"Du vet redan tillräckligt. Det gör jag också . Det är inte kunskap vi
saknar. Vad som fattas oss är modet att inse vad vi vet och dra
slutsatserna." (You know already enough. Me too. Not knowledge we do not have. What we do not have is the courage to know ehat we know and take the consequences)...
Sven Lindqvist, 1992, Utrota varenda jävel
Jag skulle vilja träffa:Anyone who is brave enough to think for them self!!
rudolfsteinerdoktorn okt/nov 1918 (Dornach 1942, reprinted Dornach 1964): "... Aber es gibt heute etwas, was allerdings mit sehr unzulänglichen Mitteln arbeitet, was erst ganz, ganz im Anfange ist, was aber geeignet ist, sehr große Aufschlüsse über die menschliche Natur zu geben: das ist die Betrachtung des pathologischen Menschen. Die Betrachtung eines nach irgendeiner Richtung hin nicht ganz, wie man im Philiströsen sagt, normalen Menschen, die bringt in uns das Gefühl hervor: Mit diesem Menschen kannst du eins werden, in diesen Menschen kannst du dich erkennend vertiefen; du kommst weiter, wenn du dich in ihn vertiefst. - Also durch das Experimentieren wird man von der Wirklichkeit weggetrieben; durch das Betrachten desjenigen, was man heute pathologisch nennt, was Goethe so schön die Mißbildungen nannte, wird man gerade hingebracht in die Wirklichkeit. Aber man muß sich einen Sinn aneignen für diese Betrachtung. Man darf nicht abgestoßen werden von solcher Betrachtung. Man muß wirklich sich sagen: Gerade das Tragische kann zuweilen, ohne daß man es je wünschen darf, unendlich aufklärend sein für die tiefsten Geheimnisse des Lebens. - Was das Gehirn bedeutet für das Seelenleben, wird man nur dadurch erfahren, daß man immer mehr und mehr bekannt werden wird mit kranken Gehirnen. Das ist die Schule des Interesses für den anderen Menschen. Ich möchte sagen: Es kommt die Welt mit den groben Mitteln des Kränkseins, um unser Interesse zu fesseln. Aber das Interesse am anderen Menschen ist es überhaupt, was die Menschheit sozial vorwärts bringen kann in der nächsten Zeit, "Darf ich fragen, wer dein Kollege dort im Spiegel ist? Wer ist das eigentlich, der da im Spiegel lebt, so fern und doch so nah? Wie viele Male wirst du mit Tränen in den Augen den Spiegel verhängt haben, bis dein schwarzes Haar weissen Frost angesetzt hat? Gibt es nicht einen Spiegel, den man nicht verhängen kann? ..." 2010/91:7 LETTRE Liao Yiwu, 'Fragen an den Himmel'. "Objects in the mirror are closer than they appear" 2008/9:261 (Swedish) Paolo Giordano 'Primtalens ensamhet/La solitudine dei numeri primi'. "Mirrors show us what we want to see, but sometimes we look into living , human mirrors and then, briefly, the fantasising has to stop." 1990:170 Ruth Rendell Some lie and some die. GEORGES ADÉAGBO: "L'art est le miroir dans lequel, se regardant, on se voit, tel que l'on est".. ("Art is the mirror, in which, watching ourselves, we see us as we are" Georges Adéagbo: "For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known" (Corinthians XIII:12) "...That it was like trying to put together a shattered mirror. Each piece reflects a part of the subject. But if the subject moves, so does the reflection." The Poet by Michael Conelly 1997:499
Shep: "It's strange to look at you like this. The way I see you is like a kind of double image. Someone who's completely new and strange - and someone I've known intimately. ... I'd like to give those images a chance to blend..." Bell, Book and Candle J van Druten 1951:69-70
"… Americans don’t really look at one another when talking. They talk to their reflections. They look at others or themselves only when they think nobody is watching. So they never see how they really look. …" THE JOY LUCK CLUB, Amy Tam, 1989, Double face 1994:255 "She saw in him what no one ever had, and he wanted to know her and so discover himself" (Focus, Arthur Miller, Panther 1964:92) "Auch sie trug ihre Masken, wer tritt schon ohne Maske vor den Spiegel, und kenne ich etwa mein eigenes Gesicht?" Glück hat seinen Preis, Irina Korschunow 1993:200 an event guesting person with the back to the event - while the others look directly at the event in front of them (in the 'frontmirror'). The hearing 'sound-seeing' person sound-images in the behindmirror, in front of her, what happens behind: "Hearing I see without looking." ...Ondaatje gives us this magnificent detour into the world of Netra Mangala, the ritual of the eyes: "Coomaraswamy points out that before eyes are painted there is just a lump of metal or stone. But after this act, it is thenceforward a God." So Ananda, bedecked, must climb a ladder to paint the eyes of the Buddha, but must paint over his shoulder looking into a metal mirror, for "no human eye can meet the Buddha's during the process of creation."(Anil's Ghost, Michael Ondaatje, Picador India 2000) Else Lasker-Schüler 1896-1945:
ELS signs since 1912 her work and personal letters with the signature Jussuf-Abigail, Prince of Thebes: admitting as woman her male-female being. Not Rimbauds 'Je l'Autre', the reason for what I do is (not) outside myself - but me/moi and I/je (Lacans 'Moi-Je') with and in myself. The same gesture she focuses in her fragment IchundIch 1940, read for the members of the Berger Club in Jerusalem (Milano 1992): the play as a place for the play (a mirror in the mirror) with Faust/Goethe-Mephisto, herself as the poet, together with director Max Reinhardt. ELS, Jussuf-Abigail, the Prince of Thebes, searching for evilness (Mephisto, Hitler, Göring ...) in herself (which now has lost) and not outside (which has won). It demonstrates that she and her work is aware of the 'Kegelpunkt': she knows knows how to see the flowers in the vase, normality in close neighbourhood with unnormality – aware of the veil and frame, deviding the sacral and the profane. Mutter Gabi mit Leon, heute 18-jährig. Berlin, Winterfeldstrasse Link: Lacan (The mirror in the mirror) Link: TrueMirror (True Mirror) René Magritte, Die verbotene Reproduktion, ueber die Sichtbarkeit des Denkens, Ralf Konersmann, Fischer, Ffm 1991 (Eye Movements and Vision, Alfred L Yarbus, Plenum Press, NY 1967:180) Record of the eye movements during free examination of the photograph by Fridlyand 'Girl from the Volga' (from the first page of the magazine OGONEK No 23:1959) with both eyes for 3 minutes.) (Eye Movements and Vision, Alfred L Yarbus, Plenum Press, NY 1967:190-191) Eye moveent reflect the human thoiught processes ... It is easy to determine from these records which elements attract the observers eye, in what order, and how often ..." "The human eye and lips ... are the most mobile and expressive elements of the face. (They) can tell an observer the mood of a person and his attitude towards the observer, the steps he may take next moment, and so on." (Abendessen von Honoré Daumier Aufnahme aus St Mannel, Die Kultuvierung des Apetits. Irving Penn photographed P Picasso 1957 at 'La California'at Cannes: Irving Penn is reflected, taking the picture, standing by the window,in Picassos eye-mirror, "Moments Preserved" (1960) (Penn, taking the by-chans-Picassophoto; Penn, reflected in Picasso's eye, standing at the window), see picture: left the link Irving Penn 
während die Menschheit sozial zurückgebracht wird durch das Gegenteil der Positivität, durch das von obenherein Enthusiasmiert- oder Abgestoßensein von dem anderen Menschen..."
Oslo 2011-07-22 och rudolfsteinerdokterns citat: "in diesem Menschen kannst du dich erkennend vertiefen." uttrycks väl av AUF-flicka i CNNintervju (Till Minne, SVT2 2011-08-07 21.15): "Om en människa visar så mycket hat - tänk hur mycket kärlek vi alla kan visa tillsammans." Och vi bör lyssna väl till Emanuel Karlstens DN varning: att vi alla är "en del av Breiviks plan".
ABB:s fokus var just-nu-partiet vid makten: 1. den socialdemokratiske administrationen (Oslo), 2. s-partiets framtid (Utöya). Socialdemokratin, sverigekritiserat med Kurt Salomonson romantrilogi om folkhemmet.
ABB:s fokus det öppna samhällets mångfald.
Angela Merkel: " ... Hass auf den Anderen, Hass auf den Andersartigen, auf den anders Aussehenden, dem vermeintlich Fremden. Dieser Hass ist unser gemeinsamer Feind ..." (... att inte glömma: Angelika Merkels konstaterande om det misslyckade multikulturella projektets misslyckande).
DIE ZEIT, Unsere Kreuzritter.
Slavoj Zizek i breivik-artikeln: "... What if Europe should accept the paradox that its democratic openness is based on exclusion, that there is "no freedom for the enemies of freedom", as Robespierre put it long ago? In principle, this is, of course, true, but it is here that one has to be very specific. In a way, there was a vile logic to Breivik's choice of target: he didn't attack foreigners but those within his own community who were too tolerant towards intruding foreigners. The problem is not foreigners, it is our own (European) identity. ..."
Democratic openness based on exclusion. What about mild, medium, severe disability? Is mild accepted, even medium but never! severe?
7/sju veckor före 9/11 10/tio år: USA:s 9/11, Norge:s '9/11', 22/7. ABB, born 1979, var 2001 22, hans tid och start, enligt media, mot 22 juli 2011. Kusligt.
stephanSE 2011-0727
Mirror Quotes
As described in ...
Faust: "Eure Hölle ein Exil?" Mephisto: "Nur Ewigkeit ist kein Exil." (page 42) Mephisto: "... Doch meine Ichgestalt, zerteiltes Urgetier, beschert ein neues Leben mir - und durch wiederum Entfalten des IchundIch Komm ich geklärt und pfingstgeläutert ich zu mir..." (page 64)
(ein gutes Beispiel fuer 'Stade du mirroir')
Jeder fuer sich, ohne Kontakt...
Picasso, Penn
The Looking-Glass War, Jim Holt (FRANCA LANCA, Volume 10, No. 8 - November 2000)
THE OTHER DAY AS I WAS WANDERING DOWN AN OLD TENEMENT BLOCK on New York's Lower East Side, I chanced upon an odd little shop. It sold only one item: mirrors that do not reverse left and right, or True Mirrors, as the store calls them. There was one in the shopwindow. Looking at my reflection in it, I was appalled by how crooked my facial features seemed, how lopsided my smile was, how ridiculous my hair looked parted on the wrong side of my head. Then I realized that the image I was confronting was the real me, the one the world sees. The image of myself I am used to, the one I see when I look into an ordinary mirror, is actually that of an incongruous counterpart whose left and right are the reverse of mine.There is nothing very strange about the fact that ordinary mirrors reverse left and right, is there? "Left" and "right" are labels for the two horizontal directions parallel to the mirror. The two vertical directions parallel to the mirror are "up" and "down." But the optics and geometry of reflection are precisely the same for all dimensions parallel to the mirror. So why does a mirror treat the horizontal and vertical axes differently? Why does it reverse left and right but not up and down?This question might seem foolish at first. "When I wave my right hand, my mirror counterpart waves his left hand," you say. "When I wiggle my head, I should scarcely expect my counterpart to wiggle his feet." True enough, but you might plausibly expect your counterpart to appear upside down, with his feet directly opposite your head—just as his left hand is directly opposite your right hand.Foolish or not, the issue has been vexing philosophers for at least half a century now. As far as I can tell, it first arose in the early 1950s, as a sort of sidebar to discussions of Immanuel Kant's theory of spatial relations. In his 1964 book The Ambidextrous Universe, the science popularizer Martin Gardner stirred things up by arguing that the puzzle has a false premise. A mirror does not really reverse left and right at all, he claimed; instead, it reverses front and back along an axis perpendicular to the mirror. In his view, we merely "find it convenient" to call our image left/right reversed because we happen to be bilaterally symmetric. In 1970, the philosopher Jonathan Bennett published an article endorsing Gardner's supposed resolution of what by now had become the "mildly famous mirror problem." But the sense of closure was premature. In 1974, the MIT philosopher Ned Block wrote a long, diagram-filled piece for the Journal of Philosophy in which he contended that the question "Why does a mirror reverse right/left but not up/down?" has at least four different interpretations. Block claimed that the four interpretations had been clumsily conflated by Gardner and Bennett; he also insisted that in two of the four, a mirror really does reverse left and right. Three years later, in an equally lengthy article that appeared in the Philosophical Review, an English philosopher named Don Locke declared that Block was only "half right." Mirrors actually reverse left and right in every relevant sense, he argued.Reading these papers, and others that have appeared since, one comes to feel that the mirror problem defies philosophical reflection. People can't seem to agree on the most basic facts. For example: Stand sideways to a mirror, shoulder to shoulder with your image. Your left/right axis is now perpendicular to the mirror's surface. Gardner and Bennett say that in this case and this case alone, a mirror really does reverse left and right. Block and Locke say that in this case and this case alone, left and right are the same direction for you and your mirror image. (Having just dashed into the dressing room to try this, I think I'm in the Block-Locke camp. My right arm and my mirror counterpart's right arm both pointed east; on the other hand, he was wearing his watch on his right wrist, whereas I wear mine on my left.)The key to the mirror puzzle would seem to lie in some subtle disanalogy between left/right and up/down. Both of these pairs of directions are relative to the orientation of the body (unlike, say, east/west and skyward/earthward). But as any child will attest, left/right is much harder to master than up/down. The human body displays no gross asymmetries between its two sides. (There is, of course, the heart, but that is hidden.) So "left" and "right" have to be defined in terms of "front" and "head": Your left hand is the one that is to the west when you stand on the ground and face north. This would remain true even if a surgeon cut off your two hands and sewed them onto the opposite arms.Left/right is thus logically parasitic on front/back, whereas up/down is not. And a mirror, everyone agrees, reverses front and back. That must be why it also reverses left and right—if indeed it does, which to this day remains unclear. Fatigued by the debate? Then visit and get yourself a True Mirror. But don't try shaving in front of the thing—your face will be a bloody mess. (FRANCA LANCA, Volume 10, No. 8 - November 2000)