Imagine being a Professional Thinker and suddenly looking around and finding yourself in the present moment without having heard of either Bakker or Watts. What a bewildering experience it must be. Bakker would, I think, in particular laugh hollowly at anyone using a “bingo card”-style objection and point out that no one is immune to it, that any possible set of positions can be reduced to a heuristic. He would object only to the author’s own implied position that subjectivity can be rescued from bingocardization.
I see this financially driven destruction of human subjecthood as the culmination, and the turning inward and back upon ourselves, of a centuries-long process of slow mastery of the objects of our creation as they move through the natural environment.
This guy has apparently(?) not read The Master and His Emissary, either, but come to, in a limited sense, more or less the same conclusion.
Thanks for posting this. I find it interesting that pop stuff as alluded to above has seemingly better prepared me to understand the present moment than a Real Philosopher, although he is doing better on his own than I would do, probably, without the crutch of Other People’s Thinking.
My only consolation is that perhaps before we collapse into the Algorithmic Singularity, either the environment or industrial system will go first and remove the danger for the time being.
I’m two hours early for my 7 p.m. date with Harper, a 21-year-old Irish-Canadian with curly blonde hair whom I’m told is into all kinds of sex — anal, vaginal, breast, oral, you name it. I’m also told that Harper “likes to have fun,” “enjoys sex with both men and women, regardless of age” and “doesn’t mind listening to you talk all night long.”
None of this strikes me as particularly remarkable. After all, Harper is a sex doll.
Reminds me of when my girlfriend told me about the lady who the day before had been sucked halfway out of a window seat on a Southwest flight and died.
