Strange Existentialism Article from Unlikely Source: Interpretation Requested

Warning: contains language that I wouldn't use

Here's a link to the full, very brief article: www.newrepublic.com...

It's more than a tad ironic, but apropos, that it took a missing airplane—one of man's greatest technological innovations—to remind us that there's still some mystery left to humanity. As The Onion wrote Thursday, investigators are not only considering mechanical failures or terrorist plots but “the overarching scope of space, time, and humankind’s place in the universe,” the site reported, and that people are demanding answers to questions about the flight's duration, path, and "the very dimensions of space-time and the nature of reality, and what exactly it is that brought us into existence and imbued us with this thing we call life."

I know what my thoughts are on this "work," but philosophers, psychologists, and others in the community, what are yours?

So as not to bias anyone, I will withhold until/when I get responses.

Please share your comments, including:

-Your initial reaction to the headline
-Your *feelings* about what the author proposes
-Your thoughts on how this does/does not relate to our state of being on a individual or global level
OR
-Anything else you find relevant

reply to post by watchesfromwall


Hm, there is nothing in your OP...

EDIT:

I see you fixed it. Reading now.

reply to post by watchesfromwall


Point one: it's the Onion. Taking it seriously means you're probably one of the people it's making fun of. Calling it an unlikely source is a little strange given that the Onion is known for its satirical work, particularly given the exaggerated nature of the article in question.

Point two: the simplest explanation is usually the best, unless and until you have evidence strongly suggesting that explanation is invalid.

Derives the inner existentialist in all of us.... I qoute

...a plane falling out from the sky. What the #?

reply to post by AfterInfinity


I can't believe people fall for the onion.....

I did for a minute...the headline?.

"Dolphins evolve opposable thumb oh crap says humanity!"

lol.

boymonkey74
reply to post by AfterInfinity

 

I can't believe people fall for the onion.....

I did for a minute...the headline?.

"Dolphins evolve opposable thumb oh crap says humanity!"

lol.

The Onion has invaded my wet dreams for the last time!

...And no, I'm not romantically interested in dolphins. But I do believe that dolphins with opposable thumbs would be the best thing since the Great Flood - if, in fact, I believed in the Great Flood. And since I don't, I believe dolphins with opposable thumbs would be the best thing ever. Period.

...On second thought, scratch that. I can just imagine the dolphins telling me off for suggesting that such an impediment be introduced to their species. Flippers are far more advantageous than opposable thumbs will ever be, given the quote below.

“For instance, on the planet Earth, man had always assumed that he was more intelligent than dolphins because he had achieved so much—the wheel, New York, wars and so on—whilst all the dolphins had ever done was muck about in the water having a good time. But conversely, the dolphins had always believed that they were far more intelligent than man—for precisely the same reasons.” - Douglas Adams, A Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy

boymonkey74
I can't believe people fall for the onion.....

It's always fun when that happens.

The explanation of the missing airplane is simple .... The pilot/copilot turned off the transponders, said 'good night' to the flight control, and then changed course dramatically while the plane was between control towers using maneuvers that only a skilled pilot could use. It was a hijacking by the pilot/copilot. The only thing we don't know ... is the plane at the bottom of the ocean or do terrorists have it for nefarious purposes. I have no doubt that the passengers are dead.

AfterInfinity
reply to post by watchesfromwall

 

Point one: it's the Onion. Taking it seriously means you're probably one of the people it's making fun of.

Point two: the simplest explanation is usually the best, unless and until you have evidence strongly suggesting that explanation is invalid.

Please read the full article, and then comment.

I quoted the portion the author sourcedfrom the onion because it seems to repeat items of interest we have discussed in this forum vis-a-vis a current event.

I do appreciate your input, but the focus should be on the message,(the article), not me, (the messenger).

Thank you and Peace.

reply to post by watchesfromwall


I don't know. I love mystery, but this guy is almost fantasizing about the Malaysian tragedy, which just disgusts me. To further attract people to his (IMO ridiculous) theory, he introduces big words such as "space-time", which don't really help the fact that he's using the Malaysian tragedy as an attempt to increase technophobia, ignorance - which are two things which the Elite wants us to have: The Elite wants a people who has no defensive technologies, and no knowledge so to make predictions.

He seem to state that technology is an enemy to mystery. I say, we should use technology to explore mysteries. That's how we discovered Relativity, that's how we discovered ways to cure ill children. Besides, we will never know everything anyway...

reply to post by swanne


Thank you.

Peace.


----------------------------------------------------


Everyone else, please realize the article is from the New Republic, not the onion.

Much respect!

watchesfromwall

AfterInfinity
reply to post by watchesfromwall

 

Point one: it's the Onion. Taking it seriously means you're probably one of the people it's making fun of.

Point two: the simplest explanation is usually the best, unless and until you have evidence strongly suggesting that explanation is invalid.

Please read the full article, and then comment.

I quoted the portion the author sourcedfrom the onion because it seems to repeat items of interest we have discussed in this forum vis-a-vis a current event.

I do appreciate your input, but the focus should be on the message,(the article), not me, (the messenger).

Thank you and Peace.

Oh, you thought I was talking about you? I meant you in the royal sense. Although if you're not taking it serious, nor at the best explanation, then clearly, I wasn't talking about you. Or was I? I wasn't intending to, although your reaction now gives me misgivings.

reply to post by watchesfromwall


The Onion is satire, like the Colbert Report and John Stewart and SNL.
The paragraph you c/p was followed by "the joke isn't that far off."

The point seems to be that we are all so hooked in to technology and surveillance that we can't escape it...but the plane did, somehow. Planes do disappear, but it is hard to understand things like the Bermuda Triangle.

I think the article (not, imo, a great source) simply means that we feel 'safe' knowing that we can be tracked and found if we go missing - but we also feel 'stalked' at times, and want to be left alone. In the case of the plane's passengers, they are neither safe nor being effectively stalked -- no wait. rescued.

Is that what you're looking for?

AfterInfinity

watchesfromwall

AfterInfinity
reply to post by watchesfromwall

 

Point one: it's the Onion. Taking it seriously means you're probably one of the people it's making fun of.

Point two: the simplest explanation is usually the best, unless and until you have evidence strongly suggesting that explanation is invalid.

Please read the full article, and then comment.

I quoted the portion the author sourcedfrom the onion because it seems to repeat items of interest we have discussed in this forum vis-a-vis a current event.

I do appreciate your input, but the focus should be on the message,(the article), not me, (the messenger).

Thank you and Peace.

Oh, you thought I was talking about you? I meant you in the royal sense. Although if you're not taking it serious, nor at the best explanation, then clearly, I wasn't talking about you. Or was I? I wasn't intending to, although your reaction now gives me misgivings.

Let me put it this way: I would never use the Onion as a sole source to base a thread. And, based on your original reply, you seemed to have skipped over the main article. That's all. Peace.

reply to post by watchesfromwall


My apologies, I was being funny. The article raises some excellent points that will never be addressed in an official capacity by anyone whom we would like to see being honest about the situation. As per the norm.

reply to post by AfterInfinity


Apology accepted. Further input from you noted, and appreciated. I have added to the OP for clarity's sake so I appreciate some of your feedback. : ) I posted in philosophy & metaphysics for a reason - for contemplation instead of conspiracy.

Here's a lucky 4 leaf clover for your time.

reply to post by watchesfromwall


The article points out our that we are overly confident in knowledge and reason, but in practice, and against much stronger forces, we often find that our knowledge and reason are never quite up to task when it comes to the magnitude of states of affairs. This realization, supposedly prompted by this missing airplane, and hilariously parodied by the Onion, raises questions about the grand scheme of things, leading to conjecture, conspiracy, even questioning the fabric of the universe and existence.

I think youre catching all the flack because even if the article wasnt FROM the Onion...that comedy-news site was one of the only ones to reprint it.

If you couldve found it printed elsewhere and linked that...it wouldve helped its credibility, and wouldve been taken more seriously.

reply to post by mysterioustranger


It was my bad because I quoted a portion of the "New Republic" (the original, linked source) that I believed would appeal to those who participate in the Philosophy/metaphysics forum. Oddly enough, when I thought it was fairly slow, it got pounced on by the popular mainstream, everyday ATSers. And, unfortunately, that quote contained the onion which I kind of glossed over as secondary to the topic at large.

It's OK...I'm sporadic on here at best and I just like it as an extra outlet for more adult contact as I don't care for where I live right now. I will never make a thread on ATS again. I can watch, and occasionally post, or just give it up altogether.

But hey, you made a good point and I appreciate it. Peace be with you, as you have brought me some closure. : )

reply to post by watchesfromwall

Woah! Hold on there. You dont have to leave, go away or quit threading/posting! Thats not the way to deal with this. It reflects nothing on you as a person, member. Take it from me. Im always ticking someone off, posting things misunderstood, and have made a few non-sensical threads....but its a learning thing. We get better that way.

Ive often heard it said that "The woods would be silent...if the only birds singing...were the ones that sang the best!"

Dont stop singing...Im sure you have a lot more to say. Like me? You just need to learn to duck...and move on to the next. You have value here. We all do.

Best MS

reply to post by watchesfromwall


Hey! Thanks for tagging my wall. I didnt know I even HAD a wall! See? 'Always learnin' something here! Thanks MS