EXCLUDED KNOWLEDGE

While I was working on the links page on the SQ1 web site, I revisited many sites I look toward when I want to appraise or roll around in the vast tracks of outsider or excluded knowledge; what one isn’t supposed to know, in short. If the WWW could be said to have a portal for this kind of tea party, it is certainly found @disinformation. I couldn’t include every such outsider site on the links page because I didn’t want to tip the balance. After all, I am basically a severe skeptic and rigorous trickster. LOL Still, if you wish to go there, here are some of my favorite locales on the edge. Robert Anton Wilson Home Page; RAW of the wild and a recent failed gubernatorial run in Cali.

Then there is the self skeptical free zone of Traditionalism

Traditionalism is a great example of outsider knowledge. Integral Tradition collects materials in favor of the revolt against the modern world. I’m not a traditionalist, yet, this general concept, whether vague (Kirk, Strauss, et. al.) strict, (Guenon, Schuon, Nasr, et. al.) or unkempt, (Julius Evola is a mild example,) has long fascinated me even as I disagree. It runs from impinging on materialistic modernity in the guise of dry philosophical conservatism, or is broken down into various, disparate ‘classifications‘. Extremes being what they are, the antidote is both opposite and either less disagreeable (New Thought Portal) or downright wooly in its exclusion of the excluded, The Brights, or, its tortured inclusion of only ‘that which is caused,’ ergo, naturalism. Both sides cannot escape grandly tautological premises, (example: Ayn Rand,) endless shell-game regressions of explanations, or, the messy mysteries which have constituted my own liberalism. How about pseudo-science? Essentialism?

Both ignore the mysterious and paradoxical.

This entry was posted in cultural contradictions and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *