>if what ancient europeans have done
>is having no affect on
>our current state of being
>then i would agree w/
>you.

What ancient europeans have done is not having an affect on our current state of being, we on a whole are....that is an excuse...and it's time we took reposnibility for our own actions for our own thougts...

but in attempting
>to understand how we got
>here (be it mentally, culturally,
>spiritually, socially...) i think it
>is necessary to understand the
>core of the culture that
>dominates.

the european culture does not dominate your mind, therefore it is not dominant, it is like an illusion, yes some of us can't see past it but it still is an illusion, don't fool yourself into giving something, someone else power over your own mind...

the dominat culture didn't
>spring up out of the
>blue, and it takes varying
>shapes in different parts of
>the world and in different
>aspects of our lives. so
>why not go back to
>the core, and find out
>what's really going on?

Yes if you go back to the core that means you have to do it, without bias, once you step into the realm of finding the truth the moment that you do that with bias, you will be looking for something else, other than truth

>i don't understand your connection between
>"not being objective" and "detaching
>from lower nature tendencies"

it's very simple, not being objective means that you are being subjective, being subjective means that you hold biases, holding biases are lower nature tendencies...

>all that i think ani is
>doing is being clear from
>the beginning about her reasons
>for and approaches to this
>study of 'european cultural thought
>and behavior'

yes but once you do it with the contemporary processes of the culture that you are trying to theorize on, you fall into a cycle, like my shades example...she's doing what you state above through the shades or thinking/philosophy of an european....meaning that would be the way an european would go at it...so it really can't hold much weight, like I said, it will leave the reader asking for more, a kind of "Is that it???" feeling...

>i also think her point is
>that nobody is really objective.

I totally disagree here, and see more effectively how european that ideology if it is one she holds is a result of her own brainwashing...

It is very possible for masses of people to be objective, to be detached, the five senses that we hold limit us, if we view the world through them, therefore it is more than just possible it will be a byproduct of evolution to be objective, because it means that we transend the physical appearances more than what we see with our eyes and hear with our ears and think with our minds, we reach a state where teh illusions fall apart leaving nothing but spiritual truth...

> everyone comes from a
>point of view, put what
>european culture does is to
>"say" that it is objective,
>that is has separated itself
>from that which it is
>analyzing, and people believe that
>somehow by doing this (or
>appearing to do this) a
>greater level of understanding has
>been reached. in reality, the
>conclusion that is reached is
>still attached to the culture
>of the analyzer.

this is another flaw, if this is the reason she is subjective, because being objective does not mean that you see yourself as separate, being objective means that you don't have biases, there is a difference, if you hold a bias that blinds you from everything, however if you view something without bias, it allows you to see more clearly how that thing is apart of you...

Obejectivity/detachment is not separatism, rather it is the tool that should be used to fully realize unity....without first being a drop of water, seeing myself as an entity out of the water and searching for truth, i could not view the ocean, seeing that it is made up of the things that I am made up and that indeed I am apart of the ocean...

By being subjective we fall into the trap that presents that scenario as such:
being a drop of water holding bias, I may see that I am clear water and that teh ocean in its fullness appears to be blue, holding my biases, being subjective, I never realize that each drop of the ocean is clear and that together we are all blue...

So being subjective, especially when trying to reveal truth or striving for such, will not give you the answers you set out to find, only perhaps prove the hypothesis that you have...


>where was she self-glorifying?

self-gloryfying is not only talking about yourself in a self righteous manner, it is also talking about members of your family, culture and/or ethnic group in such a manner



>there is always something else.
>this book is an "african-centered critique
>of european cultural thought and
>behavior" - that's it.
>is she expected to map out
>the entire realm of "truth"
>in this one book.
>like everything else,it's just a piece
>of the puzzle

another place where I disagree with you, no, when it comes to truth, there isn't something else, there is only ALL.