person:john cleese

Let’s all stop beating Basil’s car
▻https://www.edge.org/q2006/q06_9.html#dawkins
C’est brillant, mais RD oublie que derrière ces jugements aberrants se cache toujours un intérêt de classe sociale. Les jugements ne sont pas la conséquence d’un atavisme humian.

RICHARD DAWKINS - Evolutionary Biologist, Charles Simonyi Professor For The Understanding Of Science, Oxford University; Author, The Ancestor’s Tale

Ask people why they support the death penalty or prolonged incarceration for serious crimes, and the reasons they give will usually involve retribution. There may be passing mention of deterrence or rehabilitation, but the surrounding rhetoric gives the game away. People want to kill a criminal as payback for the horrible things he did. Or they want to give "satisfaction’ to the victims of the crime or their relatives. An especially warped and disgusting application of the flawed concept of retribution is Christian crucifixion as "atonement’ for "sin’.

Retribution as a moral principle is incompatible with a scientific view of human behaviour. As scientists, we believe that human brains, though they may not work in the same way as man-made computers, are as surely governed by the laws of physics. When a computer malfunctions, we do not punish it. We track down the problem and fix it, usually by replacing a damaged component, either in hardware or software.

▻https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mv0onXhyLlE

Basil Fawlty, British television’s hotelier from hell created by the immortal John Cleese, was at the end of his tether when his car broke down and wouldn’t start. He gave it fair warning, counted to three, gave it one more chance, and then acted. “Right! I warned you. You’ve had this coming to you!” He got out of the car, seized a tree branch and set about thrashing the car within an inch of its life. Of course we laugh at his irrationality. Instead of beating the car, we would investigate the problem. Is the carburettor flooded? Are the sparking plugs or distributor points damp? Has it simply run out of gas? Why do we not react in the same way to a defective man: a murderer, say, or a rapist? Why don’t we laugh at a judge who punishes a criminal, just as heartily as we laugh at Basil Fawlty? Or at King Xerxes who, in 480 BC, sentenced the rough sea to 300 lashes for wrecking his bridge of ships? Isn’t the murderer or the rapist just a machine with a defective component? Or a defective upbringing? Defective education? Defective genes?

Concepts like blame and responsibility are bandied about freely where human wrongdoers are concerned. When a child robs an old lady, should we blame the child himself or his parents? Or his school? Negligent social workers? In a court of law, feeble-mindedness is an accepted defence, as is insanity. Diminished responsibility is argued by the defence lawyer, who may also try to absolve his client of blame by pointing to his unhappy childhood, abuse by his father, or even unpropitious genes (not, so far as I am aware, unpropitious planetary conjunctions, though it wouldn’t surprise me).

But doesn’t a truly scientific, mechanistic view of the nervous system make nonsense of the very idea of responsibility, whether diminished or not? Any crime, however heinous, is in principle to be blamed on antecedent conditions acting through the accused’s physiology, heredity and environment. Don’t judicial hearings to decide questions of blame or diminished responsibility make as little sense for a faulty man as for a Fawlty car?

Why is it that we humans find it almost impossible to accept such conclusions? Why do we vent such visceral hatred on child murderers, or on thuggish vandals, when we should simply regard them as faulty units that need fixing or replacing? Presumably because mental constructs like blame and responsibility, indeed evil and good, are built into our brains by millennia of Darwinian evolution. Assigning blame and responsibility is an aspect of the useful fiction of intentional agents that we construct in our brains as a means of short-cutting a truer analysis of what is going on in the world in which we have to live. My dangerous idea is that we shall eventually grow out of all this and even learn to laugh at it, just as we laugh at Basil Fawlty when he beats his car. But I fear it is unlikely that I shall ever reach that level of enlightenment.

#droit #justice #philosophie

Absolutely Anything (2015)
▻https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMuYR5PSdtU

Si vous cherchez toujours le film pas trop chiant pour toute la famille, voici ma proposition. Mon critère de sélections est qu’il soit trop intelligent pour réussir chez les abrutis. Alors quand j’ai lu que la dernière oeuvre de Terry Jones a échoué aux États Unis, je l’ai regardé. Oui, c’est une histoire radicale, assez drôle et enfantile pour clore une soirée de Noël en famille - ce qui arrivera ce soir en Allemagne et demain en France.

Héhé, on a encore de l’avance sur vous, hein Monsieur Macron !?!

Cerise sur le gateau Youtube propose le film complet en v.o. avec sous-titres en anglais et si vous préférez en chinois.

No spoiler - vous pouvez lire la trame dans l’encyclopédie en ligne officielle sans gâcher le plaisir.
Absolutely Anything — Wikipédia
▻https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolutely_Anything

Absolutely Anything est une comédie britannique coécrite par Terry Jones et Gavin Scott et réalisée par Terry Jones en 2015.

La distribution est composée notamment de Simon Pegg, Eddie Izzard, Joanna Lumley, Kate Beckinsale, Sanjeev Bhaskar, Rob Riggle et les voix originales de Robin Williams (le chien), Michael Palin, Terry Jones, Terry Gilliam, John Cleese, Eric Idle.

Terry Jones
▻https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_Jones#Biographie

#film #humour #dieu

Un épisode Monty Python spécialement sélectionné pour les habitants de Calais
▻https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ra5h17EbC8

▻https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Monty_Python%27s_Flying_Circus_episodes#10._Untitled

Ron Obvious (Monty Python)
▻https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Obvious_(Monty_Python)

Ron Obvious is a Monty Python character played by Terry Jones, appearing in a sketch in episode 10, ’Untitled’, of the first series. In the sketch, the extremely naïve Ron Obvious, encouraged by his unscrupulous manager Luigi Vercotti (Michael Palin), undertakes several impossible tasks for publicity, in this order:

Jumping the English Channel: In the opening scene, Ron Obvious from Neepsend is shown running along the seashore in a track and field uniform. The announcer (John Cleese) says that Obvious hopes to become the first man to jump the Channel, and will be landing in the center of Calais itself. The scene momentarily cuts away to a group of Frenchmen standing under a sign that reads “Fin de Cross Channel Jump” as traditional accordion music plays in the background. When asked how he plans to jump 26 miles (since Obvious’s longest jump is almost twelve feet (unofficially)), he says that “You see if you’re five miles out over the English Channel, with nothing but sea underneath you, there is a very great impetus to stay in the air.” Obvious has his passport checked by a customs officer, and carrying a 56-pound bag full of bricks that is provided by the Chippenham Brick Company, the event’s sponsor, he sprints toward the sea and jumps, splashing into the water only a few feet from shore.

Eating Chichester Cathedral: As the announcer mentions that Obvious is about to attempt to become the first man to eat an entire Anglican Cathedral, Obvious is shown brushing his teeth, putting on a bib and flexing his jaws, before biting into the corner of an old stone building and breaking his jaw.

Tunnelling to Java: Vercotti shows a map illustrating the route Obvious will use while digging his way from Godalming to Java, which should make Obvious a household name overnight. When the announcer asks him where Obvious is, after a couple of evasive answers Vercotti yells, “Ron, how far have you got?” Obvious sticks his head out of a very shallow hole and replies, “Oh, about two foot six,” and inquires if there is a spade he can use.
Splitting a railway carriage with his nose: Vercotti and the announcer walk along a railroad track discussing Obvious’ next endeavour, and allegations that Vercotti is exploiting him. The sound of an approaching train is heard, followed by a loud scream.

Running to Mercury: Vercotti explains that once Obvious gets out of Earth’s atmosphere and is in orbit, he should be able to run straight to Mercury. Obvious, wrapped in head-to-toe bandages from his previous exploits, is shown jumping off a wooden ramp with a crutch under his left arm. The frame freezes in mid-jump, and another loud scream is heard.

Most time being Underground (Deceased): The next scene shows Ron Obvious’ tombstone with the legend “Very Talented” written on it. Vercotti says that he hopes to break the world record for remaining underground.

Barghouti’s N.Y. Times article met by Israeli ritual of diversion and denial -

Comparing article to terror attack and suggesting sanctions against the Times, as Michael Oren did, is more damaging to Israel’s image

Chemi Shalev Apr 19, 2017
read more: ▻http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/1.784060

At the end of his opinion piece in the New York Times about the Palestinian prisoners’ strike, Marwan Barghouti was originally described as “a Palestinian leader and parliamentarian.” After 24 hours of outrage and condemnation, an editor’s note conceded that further context was needed, pointing out that Barghouti had been convicted on “five counts of murder and membership in a terrorist organization.” News of the clarification spread like wildfire on social media. It was described in glowing terms as yet another historic victory of good over evil and of the Jewish people over its eternal enemies.
It was another example of the time-tested Israeli ritual of accentuating the insignificant at the expense of the essence, the results of which are well known in advance. First you manufacture righteous indignation over a minor fault in an article or the problematic identity of its writer, then you assault the newspaper or media that publicized it and cast doubt on its motives, then you demand to know how this was even possible and who will pay the price. In this way, the Israeli public is absolved of the need to actually contend with the gist of the article or public utterance, in this case Barghouti’s claims that he was physically tortured, that almost a million Palestinians have been detained over the years, that their conviction rate in the Israeli military court system is absurdly high, whether it’s really wise to hold as many as 6,500 security prisoners in custody at one time and so on.
The guiding principle of this perpetual war waged by Israel and its supporters against the so-called hostile press - to paraphrase a legendary John Cleese episode about a visit by German visitors to Fawlty Towers - is “Don’t mention the occupation!” After one spends so much energy on protestations and exclamations of how unthinkable, how outrageous and how dare they, there’s very little enthusiasm left to consider eternal control over another people or the malignant status quo that many Israelis view as the best of all possible worlds or how is it even possible that someone who is defined by former Israeli Ambassador and current deputy minister Michael Oren as a terrorist and a murderer on a par with Dylann Roof, who killed nine African American worshippers in a church in Charleston, is considered by many people around the world, including those at the New York Times, as an authentic leader whose words should be read and heard.
In an interview with IDF Radio on Tuesday, Oren put the ingenious diversionary strategy on full display. He described Barghouti’s op-ed as nothing less than a “media terror attack.” To this he added a pinch of conspiracy theory with a dash of anti-Semitism by claiming that the Times purposely published Barghouti’s article on Passover, so that Israeli and Jewish leaders wouldn’t have time to react. Then he approvingly cited the wise words of his new oracle, Donald Trump, describing the publication of the article and its content as “fake news.” And for his grand finale, Oren intimated that the proper Zionist response would be to close down the Times’ Israel office, no less.
In this way, anyone who wants to address Barghouti’s claims substantively, even if it’s to criticize them, is seen as collaborating with a terrorist and enabling terror. It’s the same system by which anti-occupation groups such as Breaking the Silence are tarred as traitorous, backstabbing informants so that no one dares consider the actual testimonies they present about the hardships of occupation and the immorality of forcing the IDF to police the West Bank. What’s hilarious, however, is that so many Israelis and Jews are convinced that articles such as the one written by Barghouti, which most readers probably view as yet another tedious polemic about an intractable Middle East conflict, somehow causes more harm to Israel’s image than a senior government official who compares a news article to a terror attack and who recommends closing down the offices of the most widely respected news organization in the world, a la Putin or Erdogan.

#Palestine #Israel #Barghouti

Unflattening design - Inside Intercom
▻https://blog.intercom.io/unflattening-design

https://blog.intercomassets.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/23040340/hero_12482.png

#Design is best described as a constant switch between two mindsets: an open one (exploration/diverging) and a closed one (execution/converging). John Cleese explains this well in this amazing talk:

“We need to be in the open mode when we’re pondering a problem, but once we come up with a solution, we must then switch to the closed mode to implement it.”

The most difficult part of design is switching between these two modes; they require radically different mindsets. Good designers need to alternate between being very naive and totally confident. More importantly, they need to know when to be naive, and when to be confident. Often, designers are confident too early. But a confident designer with a flat perspective is usually heading straight to the land of missed opportunities.

Being naive, on the other hand, is the first step towards unflattening. It helps us challenge our habits, to fight routine, and tackle the problem from different angles.

#Monty_Python: ’We hate the Daily Mail slightly more than we hate each other’ | Culture | The Guardian

▻http://www.theguardian.com/culture/2015/apr/26/monty-python-reunion-tribeca-film-festival-holy-grail

http://media.guim.co.uk/4eb56ae9edadc8b97593c4ace53bc3097023d3ea/0_57_2992_1796/2992.jpg

The five surviving members of the famed British comedy troupe Monty Python – Michael Palin, John Cleese, Eric Idle, Terry Jones and Terry Gilliam – do not get along. On stage at the Beacon Theater on Friday night, two members walked off in the middle of a discussion. Others rearranged chairs so as not to have to face one another or the audience, while host John Oliver struggled to keep control of men who, he said, “always had a fundamental disrespect for authority”.

Or, at least, the Pythons suggested that such would be the story if the Daily Mail wrote it up.

Art of Jin: Champions of Reason. From left to right: John Cleese, Penn Jillette, Bill Nye, Stephen Hawking, (above) Frederick Nietzsche, (below) George Carlin, Carl Sagan, Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins, Charles Darwin, Neil DeGrasse Tyson, Adam Savage, Michio Kaku.

▻http://saejinoh.blogspot.ch/2012/05/champions-of-reason.html

La vie de Brian (et TOUT mais alors TOUT ce qui touche de près ou de loin aux Monty Python)

▻http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRrtDn0_Nj4

#les_films_qui_ont_changé_ma_vie

Fiction becomes true

John Cleese about Terry Jones :

He and I never got on. What Terry cannot accept is that the Welsh are a servile nation that God put on the planet to carry out menial tasks for the English.

After the latest public announcements of the Britisch prime minister David Cameron I have the impression he wants to change the status of the Welsh into that of a servile nation that God put on the planet to carry out menial tasks for all Europeans exept for the English.

▻http://www.heise.de/tp/artikel/38/38435/1.html