Hi.
I read some bollocks in the Times last week.
I read some bollocks in the Times last week suggesting that modern white americans (being from the colonial period c.1600 to today) are better 'landlords' than the North American Indians. I can't begin to describe just how offensively racist that term is.
For one, we know little about tribal history other than folklore but I find it hard to believe that native tribes regularly and deliberately exterminated each other. For two, who invented scalping?
Scalping was invened by the US Cavalry and bounty hunters working for the US government to prove how many, specifically Apache, Indians they had killed. An Apache scalp being brown obviously, a receipt of death if you will.
I read some other bollocks in the Times this week.
I read some other bollocks in the Times this week about hallucinations. I'm wondering, why is it OK to suggest drug hallucinations or for example 'abduction experiences' (what laymen term alien abductions) are not representative of real phenomenon but at the same time it would be considered inappropriate to run into a church service and laugh and point at everyone while saying "Ha ha you believe in the supernatural. Ha ha!".
The bollocks being the cultural assumption that most of our subjective experiences are of real phenomena while some hallucinations are of 'non-real' phenomena. What if life is an illusion? and so the subjective experience of death is another delusion/illusion/hallucination? Or what if one cannot hallucinate non-real phenomena? I suppose by definition if one hallucinates something it will exist in a parallel universe or will eventually exist in this universe.
