Thinking on the Edge

Posted on July 9, 2005 by Dave Pollard

Each of these links represents an example of unorthodox thinking, which we need a lot more of.

World Tribunal on Iraq: This is an information-packed progressive website with everything you would ever want to know about the war crimes perpetuated by Bush in the war on Iraq and the events leading up to it. Thanks to Wendy Farmer-O’Neil for the link

The Decision-Making Process: Here’s a long but intriguing paper on decision-making by a British writer Barry Brown. His argument is that decision-making is a complex, not a complicated process, and that decisions should be viewed as social, rather than intellectual objects. I don’t fully agree, but it’s thought-provoking. Thanks to Anne Galloway for the link. As a follow-up, Anne links to this Cornell study suggesting that the way our brains work is also complex, rather than complicated, continuous rather than discrete, biological rather than logical. Perhaps the analogy of the brain as computer has outlived its usefulness.

Google Earth Now Out: I confess that after the long wait (only so many downloads have been allowed per day) I am disappointed with the extra functionality that Google Earth offers relative to the earlier Google Maps. Zooming in and flying around is fun, of course, but I would have preferred “more matter and less art”.

The Cooperation Project: A new paper from Institute for the Future proposes a ‘knowledge commons’ a network of ‘cooperation researchers’ and some intriguing tools to hold it all together. I’d have pushed it a bit further, and stressed face to face interaction more and technology enablers less, but it’s an interesting start. But why cooperation and not collaboration? Thanks to Sue Braiden for the link. Also from Sue, If you had one hour to brief Wolfowitz on the benefits of microfinance.

Pentagon Strike: A new video out of the UK stirs up the conspiracy theorist in all of us. First there was the question of why the twin towers collapsed from the bottom up, rather than the top down, where they were hit by the planes. Now there’s the question of the missing aircraft that supposedly struck the Pentagon.

I Dream of Children: A writer that has helped me in my difficult struggle to learn to pay better attention is Sharon Brogan at Watermark. Her lovely poetry like this piece is always entirely in the moment, and her photography, like the composition reproduced above, mostly of natural things, is exquisite. Go there, be refreshed.

This entry was posted in Our Culture / Ourselves. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Thinking on the Edge

Ken Hirsch says:

July 9, 2005 at 23:02

Pentagon Strike: A new video out of the UK stirs up the conspiracy theorist in all of us. First there was the question of why the twin towers collapsed from the bottom up, rather than the top down, where they were hit by the planes. Now there’s the question of the missing aircraft that supposedly struck the Pentagon.A slightly more plausible conspiracy is that Elvis was kidnapped by aliens.
Tim says:

July 10, 2005 at 04:43

At first I thought: No, not this conspiracy theory again! But there are some arguments for it. On the other hand, if it indeed were explosives or a missile, where did Flight 44 disappear to? The aircraft was real and the people on board as well, so what happened to them if they didn’t crash into the Pentagon?
Eric Lilius says:

July 10, 2005 at 20:43

There Have been several sites depicting Penta Lawn -the amazing grass around the Pentagon that was untouched by the alleged attack on the Pentagon. These have been up for quite some time.http://www.govsux.com/penta-lawn.htm http://www.geocities.com/pentalawn2000/
Kate says:

July 14, 2005 at 01:15

Jerome is right: the plane is gone. The people on it are dead. So where is it if it didn’t crash into the Pentagon? Vanish into thin air? I don’t understand why there is such a need to find a conspiracy with this. What’s the point? What does it change? It seems like wasted effort to me. We should be spending our time trying to stop them, not coming up with kooky theories that further discredit the administration’s critics.I hadn’t heard any of those conspiracies about the WTC. Many of us saw them collapse live on TV. We saw the footage of the planes crashing into the buildings. Have we moved so far into the land of partisanship that there are no longer facts? I sincerely hope not. I don’t think it’s hard to believe that a bunch of religious fanatics dead set on killing themselves and others flew planes into buildings on 9/11. This doesn’t mean that I think Bush’s response to these attacks was justified. It’s possible to condemn both the attacks and our response. It’s actually logical to do so. The conspiracy theories imply that it’s not possible, and that we have to think Bush orchestrated all of it for his nefarious, political reasons. It’s complete nonsense. The truth is Bush and bin Laden are good for each other, but that doesn’t mean they’re in cahoots. Remember The Onion’s headline weeks after the attacks? “Two sons of millionaires battle it out on world stage” (or something like that — I dont remember exactly). They are both driven by absolutist ideology. It makes complete sense to me that bin Laden’s followers would fly planes into buildings, just as it makes sense to me that his ideological brothers would walk onto trains in London and blow themselves up. Religious fanatics are the most dangerous people in the world. Where’s the conspiracy in that?
Dave Pollard says:

July 24, 2005 at 01:37

Ken: If Elvis wasn’t kidnapped by aliens, how do you explain the monument to him found on Saturn?Jerome/Eric/Kate: Jerome’s question is quite chilling — it must have crashed somewhere, and if not at the Pentagon, the real crash site must have been covered up. I still consider this a ‘conspiracy theory’ (something, like UFOs, with a more plausible explanation somewhere), I’m just intrigued that there *should have* already been a perfectly reasonable explanation put forward for the lack of a plane, the uncharred lawn, and (in the case of the towers) the fact that in slow motion the towers clearly collapsed from the bottom up, not the point of airplane impact down — and no such ‘reasonable explanations’ have been forwarded for any of these things. It’s just one of those ‘things that make you go hmmmmm’.
SB says:

October 15, 2006 at 15:14

Oh, my. I just found this entry (doing an ego search for ClaimID) — What a lift for me, today.