UFO Conjectures

Friday, August 11, 2023

You don’t have to footnote your thinking

Copyright 2023, InterAmerica, Inc.
You notice that my former friend Sentes – I still like the guy – has piled supportive sources for his recent (and always) commentary.
A book I’m using for my Substack pages – Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in Ancient Times by Donald B. Redford – offered the first appearance date for the Hebrew God Yahweh, and I needed that for my page.
I thought it might be in the footnotes – a wildebeest gathering of them – which precluded me from digging for the date. (I found it in the main book area, thankfully.)
Footnotes are an academic must, but are they needed for blog commentary or magazine articles? Or your thoughtful digressions? I don’t think so.
You can read (and should) Darwin’s On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life along with books by others and come away with your consideration of the theory – a tough slog but not impossible.
When offering your view, you don’t need to support that view with thinking by others, unless its use is pertinent to your viewpoint.
Sentes likes Karl Marx and those who do also, supporting Marx to cement their views of society. But such slugs as Adorno or those attuned to Johann Gottlieb Fichte are not needed to make a case against Marx or Marxism.
Karl Marx’s ideas are rather splendid but put them in the context of Darwin’s evolutionary result – how mankind has turned out – shows that Marx’s (or Fichte’s) idealisms could not and cannot work.
The reasons why not show up in the machinations of Capitalism which highlights the very failures of man and society: greed, lust for power and control, and selfishness.
(This is where my idolized Ayn Rand’s ideas fall apart too…but that for another time.)
You can see that Marx can’t work and doesn’t work in human society as it has evolved.
But Capitalism is the pretty foil for the vicissitudes of humankind: every man (or woman) for him (or her) self…to hell with one’s neighbor or fellow human (or sentient thing).
You don’t need a footnote or two for that.
Lenin and his criminal pals make short shrift of Marxian thought. You don’t need footnotes for that either. We’ve lived through it and have the sensory experience of it.
How does this impact the UFO matter or dialogue?
It shows the errancy of Bryan Sentes’ nod to academia when discussing the topic just as it destroys Mike Cifone’s bogus attempts to enter the UFO fray at this late date.
We can chew the ideas about UFOs without all the prettification of the topic by lovers of philosophy or economics – sorry Dominick – and we can accept viewpoints based on a read of such things, without the ostentatious attempts to feign scholarship.
Yes, a lot of ignorance will seep in – much by me – but that’s okay. The phenomenon shall survive – based on its substantiality, not the minutiae supporting it *
* Those footnotes


Post a Comment

<< Home