - the mutation is termed D614G - and it appears more infectious than the original.
We have so much to learn about this virus.
A link: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news.
The time for mitigation may not yet be over!
Please, all be safe, be wise, be home, and be healthy!
Best regards,
Waldemar
Waldemar A Schmidt, PhD, MD
(Perseveret et Percipiunt)
503.631.8044
Strive not to be a success, but rather to be of value. (A Einstein)
On May 5, 2020, at 7:20 AM, Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Hi List,
Waldemar was kind enough to walk me through some basic biology of the virus and we put our discuss up as an FAQ in blog form:
Hope folks are doing ok these days. Fingers crossed the next month does not see a major resurgence in the spread of the disease.
Best,
Gregg############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
