|
but the more difficult problem is that conservative discourse has the characteristics i outlined above and those characteristics are what oriented the study--which isn't really that interesting as a study if you actually look at it---but hey why bother with that when the "real" issue here is that you don't like what it says on the surface?
it's self-evident that there are dispositions amongst conservative folk---across their diversity---that resonate with the patchwork of memes and patterns that comprises conservative discourse. otherwise there'd be no mobilization. there'd be no conservatism.
it's also self-evident that dispositions come from somewhere. that somewhere is one form or another of cognitive arrangement.
unless you imagine that personal dispositions float around in space or that they are consumer goods like everything else in the united states---but even if you for some strange reason thought that you went shopping for dispositions, there'd still be dispositions or patterns of experience/projection (which organize information) that'd lean on one form or another of cognitive arrangement.
because everything human beings do leans at one level of another on cognitive arrangements.
and this because there's very little about the world as human beings understand it that's given with the objects themselves. almost everything is imputed to objects in the world, imputed to the world, across types of (embodied) cognitive arrangements.
so if there is an underlying argument that shapes your objections, it's absurd.
for what it's worth, i think most forms of continuity are illusions. so the idea of some pineal gland defect that "explains" conservatism is laughable. but that's another matter.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
|