It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

I was just about to start a deep philosophical thread and I realized...

page: 2
8
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 5 2015 @ 12:41 AM
link   
I think the practicality of any belief system or view is all that matters to me.
I like to hear what others beliefs and views on reality are, not in search of "The Truth"
but more as one would browse in a tool store.

All beliefs and concepts about the nature or reality, and values, will be the sources of behavior and personality.
When considering another viewpoint or belief, I look at what characteristics, habits, and experiences it provokes.

If it makes the person unhappy, I'm likely to pass it up. If it makes them cruel to others, same thing.

I may be wrong about the premise there - maybe we have no will whatsoever, it is a possibility.

But I observe when people change their minds on deep beliefs, there are usually changes in their behavior, mood, habits.... so I can't help make a correlation there.
So it does end up being a purely pragmatic issue - it is not the veridity of the view that matters in this reality.
What you have in your head only matters to you!
What matters to the exterior world is what you do.




posted on Nov, 5 2015 @ 12:57 AM
link   

Their posts tend to be aggressively defensive of their illusions, long-winded, verbose and confused. If they have intellectual pretensions they will mention Jung at some point. Unfortunately this type can't be so easily ignored.


I notice that too!


From a pragmatical point of view it is very effective at distracting. It can make someone forget entirely to focus insults, sarcasm, cruelty towards others and focus it on one person instead.

So, Op-
I see what you mean then. That the cyber world is becoming a popular form of escapism, and that Solipsism, as a result, can be slightly more influencial now, then it was in the past?

Before, people could theorize or even believe in that, but the mode of living forced them to deal with the real world anyway.
That is no longer the case at this time, so it is more dangerous a mode of thought now?
edit on 5-11-2015 by Bluesma because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 5 2015 @ 02:09 AM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

So (and sorry if I've misunderstood you) - you believe the philosophical theory of solopsism is the cause of social dysfunction?



posted on Nov, 5 2015 @ 04:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: and14263
a reply to: intrptr

So (and sorry if I've misunderstood you) - you believe the philosophical theory of solopsism is the cause of social dysfunction?

I think people pretend the world doesn't really exist so they don't have to actually do anything to help anyone else.

After all they are the only real thing in their world, so why bother.

They call it Solipsism, I call it Narcissistic, self centered, selfish.



posted on Nov, 5 2015 @ 04:52 AM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

OK cool - I understand what you're saying.

I didn't actually believe/realise these philosophical theories are anything more than theories. I had no idea people actually lived their life on the premise that the only thing they can be certain of is themselves - therefore that is all they care about.

I thought social dysfunction and selfishness was caused by society and its problems rather than the individual's awareness of solopsism.



posted on Nov, 5 2015 @ 05:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: and14263
a reply to: intrptr

OK cool - I understand what you're saying.

I didn't actually believe/realise these philosophical theories are anything more than theories. I had no idea people actually lived their life on the premise that the only thing they can be certain of is themselves - therefore that is all they care about.

I thought social dysfunction and selfishness was caused by society and its problems rather than the individual's awareness of solipsism.

Yah, were trained to it, form an early age. That way you see, there is no union possible.

In that stead the device screens serve their function perfectly. Its this excuse we have that somehow we are interacting with others, but really we have no idea who we are texting or emailing to. Really, we are in a isolation bubble whose wall are thicker than ever. Before the breakup of family began, we at least watched TV together. Until sets became cheap enough so everyone could afford to have one in their room.

I remember the before and after of that epic milestone.



posted on Nov, 5 2015 @ 05:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: Pinke
For most humans there is no practical value in considering that they might not have free will or that everything is a bit poop. We're a bit of delusional species but those delusions built social contracts enforcing cultural norms that encouraged productivity even if it also encouraged ignoring the issues of the angry, hopeless, and emotionally damaged.

Most people just can't make sense of a reality where there is less free will and they have no control. Delusion or not, it works!


You're actually arguing that ignorance is strength?

I thought sites like this are supposed to be a counterbalancing force against Orwellian thought. But, what I've found is that rather than being a counterbalancing force against Orwellian thought, many of the posters on these sites are more Orwellian in their thinking than the average person.

Mention the phrase "Ignorance is strength" to the average person (what is often called 'sheeple' on sites like this) and that person will be opposed to the idea.

Then visit a place like this, where almost everyone thinks of themselves as being more awakened than average people and you'll find people propagating "Ignorance is strength" and frequently other Orwellian ideas too.

You know what?

I'm starting to think most of the posters on sites like this are suffering from the Kruger-Dunning effect. Thinking they're above average when they're not.


originally posted by: Bluesma
So, Op-
I see what you mean then. That the cyber world is becoming a popular form of escapism, and that Solipsism, as a result, can be slightly more influencial now, then it was in the past?

Before, people could theorize or even believe in that, but the mode of living forced them to deal with the real world anyway.
That is no longer the case at this time, so it is more dangerous a mode of thought now?


I can't take a stance against solipsism because it can't be proven to be true or false. Actually, I think it's far more likely that solipsism is true than any other religion is true (I consider solipsism to be a religion). It's simply an application of Occam's razor that leads me to that conclusion.

Solipsism requires far, far, far less assumptions than any other religion so on that basis alone, according to Occam's razor it's more likely to be true than any other religion. Plus, the theory of solipsism is completely internally consistent (and I don't believe any other religion can claim that).

My original post in this thread was not anti-solipsism. However, I do agree with the following video for the most part.


www.youtube.com...
edit on 5-11-2015 by Profusion because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 5 2015 @ 05:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr

I think people pretend the world doesn't really exist so they don't have to actually do anything to help anyone else.

After all they are the only real thing in their world, so why bother.

They call it Solipsism, I call it Narcissistic, self centered, selfish.


I am not sure a solipsistic view necessarily or systematically gives forth the behaviors of narcissism or selfishness.

I think it could be used as an excuse for them though.

The belief that you cannot know for sure what is going on inside someone elses head doesn't necessarily make you not care about it. It could make you want to get as close to an accurate idea as you can though - through asking and interacting with the other.

If you are sure you already know, you have no more reason to do that.

Maybe I am mistaken here, but solipsism isn't the belief that the exterior world or others doesn't exist,
it just means one cannot know with absolute sureness... doesn't it?
Or perhaps it is one of those words that is evolving in the culture and taking on a slightly different meaning.

ETA- I guess your last post went up while I wrote this, so I was not responding to it, hadn't seen it yet. JUst in case it seems to be out of sync with that or something. I'll watch your video now
edit on 5-11-2015 by Bluesma because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 5 2015 @ 05:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Bluesma


The belief that you cannot know for sure what is going on inside someone else's head doesn't necessarily make you not care about it.

Thats because you have a conscience. I was raised by two narcissists, believe me, I know the difference.

There are people walking around that have no concern whatsoever for others except how those others can be of use or useful to them, their life, their goals.

The deception occurs when they keep up appearances on some level, going through the moves to meet expectations in the greater world. But really, they are as shallow as a puddle on empathy. To them, its a bother. Partly based on arrogance, partly better than.

All one has to do is study history to see how certain people at the heads of nations can wage total war without regard to human suffering, or enslave whole peoples and work them to death. History is full of such examples, most important is the character of these "world leaders" having the lack of conscience but ambition to climb to the top of the heap and seize or manipulate control of a nations apparatus and change it to their own ends.

In public, they smile and promise and kiss babies in front of cameras, but inside they are empty as a jar on feeling, unless their feelings are hurt.

I'm sorry I'm not doing a good job of relating this, its early and I should be in bed, lol. The difficulty is trying to explain that some people just don't have any feelings for others, only self.

You have to live with someone like this for some length of time to understand it.

When I googled solipsism I understood right away how that could be used as an excuse to cover for this.

Are there some that use this just to affirm that we don't really know whats going on outside our senses? Sure. My bet is it was invented the term and hold it out to deceive people about the nature of their character. It fits perfectly.

As far as personal beliefs, read my signature. I believe awareness of what we are told and led to believe are lies by these very world control freak cretins to mold our opinions and behaviors to their ends.



posted on Nov, 5 2015 @ 06:22 AM
link   
a reply to: intrptr


There are people walking around that have no concern whatsoever for others except how those others can be of use or useful to them, their life, their goals.

I've toyed with this idea over the last few weeks actually. Life would be so much easier if we didn't care about others. I can actually empathise (certainly not sympathise) with that feeling of using others for gain. It shocked me to be honest, walking around in those boots, even if I only did it in my head. One must have to be very self-centred to behave like that.

And you're right - people are becoming more and more like this. Or at least the personalities which are promoted to us are.



posted on Nov, 5 2015 @ 07:50 AM
link   
It seems to me there are a lot of separate issues addressed in that video.

Looking it up, I see that there is a difference between the traditional epistemological meaning, and then there is a metaphysical meaning, in which it is a belief system. I didn't know about that second one.


There are narcissistic and uncaring people out there, studies show that. But I guess I don't perceive as many of them as you do? Even when I see behaviors that are uncaring or insensitive, I don't have the reflex to assume they are uncaring people in general. I see myself as very complex inside, so that's probably why I will assume others are. I don't know if I have ever perceived a person as being completely empty inside.


edit on 5-11-2015 by Bluesma because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 5 2015 @ 08:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Bluesma


I don't know if I have ever perceived a person as being completely empty inside.

Because they hide. On the surface you can't tell. They may be responsible, successful, involved in community, their sends of self worth is over the top, over inflated even, because they know they have to keep up appearances wherever possible so they won't be found out. They mimic emotions other people express (ever heard of crocodile tears) and may even shed tears on occasion. The difference is those tears , anguish, sorrow are because they are upset that something isn't going their way. You might see them 'cry' about others, but there are no tears.

Other traits might be they go to church and bow their heads but never actually can be seen helping others in need directly themselves. On the surface they are good citizens, nary a mark on their record, but inside this is trappings, loathsome even for them to have to submit to. Some actually hide behind going to church just to give the appearance they are good, but help others in a practical sense as little as possible.

They invite everyone to their house to help move, but are 'just too busy' to help others when the time comes. Whenever they come over they don't bring any thing to the table. others go, I got the beer and i got the chips, and I got the dip. The narcissist says, got anything to drink and asks to use your bathroom.

They are usually better off than others because they spend all their time working to accrue money and stuff. They mostly keep it all to themselves. They may say, I'm sorry I can;t help you out and next time you see them they have just bought a new car or cabin in the woods.

And oh ,by the way you're welcome to come and help them work around their cabin anytime, for free. Their reward to you is their presence, they are so full of themselves they think that you should be glad to spend time with them, because they have so much to offer, just being near them.

It is hard to spend any length of time with people like this because you always come away feeling cheated out of your time, labor and resources. They need a ride and don't pay for gas, their car is in the shop. They could call a cab, but opt for you to "help them out". You fix them dinner and they never ask you to come over for dinner at their place, unless its birthday or christmas, then bring something to eat along with the gifts.

You can go where they are already going, you can join in their planned activity, you can be a part of their circle of minions, doing that they want, mostly listening to them talk about themselves.

If not, (click) like a tv remote, no further use for you. Don't ask for anything, don't tell them your problems, don't expect any reciprocation for anything you do for them, it ain't happening. After a long time of being fooled by this type of personality, most people detach and get away for them and thats just fine. There are other suckers out there, especially in church (sooo helpful) that can be used and exploited by their charm and manipulation.

When my brothers dog died, he buried it in the backyard and never shed a tear. I was with him the next day, he called and said KIKI died and I was so sad for him, I drove to his house to be with him and mourn and it was as if his life continued uninterrupted, not a misstep. He told me how she died in a matter of fact drone voice, not a tear, not a shiny eye, nothing.

I had to get out of there I was kinda creeped out by it, trying to excuse it as denial or repressed grief but after all the years of knowing him and his behaviors, I had to finally admit he is empty inside, devoid of feeling.

He owned a dog like people own a piece of furniture. Come to think of it I never saw him walk it, feed it, or even pet it.

Poor Kiki, she was so loving, she died of a heart attack at one year old, on their porch, locked out of the house because someone shut the door and didn't wonder where the dog was. She was buried in the backyard in a cardboard box, unloved and neglected.

Thats what its like to live with a narcissist.



posted on Nov, 5 2015 @ 10:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: Profusion
You're actually arguing that ignorance is strength?

I'm arguing evolutionary psychology to suggest a different approach.

There are some points in a person or creatures life where complete or accurate information is actually a hindrance. Everything we know about humans suggests that complete and accurate information isn't how we got through the last 100, 000 years. If humans actually thought a lot of things through they might be miserable, scared and depressed on the whole. Irrational self confidence. Irrational hope. Irrational rationalizing. That's part of humanity.

The point isn't even what I think, it's what we are. You're trying to sell absolute truth / accuracy to a species that isn't generally inclined to complete information and takes logical shortcuts by design. A lot of studies demonstrate humans think this way (you and me included). It's an alternate perspective other than people actively trying to avoid discomfort or the truth, that is all. There is no blanket 'ignorance is strength' statement here or some George Orwell reference to be mined and if I was going to make one I'd have to multiply my word count by at least ten.

I'm sorry if I worded my post poorly, but you've missed my point.


I'm starting to think most of the posters on sites like this are suffering from the Kruger-Dunning effect. Thinking they're above average when they're not.

And gone on to insult me as a result.


The ridiculous thing is my world view doesn't differ that much from your own. I just don't think people in general are evolved to share that world view, nor does our culture or biology encourage it, nor do I think I should get overly frustrated about it.



posted on Nov, 5 2015 @ 12:07 PM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

Well. That sounds pretty horrible, for sure!

I don't think I ever get close enough to those types to get involved personally. I mean, in person, you just get intuitive feelings about people and refuse them. I don't usually bother trying to put a finger on what exactly it is about them that turned me off. It might be those. I can't be sure.

But back to the problem in your OP?

I found myself thinking- a person can also be TOO sensitive as well as not enough, you know?

If you are too sensitive, you can get hurt so easily that you have to strike out in your own defense quicker, which sort of limits the freedom of others to "be themself"... You wouldn't want to make everyone around you walk around on eggshells.

I know I sometimes do not show my emotions to others (especially if they are strong) because I do not want make them feel it too. It is out of concern for them.

If you are too sensitive, then you can feel shut down by others, when you don't have to.
It is not because someone said, "this is how things are" that they are.
It is not because someone told you you can't do something a certain way, that you can't.

Sometimes giving in too fast just causes you to feel built up resentment.

Even for them, it might be better that you be a nuisance, and refuse, in a polite way, now,
then repress yourself, walk away mumbling and stewing, and come back days later with an uncontrollable bitterness which will finally come out at them- but in a much more offensive way!

I'm willing to bet, that the exact same people that you feel are closing their minds to you,
are probably feeling the exact same thing in regards to you. They might not be so evil- they might be frustrated that they can't get through to you.
I don't know the experiences you have had, I don't know the issues, events, or topics. But so many people are looking for the truth, and fighting over what it is. As if it will give some sort of salvation from... I don't know. Existence?
In any case, what I am trying to suggest is that they might not be so horrible as you think. They might be like you.
edit on 5-11-2015 by Bluesma because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 5 2015 @ 12:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Pinke


There are some points in a person or creatures life where complete or accurate information is actually a hindrance. Everything we know about humans suggests that complete and accurate information isn't how we got through the last 100, 000 years. If humans actually thought a lot of things through they might be miserable, scared and depressed on the whole. Irrational self confidence. Irrational hope. Irrational rationalizing. That's part of humanity.

The point isn't even what I think, it's what we are. You're trying to sell absolute truth / accuracy to a species that isn't generally inclined to complete information and takes logical shortcuts by design. A lot of studies demonstrate humans think this way (you and me included).

I like this. I actually felt it - and made a little sigh

We see a lot of confrontation these days between different kinds of belief, different ways of looking at our existence. Mankind has gotten this far, as you say, with a combination of lies and truths. Is truth always in the eye of the beholder?

Truth, and a better understanding of reality only comes through challenging each other and ourselves about what we think we know while still tolerating and respecting each others view on this universe and our place in it

Long term, it's two steps forward and one back. It works in it's way. But, if we face a situation that doesn't allow for that kind of time, I wonder... if our future depends on a better understanding of reality, how are we supposed to function if the weight of the irrational pulls us to the bottom?


...nor do I think I should get overly frustrated about it.

What's your secret? :-)


edit on 11/5/2015 by Spiramirabilis because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 5 2015 @ 12:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Pinke

Star for that. Come on over here.



posted on Nov, 5 2015 @ 10:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Pinke

originally posted by: Profusion
You're actually arguing that ignorance is strength?

I'm arguing evolutionary psychology to suggest a different approach.


You made a post where you explained why you believe ignorance is strength. Then you label your position "arguing evolutionary psychology" and you go on to explain why you believe ignorance is strength.

Ignorance is not strength because knowledge is power IN MY EXPERIENCE. Nothing could ever make me waver from that conclusion because the entirety of my existence on this planet has supported that conclusion.

Maybe your experience has been different. Has it? I would like your answer to the following question:

Has it been your experience that knowledge is power, yes or no?

Here's my take on your position:

Let's assume for a moment that the Fukushima disaster is an extinction level event. Would it be a good thing for humanity as a whole to realize that and take action based on that knowledge? In the case of the Fukushima disaster, I would say no. We may have a worldwide societal collapse that would lead to billions of deaths in a much faster and much more brutal fashion than what will come directly from Fukushma.

Is it good for humanity as a whole for the human race to wallow in ignorance in such a case? I would say yes, the effect would be a good thing for humanity.

However, I would never call it strength. Humanity should not be as dumb as that, I think it's unbelievably pathetic.

We may have some common ground based on your outlook on this issue and mine. I think the difference is that you literally want to call ignorance strength. I would never call ignorance anything but weakness because my firm belief is that knowledge is power.

I wonder if you believe knowledge is power as well, I'll be looking forward to hearing your answer.

I'm going to include an argument for why knowledge is power at the macro level here to see if you have an opinion on it.

Again, let's assume for a moment that the Fukushima disaster is an extinction level event. If humanity as a whole chose not to be ignorant of that and instead chose to be proactive about it, humanity could possibly stop the disaster. But, if humanity collectively chooses to ignore it, there's no chance the Fukushima disaster can be stopped. That's my argument for why knowledge is power at the macro level.
edit on 5-11-2015 by Profusion because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 6 2015 @ 01:32 AM
link   
I think you are somewhat misunderstanding what Pinke said. That happens sometimes (I should know, I do it sometimes! ) Sometimes you're just working on something important for you to work out at the moment, and won't be swayed until you have. Seeing an antithesis where it is not helps relieve internal ambiguity.

I just had some thoughts come up in response to your views on ignorance and knowledge.

I don't have any beliefs myself, and am terribly lacking in firm commitment to any knowledge - no matter what I think I know, there is always a smidgeon of doubt. It might be false, or it might be incomplete, but I go with whatever I have in the moment.

That aside, looking at it from your position (that there is a very clear line between truth and non-truth, and that it can be known in entirety).

I suspect that it is worth considering what "power" is to you?

Is it an internal feeling? A capacity to influence and manipulate the exterior world in action?

I suspect the first may be potential for power, the second is realized power.
Consider the so-called "Serenity Prayer" :

God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
The courage to change the things I can,
And the wisdom to know the difference.


I observe in myself, and others, that how easily we integrate and recieve information almost seems to depend upon whether or not it is useful or beneficial to us. Not only in our existing focus of interest and intent, but in terms of what we are in place to be able to process, or take action effectively.

Lots of religions and belief systems exist that facilitate passivity (lack of action), and we can legitimately call them repressive ignorance. On the other hand, many of them grew out of conditions of powerlessness, like slavery and poverty, as a tool for those people to increase endurance during that period, which they couldn't get out of in the moment anyway.

Of course, like any coping tool, it gets destructive when one identifies so strongly with it, they don't recognize when it is time to put it down; that opportunity for action as opened. But it serves a purpose in certain cases.

In prey animals, wasting energy unecessarily is a danger to them. Energy needs to be saved up for a fast sprint if it becomes necessary. I think humans too, have some drives of this sort, to conserve energy.

But we also have some sort of mechanism in us, which might cause us to block integration of information which provokes strong energy production (emotion) if a viable path of action for channeling it into cannot be seen.

Because once the emotion is provoked, the brain is hindered in it's capacity to use critical thought and logic to discern an effective path of action. You're just a very mad, or scared, person, running around with your head cut off. (thinking of big issues, like the one you used as an example). Then you are not powerful in the sense of being capable of effective action; though you might be filled with adrenaline and feeling like the Hulk inside!



I guess what that tells me, in the question you have posed, is that power is not something that you can just grab overnight, or in a second. Power comes with responsibility, and responsibility, to be used in an effective and constructive way, needs to have certain skills and knowledge integrated already and accessable.

Trying to skip steps and jump ahead to grab more power than you are capable of mastering in the moment, is sometimes a mistake. It might not be that it is good to remain forever in ignorance - but all is process happening now, and not everyone is in the same phase of that.
edit on 6-11-2015 by Bluesma because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-11-2015 by Bluesma because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-11-2015 by Bluesma because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 6 2015 @ 08:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: Profusion
You made a post where you explained why you believe ignorance is strength. Then you label your position "arguing evolutionary psychology" and you go on to explain why you believe ignorance is strength.

Ignorance is not strength because knowledge is power IN MY EXPERIENCE. Nothing could ever make me waver from that conclusion because the entirety of my existence on this planet has supported that conclusion.

Maybe your experience has been different. Has it? I would like your answer to the following question:

Has it been your experience that knowledge is power, yes or no?

Your logical fallacy is: black and white.

The rest is an unrelated straw man.

Choosing to believe or not believe in hopelessness is not a 1:1 comparison with a nuclear accident. Is a bit like taking the statement 'don't look down' and then extrapolating it into a thought experiment where a person thinks 'down' doesn't exist so attempts to fly.

a reply to: Astyanax
Thank you! Love topics like that and Michael Shermer is okay.

a reply to: Spiramirabilis

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
What's your secret? :-)

Don't really have any particular secret. Just over time I realized persons have a lot of varied ideas about why they do what they do and what they believe. Most people will be wrong about this I imagine at least in some way ...

At the end of the day though you can put a Christian, an follower of Islam, someone that believes hopelessness is a choice, someone that believes hopelessness occurs in opposition to free will, a feminist, an anti-feminist, Pinke, Astyanax, and Profusion all in a room together.

More of us than not will tell the suicidal person on the ledge that they shouldn't jump off it in all probability.

And blah I could be totally wrong about that and that would make me sad (also it's a gross generalization), but in many situations people will come to bizarrely similar conclusions regardless of their way of looking at reality or justifying their behaviour. Despite this people get very upset about semantics for some reason :/

That really does make me sad, because some of my friends can't stand each despite having most things in common.



posted on Nov, 6 2015 @ 08:30 AM
link   
a reply to: Profusion

If you knew all the trouble, illness, pain and strife you are going to cause yourself and others in the future -- as we all must -- would it strengthen or weaken your effectiveness and resolve?

You may say you'd use the knowledge to avoid all that but I don't think that is possible. Trying to cover every outcome is beyond human capacity.

Would it strengthen you or weaken you if you knew when you will reach the end of your road?

If you knew in advance exactly what the price of success, or of love, was going to be, would you still pursue it?



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join