Re: Origins of Money

[Doyle Saylor <doylesaylor@xxxxxxx>]

Greetings Economists,
ha ha ha ha.  Yoshie a wonderful example!

On a more serious note, a lot can be said about societies that are 
matrilineal in how sexual connections are used to build society.  
However, I do not think we can easily apply these practices to current 
global structures.  What is important is not so much that some 
societies already existed in contradiction to current Western 
"CHRISTIAN' mores but that an economy like Japan's which developed 
around practical methods of sexual connection indicates how little we 
understand about emotion based connection.

Emotions are information structures in which we tend right now to be 
stuck with rigid barriers (sectarianism is a good example) which people 
on the left avoid discussing except to condemn.  Emotions are an 
economy in the sense that children beg for attention and love which 
parents must produce or fail at parenting.  But not an economy in the 
sense that emotional connection can be had for the asking 
involuntarily.  Or readily produced on demand.  In fact the rigidities 
are precisely what we wrestle with in terms of hatreds like racism and 
sexism.  And are directly related to human limitations of direct body 
production of emotion connection.

Emotions are face based in origin.  That's where we (primates but not 
reptiles) get the meaning of feelings via the face.  They parallel 
language production (happen at the same time but discretely apart from 
language).  So it really is a matter of understanding what is produced 
via the face that a society needs in terms of emotion connection 
knowledge.  Sex can fool us by pointing feels (literally) at the body.  
So some hair style, curve of the chest, face shape, genital look and so 
on that seems to elicit sexual feelings represents sexual feelings.  
However, sex is a way to socially connect, and that is the central 
purpose of emotion structure, the connection process.  Connection is a 
kind of work process that produces information about connection that 
people must know in order to have social structure to live within.  
Were we to have communism it must be done according to how connection 
is defined by emotion structure.  So we are constrained by equality, 
democracy, to understand emotion structure production in those terms.  
The general failure to do that in communist societies in my view is a 
problem with Christian moral theory about emotion structure.

Christian moral theory confuses language knowledge with emotion 
knowledge production.  Were socialism to address directly emotion 
knowledge it could then supplant moral based religious theory.  One 
problem central to this socialist emotion structure is automation of 
emotion connection.  While we remain tied to narrow small group 
premises of emotion connection we are unable to see how large scale 
social connection in a socialist milieu could happen.  The Christian's 
can promise a heaven after death in order to put off a loving society.  
Socialists must offer a real world solution to a 'loving' society.

The potency of homosexual alternatives is simply to express 'love' in a 
format that is not male/female.  In any case the problem lies in not so 
much gender based definition of love, but mass based definition of 
love.  In terms of knowledge production it is the interactivity of 
knowledge production that is in question.  If one looks at naked 
pictures of people to initiate masturbation via sexual connection 
feelings, the knowledge model is one-to-many (information production 
products like the print media) not interactive information media like 
games media.  Which demonstrates what is to be done with sexual 
connection, i.e. how does one massively in parallel connect tens of 
thousand (or millions or billions) at once emotionally!  Information 
for sexual connection must be on the large scale produced in an 
interactive format to socialize community (communist) emotion, and 
would inevitably be faced based not genital based.  That points at the 
'whole' society 'loving' the whole society or as the Christians like to 
prattle, HEAVEN.   Religions tending to theorize the 'mass' mind via 
introspection, counter to externalizing the mass mind via computing.
thanks,
Doyle Saylor
On Aug 13, 2006, at 6:50 AM, Yoshie Furuhashi wrote:

> Another Jesuit commented that 'this evil' was
> 'so public' that the people 'are neither depressed nor horrified'[8]
> suggesting that same-sex love among the clergy was not considered
> remarkable" (Dharmachari Jñanavira, "Homosexuality in the Japanese
> Buddhist Tradition,"