The Cliff: “We interrupt this programme…”

I will interrupt, for the moment, my own commentary on the significance of the parable of the Prodigal Son to draw attention to something perhaps more current… the metaphor of “the cliff” presently in vogue. We not only have “the fiscal cliff”, but also “the climate cliff” and “the political cliff”, all of which attest to a deepening sense of current anxiety about the human prospect. For we seem to be surrounded by a precipice on all sides.

I recall the drama of witnessing a radio or television show (at a time when I paid attention to such things) suddenly broken by the words “We interrupt this programme….”. Any annoyance at having one’s concentration focussed on the narrative continuity of a engaging programme suddenly interrupted, as with the annoying advertisement, was overruled by the dramatic tone of the announcement. What general emergency could possibly justify forgiveness of the broadcaster’s sudden and even violent suspension of the flow and continuity of a beloved programme?

“We interrupt this programme…” not only suspends the programme, it places you in a state of suspense as well. To be in suspense is to become literally ungrounded. To be in suspense is to feel oneself at the edge of an abyss. The element of surprise, the element of drama, the element of suspense, the suddenness of the experience of rupture or discontinuity– these are all invoked by the words “We interrupt this programme…”

“We interrupt this programme…” is a metaphor for the sudden emergence of an historical discontinuity. Jean Gebser’s use of the word “irruption” to describe the emergence (and emergency) of a new mutation of consciousness in our time has all the drama and suspense of “We interrupt this programme to announce” that the future ain’t going to be what it used to be. The suddenness of the announcement not only breaks the continuity of the programme we are following so attentively, in broader terms it interrupts the “Grand Narrative” of how we expect the story to unfold. For the time we await the details of the announcement, our expectations of a linear continuity between the past and the future are in suspense and in doubt. We hover over the edge of a precipice, in “suspense” at the premonition of some life or death crisis: Is it war? Is it assassination? Is it some terrible Accident with a capital “A”? It could well be something with the potential to shock and thus irrevocably alter the future and the expected routine flow of events specified in “the Grand Narrative” of history. In the words “We interrupt this programme…” we actually feel the touch of the mystery of Death, of a sense of life interrupted. That which is touched by Death acquires a mysterious power.

Such is the current metaphor of “the cliff” — a sudden looming precipice, an interruption of the course of history, a discontinuity. It fully reminds me of the Tarot card of The Fool,

Tarot Card: The Fool

Tarot Card: The Fool

….and it is uncanny, in some ways, how the Tarot illustration of The Fool resembles some current political cartoons about our being surrounded by the metaphorical “cliff” on all sides, such as this one by The Guardian’s Martin Rowson.

The metaphor of “the cliff” — as “political cliff”, “climate cliff”, “fiscal cliff” — attests to an age that is in dramatic suspense about its own future because its fate is hanging by a thread. “Living on the edge” is even a contemporary motif in popular music. The “cliff” invokes a sense of vertigo, and even of Nietzsche’s “stare into the abyss”. In the case of The Fool, the actual possibility of a step too far and an actual plunge into the abyss — a shocking, sudden and surprising interruption of his course and his trajectory. Will he, or won’t he take that last step?

Any emergency is the sudden and shocking, even apocalyptic emergence of the unanticipated, the Gebserian “irruption” as an inter-ruption in the narrative continuity of history. “Living on the edge” recalls to mind what someone once said about living in ages of transition, that it was about “as comfortable as sitting on the edge of a razor.”

If our (post-modern) Age is an “Age of Anxiety”, as some have called it, the corollary to that is that it is also an Age of Our Lady of Perpetual Suspense — a unanticipated interruption in the Grand Narrative, and a sudden, surprising turn of events that casts the whole anticipated outcome of how the Modern Story will and must conclude in radical doubt. A kind of coitus interruptus, we have even become highly suspicious of the fantasy happy endings (the happy and fruitful consummation of the marriage of past and future), like that inadvertently ironic and ambiguous one proposed by Francis Fukuyama in The End of History.

“We interrupt this programme….”


21 responses to “The Cliff: “We interrupt this programme…””

  1. alex jay says :

    “We interrupt this programme” to bring you the end of the world:(NOT!)

    • Scott Preston says :

      “Offering prophetic insights, the National Council of Elders Mayas, Xinca and Garifuna said it’s the human actions that have created a world out of balance. According to the Mayan calendar, the council said, the world will be in great pain if humanity doesn’t immediately change its destructive behaviour and restore balance to the planet.”

      Yes… and that’s the key. I was reading recently where the Mayan long count calendar may not be exactly accurate either, in fact, no one really knows the year when the long cycle will actually conclude, or even its actual duration (26,500 years? 28,000 years? something like that).

      Here’s another example of “extraordinary delusions and the madness of crowds”

      But presently with enough people generating negative and, essentially, nihilistic thoughts about the date, it could aggravate and exacerbate further this very real “imbalance” the Mayan elders are referring to above, enough to “make waves”, as it were, so that it may become, in some form or another augmenting the present unbalanced condition, a self-fulfilling prophecy.

      In fact, “self-fulfilling prophecy” has the same meaning as “you create the reality you know”, as we hear so often from Seth. We saw a lot of this in the late Middle Ages and with the Aztec Empire. Mental tautology or “tautological mind” is how I referred to it in the former Dark Age Blog.

      In TDAB, I equated “dark age” with this lapse into mental tautology, and pointed out that Blake’s “dark Satanic Mill” was this very mind now con-lapsed into mental tautology — the “mill o’ the gods”, the “windmills of the mind” or the mental merry-go-round are all symbolisations of this condition, which is the old Uroboros — the self-devouring, self-fecundating dragon energy. (The Christian Cross, in fact, superceded the uroboros). The wonderful thing about Goedel’s Incompleteness Theorem, too, is that it reveals this mental tautology as the very functioning of the deficient mental-rational — the “system”. This is the “closed loop” as opposed to the open loop, in cybernetic terms.

      I think I should resurrect that theme of mental tautology or “system” once again, because it seems more pertinent today than ever.

    • Scott Preston says :

      What we are witnessing, presently (and it is very ugly) is the breakdown of the mental-rational structure of consciousness, the “mad, mad world” scenario. In short order, we will see it’s total collapse. This was what Ehrenfeld was anticipating in his ominous essay on “The Coming Collapse of the Age of Technology”. But “technology” is only a oblique reference to the mental-rational structure of consciousness of which technology is the outward projection. He means “Age of Reason” by “Age of Technology”.

      Science is devouring itself from the inside out… well… that’s one way to put it, too. But “science” is a certain mode of perception and consciousness of reality. Fortunately, not the only one or we would be completely hooped. The problem is that “basic science” is being devoured by “techno-science”, which is connected to economism. But “economism” is also “science” (or pretends to be), and so, in a sense, “science” as will to power (scientia potens est) is self-destructing like golem in the Lord of the Rings. And this is more than a mere analogy. It is parable or “parabolic”.

      I read a couple of scientific articles today on the human genome. Although they were addressing the same research results, they couldn’t have been further apart. One was seeking cautious understanding of the genome map, while another was speaking of “flaws”, “variants”, etc and how nature couldn’t do anything right (therefore, we must correct nature). Holy Shit!!! One is authentic science, the other is techno-science, and techno-science is subordinated to political and economic interests, and not “dis-interestedness”.

      We are in great, great trouble, presently.

      • Thinking Green says :

        And yet surely science remains our only hope. Capitalism isn’t going to reform itself, Governments don’t have the power to reform capitalism, and alternative energy sources will not replace current sources soon enough to avoid the forecast two degree rise in global temperature (even the predicted two degree rise is now looking like a low estimate).

        I’m beginning to agree with Monbiot et al that swift adoption of nuclear power is now the only path that avoids run away climate change and a disaster of unprecedented proportions.

        • Scott Preston says :

          Hi Green.

          I’m beginning to agree with Monbiot et al that swift adoption of nuclear power is now the only path that avoids run away climate change and a disaster of unprecedented proportions

          This is the kind of dilemma that the late Modern mind finds itself in — trading off one disaster for another disaster. I like reading Monbiot, but he’s as much ensnared in the (tauto)logic of our times as others, and he doesn’t recognise it in himself, too. This is the “no exit” condition of being damned if you do, and damned if you don’t — or “the ears of the wolf” dilemma, or Scylla and Charybdis — and is typical of eras that have arrived at the end of their life-span. Nonetheless, our dilemmas at “the end of history” arise from an implicit dichotomisation or self-contradiction in the structure of the consciousness itself, which then manifests externally as intractable dilemma become a fate. A dilemma is a hiccough in the linear flow of expectation — an interruption.

          I wouldn’t say that science remains our only hope, for that unnecessarily boxes us into this very corner. It is, rather, one part of the solution, but not in its present form. Science is an expression of the mental-rational structure of consciousness and must transcend itself just as the mental-rational consciousness, now in the throes of its disintegration, must also transcend itself, or our fate will be like that in the old movie “Runaway Train”, which was a great movie about just this predicament. And “predicament” in its older sense, is the proper word for this situation. Science is just as beset by dilemma and self-contradiction as every other aspect, presently, of late modernity.

          There is an “out” from this predicament, which is what men like Jean Gebser or Eugen Rosenstock-Huessy, amongst others, have tried to articulate. Even William Blake earlier, who foresaw the fateful outcome that must eventually arise as a consequence of “single vision & Newton’s sleep”. For Blake this “single vision” was “the dark Satanic Mill” of his mind’s eye. Most people assume Blake was referring to the factory system, but more essentially, he was referring to the mind trapped in mental tautology of which the “mill” was merely the externally realised image or idol. To change our reality, it is the structure of consciousness that must change. That structure, presently, is what I have called “point-of-view-line-of-thought” (POVLOT) consciousness. Nietzsche called it ‘nook and corner” perception.

          This is what was so suggestive of that movie I referred to “Runaway Train”, for the “train” in the movie is the “train-of-thought”. Worth watching if you can find it somewhere.

  2. alex jay says :

    “Yes… and that’s the key. I was reading recently where the Mayan long count calendar may not be exactly accurate either, in fact, no one really knows the year when the long cycle will actually conclude, or even its actual duration (26,500 years? 28,000 years? something like that).”

    Perhaps it was a miscalculation, since the Mayan “long cycle” seems to closely mimic the “Great Platonic Year” of 25,920, which was calculated on the “precession of the equinoxes”. Each degree amounts to 72 years, so to complete the cycle of the sun appearing in the 360 degree circumvention of the zodiac would require 25,920 years (obviously the short Platonic year would be one-twelfth or 2,160 years – or 30 degrees = one-twelfth of 360 degrees). The journey of the sun in all its mythological representations making the journey in a chariot, dragon depending on cultures travels through every constellation – in appearance – once every 2,160 years and completes the circuit every 25,920 years only to start all over.

    One thing I’m almost certain about when “ages” “epochs”, “end of times” etc. are referenced, they must be taken in the context of astronomical phenomenon in their relationship to the energy, vibration, frequency and their effects on consciousness — not some physical armegeddon.

    As an aside, there is a lovely story (Acts of the Apostles, yeah must be) when the apostles ask Jesus what they should do once he’s gone. He answers by instructing them to go and find a man carrying a picther of water. What’s interesting about this instruction is that the symbol his disciples used to identify themselves was a fish. So you have a clear example how Christ prepared his followers for the end of an age, the “Age of Pisces” in anticipation of a new age, the “Age of Aquarius” – represented by the man carrying the water jar. Of course, by precession, I think our 2,160 years under the fish are just about over and we’re entering a new age of the water-carrier.

  3. alex jay says :

    Sorry to bud in on the nuclear (Monbiot issue – personally over all with slight exception I think the guy is a muppet) thing, and I totally agree with Scott. Perhaps, this piece might highlight some of the unintended consquences (sometimes I wonder about the unintended bit?):

    I suggest that Mr. Monbiot put his money where his mouth is and pitch is tent next to a nuclear plant away from his idyllic Welsh residence. And throw in a few microwave cellphone towers in process.

    • Thinking Green says :

      Hi Alex,

      Nuclear apologists would say that tragedies such as that which occurred at Fukushima are small price to pay for avoiding the greater tragedy of continuing to burn fossil fuel and eventually making the planet uninhabitable for most species.

      • Scott Preston says :

        It’s a very large price, actually, for it is not just a question of environment, but of politics. Inevitably, a “nuclear state” must be a national security state as well. I live in Saskatchewan. It has one of the richest deposits of uranium in the world. Most of that uranium is in the north, and most of the population of the north is aboriginal or Metis. The uranium mines are generating great stresses in the northern communities…

        The uranium giants (could say “cartel”) are basically insisting that the First Nations negotiate away not just their indigenous rights, but their political rights as Canadian citizens. That will be part of the price tag of nuclear energy, of which Mr. Monbiot seems to be somewhat oblivious.

  4. Thinking Green says :

    Scott, thanks for the reply.

    Yes, I can see how the “new consciousness” dissolves the double-bind of post-modern nihilism. Gebser’s Integral structure. Blake’s Albion. We could turn to Sri Aurobindo, Steiner, or some of the alchemists for similar resolutions of modernity and articulations of ecological wholism. The Kabbalists have had the whole thing mapped out pretty well for centuries. It’s unfortunate that they were forced underground in the 17thC – we might not be on the present track if we had embraced some of their creative paradoxes.

    But is this new consciousness poised, as we speak, to rein in corporate power and reform capitalism? Not very likely, unless we are envisaging an imminenet fall of the Berlin wall scenario. Indeed, many seem to find it easier to envisage the end of the world than it to envisage the end of capitalism. I see a number of my colleagues in the green movement (despairing over the data and the inaction and repeated mendacity of those in power) beginning to embrace a faith in technology and science to deliver us from the impasse. Yes, embrace nuclear, they say, to “buy us time.” (I’m sure that, as a Gebserian, you’ll enjoy that phrase.) Nuclear power will cut carbon emissions and allow us to make a managed transition to a sustainable civilization and a new consciousness structure. There are many problems with this view of course… but really what is the alternative? Are we to pray for an outbreak of sanity? Levitate the white house? Because without something changing very quickly, we are facing the 6th great extinction event, rising temperatures etc, and the remnants of the human race will be subsistence farmers, huddled around the north pole. Maybe there a new structure of consciousness will fully manifest itself.

    I’m reminded of Lord of the Rings. Do we adopt nuclear or embrace “a fool’s hope” that the ring of tautological thinking will somehow end up dissolved in the fires that forged it?

    • Scott Preston says :

      But is this new consciousness poised, as we speak, to rein in corporate power and reform capitalism? Not very likely, unless we are envisaging an imminenet fall of the Berlin wall scenario.

      The short answer is ‘yes’, although it’s not so much the effect of ecological consciousness as the fact of the self-destruction of the Modern Era. It is from that which ecological consciousness emerges rather than vice versa, since the very word “ecology” was coined very shortly after the First World War, and by the same man (Ernst Haeckel) who was, coincidentally, the first man to use “World War” to describe what had only been called “Great War” until he named it by its true name. Ever since, it has been “World War”. It’s only with that name that people generally begin to be conscious of “globalism” as something really new in their experience.

      The fate of capitalism is tied, like a Siamese twin, to the fate of communism. Both were poles of the same dialectic. When the Berlin Wall fell in 89, Fukuyama was quick to pen his first triumphalist essay (1990, the book came later) “The End of History”. Publicly, the power elites were triumphant. Privately, however, they were very disturbed and made very anxious by the sudden unexpected collapse of the USSR. The elites, after all, had justified the legitimacy of their rule by portraying themselves as effective cold warriors and a kind of “saviour” class serving as a bulwark against communism. Once the external enemy was gone, from 1990 onwards you saw, in the writings of the court intellectuals, a near desperate effort to find new ways to legitimise elite rule, mainly by the search for new enemies — Thomas Barnett’s The Pentagon’s New Map or Samuel Huntington’s The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order come to mind. The sense of panic is almost palpable in these books because they knew they were finished unless they could come up with a plausible substitute for the Cold War. And, of course, 9/11 fell right into their lap almost unbidden. They all cried crocodile tears about the disaster, of course, but as the record shows, they were jubilant about it. They had been granted a new lease on life, and one which gave them practically carte blanche to attack enemies within and without simultaneously, especially to attempt to conflate “green terrorism” with the al-Qaeda variety. I’m not sure where you are located, but the present reactionary paranoia in Canada about environmentalists is well over the top.

      That’s because it is a significant threat to corporate capitalism, and far more so than Marx ever was, not because of what ecological thinking is, but because of what capitalism is not. That’s the key to keep in mind. Capitalism is an expression of “deficient rationality”, in Gebser’s sense, and it will break apart on its own, not because of anything environmentalists do. It has already lost connection with what Gebser called “the vital centre”, and its own centrifugal force will tear it apart.

      In fact, it is already doing so. But, of course, Humpty-Dumpty couldn’t be put back together again. And it is beginning to dawn on some people that what is called “austerity” is spreading and now “permanent” — meaning zero growth. But if that’s the case, it means the end of capitalism too — at least, “life as we know it, Jim”

      The fall of the Berlin Wall was a very ambiguous, equivocal and paradoxical event, for the Wall is a kind of two-edged sword. It not only kept things in, it also kept things out. The ironic life of Rudolf Bahro is a case in point.

      (A coincidence — I helped smuggle Bahro’s books across the Wall when I was a student in Germany, before Bahro was released to the West and helped found the first German Green Party. But that’s another story).

      • alex jay says :

        “And, of course, 9/11 fell right into their lap almost unbidden.”

        Should I? Shouldn’t I? Oh heck, sure I will, though I’d promised myself, I wouldn’t harp on about it, as it only leads to extreme frustration. For when it comes to that topic it seems that the world has imbibed from the river Lethe. However, when I hear words like “unbidden” it’s like a red flag to a bull. “Unbidden”? Never! As documented in “Project for a New American Century (PNAC)” (Building America’s Defences), a New Pearl Harbour was necessary to get the great unwashed in line with the agenda, and they made sure it would happen in a similar way – though far less plausible – than FDR et co. did with the original. It was bidden, planned and executed by shadowy elements of government in primarily the executive web (what Peter Dale Scott calls “Deep Government”) of that there can be no doubt except to those suffering from cognative dissonance, delusion, or just too complacent to research the overwhelming contradictory evidence to the official fantasy.

        Otherwise, great comment. You got 99% of it spot on.

        • alex jay says :

          Oh … I do apologise for my spelling. I rarely edit before I post … not that it would matter. Dyslexia is a Bitch! Or as my history professor refreshingly claimed: “Historians are notoriously bad spellers” – probably because I bought him a drink : )

        • Scott Preston says :

          I actually wrote (with emphasis) “almost unbidden”… but then again, we differ on the interpretation of “bidden”. I see no need to postulate a conscious conspiracy behind 9/11 when the unconscious one was working so well to achieve its intents, which I previously called “a conspiracy of desires”.

  5. alex jay says :

    Hi Green,

    “Small price”? Not if you’re one of the innocent that will contract cancer as a result. I watched an interview with one of the leading radiation experts in the world (Dr. Gunderson – spelling?) and he reckons that over half of the residence will be killed off or severely impaired as a result. Furthermore, nuclear apologists – like Monbiot – ignore to mention that there has never been a nuclear plant that would have been built without the vast majority of the finance provided by the tax-payer. If a fraction of those subsidies would have been allocated to more enlightened projects (e.g fusion, Tesla tech etc.) who knows were we would be today? Unfortunately, nuclear is totally embedded with the military-industrial complex (that’s how it originated), which not only provides energy but also depleted uranium munitions that have/are causing some of the worst biological mutations and cancers ever experienced by mankind. Just ask the people in Serbia, Iraq (Fellujah especially), Gaza, Lybia or any other country that’s been the beneficiary of “humanitaran intervention”; nevermind the – goodness knows – environmental impact it’s had through atmospheric and underground testing over the last 60-plus years, as well as the leakages from the civilian projects that are never disclosed to the great unwashed.

    I think, if I were to list all the worst environmental alternatives currently applied, fossil-fuels would not even rank in my top five. Nuclear, electromagnetic pollution, chemtrails, GMOs with their accompanying pesticides/herbicides, pharmaceuticals and probably one or two others are far greater threats IMO. Fossil fuels are dirty and their methods of extraction are destructive to be sure (fracking comes to mind), but I’d rather put up with some extra CO2 than those monstrous alternatives above.

  6. alex jay says :

    “I actually wrote (with emphasis) “almost unbidden”… but then again, we differ on the interpretation of “bidden”. I see no need to postulate a conscious conspiracy behind 9/11 when the unconscious one was working so well to achieve its intents, which I previously called “a conspiracy of desires”.”

    Oh shucks … I anticipated your response, which is why I was so reluctant to post the comment (ergo “should I, shouldn’t I”), but that little argumentative imp on my left shoulder couldn’t let it slide. I doubt that our interpretation of “bidden” differ (and you would be the last person I can think of to challenge on word definitions). It simply means an invitation or an attempt to attain some goal or purpose. So I don’t unerstand how one could “almost” be invited or “almost” attempt to attain a goal (akin to “almost” wanting to be pregnant or informing the auctioneer that you will “almost” be bidding for an item and watch his bemused reaction)?

    As far as “I see no need to postulate a conscious conspiracy behind 9/11”, is taking detatchment to the point of irresponsibility in tacitly allowing the “conscious” conspirators to fulfill their diabolic neo-feudalist agenda as witnessed through the grotesque horrors perpetrated on countless swathes of humanity since and its exponential acceleration towards an Orwellian dystopia. “The truth shall set you free” (I’d settle for the facts) to break the delusion in order to tame and redirect the false collective consciousness (the unconscious) formed through millenia, largely, by letting the power-hungry bastards get away with it. History is replete with missed opportunities to change the course of consciousness. I believe that 9/11 is one of those crucial moments that can awaken the sleepy crew from heading into an iceberg … or we can take the familiar old (un!)trusted course of “nothing to see here, let’s move on” (forget the past … look to the future) espoused by that whatever – derogatory terms have been exhausted – muppet who failed the third temptation of Christ going off on a freebie $4 million Christmas break in Hawaii while 50 million of his countrymen queue up for a bowl of soup.

    Sorry, I’m definitely not with you on this one Scott … in the meantime, “I’m off to see the Wizard” so I’ll catch you after the holidays – Have a good one! – end of the world notwithstanding.

    Disclaimer: editor has left the building – all typos, spelling, stupid statements etc. are the total responsibility of somebody else : )

  7. LittleBigMan says :

    I thoroughly enjoyed the phrase “new consciousness.” I like this term because it leaves open the possibility of the emergence of forms of consciousness in our reality which, as of yet, we may have no knowledge of.

    Occasionally, I sense interference by Framework 2 in my life here in Framework 1. I can attest that these interferences have had immeasurable impact on my thoughts and feelings over the years as I go about my functions in Framework 1. I believe that everyone, in one form or another, is subject to these interferences. I hope more people don’t dismiss them as “hallucination” or as “nothing” or as something unimportant. It seems to me the portals from Framework 2 to Framework 1 are always open, and the formation and nature of the “new consciousness” will depend on how attentive we are in picking up messages that come through. The sole message I’ve been able to pick up so far has been “The reality you see and feel isn’t all there is.” I believe there are agents of Framework 2 that smuggle messages on through to us very similar, Scott, to how you smuggled those philosopher Bahro’s books across The Wall during the Cold War. I believe it will be with the help of these smugglers of information from Framework 2 that the new consciousness will emerge in Framework 1. It seems to me, even Christ himself was one such agent. There is, I’m increasingly led to believe, co-operation between Framework 2 and Framework 1.

    The link to Guardian’s piece on Bugarach Peak in France was quite fascinating and reminded me of Seth’s tale of the Lumanian civilization which, according to Seth, had “outposts” in the same region of the Pyrenees. The report of the “bewildering” caves in the region also jibes with Seth’s remarks. I don’t know what future holds, but if the opportunity arises, I definitely plan to visit the area — not ncessarily to find something — but to pick up the energies that are there. If my speculation is correct, being in the vicinity should effect my dreams in some meaningful way. The article has made me very curious.

    The link that Alex provided to the continuing siuation in Fukishima also led to another link about a New Zealand man (Alan Smith) who was dying in hospital from double pneumonia and leukemia — and the family of the man had to sue the hospital to have them administer mega doses of vitamin C to save the man’s life. What else our medical system is keeping from us? Here’s the link to the story about the farmer from New Zealand in case you are interested:

    • Scott Preston says :

      On the relationship between “framework 1” and “framework 2”, there is a passage from Blake’s A Vision of the Last Judgment” that has often picqued everyone’s interest,

      Error is created. Truth is eternal. Error, or Creation, will be Burned up, & then, & not till Then, Truth or Eternity will appear. It is Burnt up the Moment Men cease to behold it. I assert for My Self that I do not behold the outward Creation & that to me it is hindrance & not Action; it is as the dirt upon my feet, No part of Me. “What,” it will be Question’d, “When the Sun rises, do you not see a round disk of fire somewhat like a Guinea?” O no, no, I see an Innumerable company of the Heavenly host crying, `Holy, Holy, Holy is the Lord God Almighty.’ I question not my Corporeal or Vegetative eye any more than I would Question a window concerning a Sight. I look thro’ it & not with it.

      That pretty much describes the “smuggling” of Framework 2 into Framework 1.

Trackbacks / Pingbacks

  1. Making Science Public » Abseiling down the climate cliff metaphor - 14 December, 2012

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: