The philosophy of minding your own business

reply to post by zeroBelief


No need at all to apologize. I was not the least bit offended. It's just sites like this that let you star, or flag or give a thumbs up on always have people trying to be "number one" in that area. Plus you see so many threads on here created for the sole purpose of getting tons of stars and flags

reply to post by zeroBelief


Neither the light nor the darkness would exist without the other. Each defines the other. I apologize for not being as clear as I could be, but I've always had a habit of putting too much between the lines. Candle in hand, casting shadow puppets on the wall, my rabbit often looks like a pair of scissors. You can sharpen and hone the word all you like, but it's still an imprecise weapon. I'm trying not to poke out anyone's eye with it when I happen to cross their path, though.

Still tryin' to get the hang of that thing...

Another idea that is deeper than we might think is:

Good fences make good neighbors.

Personally, I don't think there are any rules for social interaction better than "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." It's certainly a good benchmark for human conduct.

ipsedixit
Another idea that is deeper than we might think is:

Good fences make good neighbors.

Personally, I don't think there are any rules for social interaction better than "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." It's certainly a good benchmark for human conduct.

I profoundly agree with both thoughts you present here......

Everyone likes to imagine that humanities biggest conflicts can be solved easily with a simple idea.

Like thousands upon thousands of years of civilisation, and nobody thought of the same thing you just came up with, no community has attempted to try it.... Really???

The golden rule is often brought up as the magic answer. If that is your magic answer, I can guess you grew up in a community that was structured with shared culture, and you haven't been far from it. In other words, everyone around you has the same values, morals, beliefs and preferences. You can rely on that.

Go to another culture, in another place, and you will find the golden rule is pretty worthless. Instead of assuming others are exactly like you, you will have to open your mind to the possibility that they are nothing like you and may want completely different type of interactions. They may even take it very badly, be very offended or hurt, as you try to offer them what you yourself would like to receive! You may have to treat them in ways you yourself would hate, in order to communicate and get along.

But that is the whole interest of shared culture... of people getting together and agreeing upon a shared set of ethics, morals and ideals, and acceptable gestures! Because then, interactions are less complicated and can be smoother. Inter-dependance in the group, exchange of goods, services, and personal relationships are all made easier.

If someone doesn't want to be part of that, then I do not see why they would? Go live in a cave, or build yourself a cabin far from other humans and sustain your own life, part of no herd. Why sit in the middle of it, benefitting from it's protection, goods, and services, complaining about it?

The OP is too vague and while it sounds like a good thing, it's not defined enough to actually agree or disagree with.

Bluesma

The golden rule is often brought up as the magic answer. If that is your magic answer, I can guess you grew up in a community that was structured with shared culture, and you haven't been far from it. In other words, everyone around you has the same values, morals, beliefs and preferences. You can rely on that.

Go to another culture, in another place, and you will find the golden rule is pretty worthless. Instead of assuming others are exactly like you, you will have to open your mind to the possibility that they are nothing like you and may want completely different type of interactions. They may even take it very badly, be very offended or hurt, as you try to offer them what you yourself would like to receive! You may have to treat them in ways you yourself would hate, in order to communicate and get along.

But that is the whole interest of shared culture... of people getting together and agreeing upon a shared set of ethics, morals and ideals, and acceptable gestures! Because then, interactions are less complicated and can be smoother. Inter-dependance in the group, exchange of goods, services, and personal relationships are all made easier.

That is really some profound thinking there, Bluesma. Well written. I have not heard or seen someone write that idea so clearly before - it is one that I also have noticed, having been fully-immersed in different cultures over my lifetime.

I think that people who do not travel (I'm not talking about anyone in this thread) can have a hard time understanding the impact that their local culture has on their perceptions. When someone does travel and experiences culture shock, or even stranger, lives in another culture severed from their home culture - this drives the point home.

On another topic - ZeroBelief is talking about the culture of no culture, a way for people to interact while being free to express themselves without the limitations of One Culture while still interacting and while still feeling connected - so, similar to... well, this is quite the accomplishment, see, to do this.

I think both you, Bluesma (who seems well-traveled) and ZeroBelief understand how it is an accomplishment to both have freedom of personal cultural preference and relate to others with the same, or even harder still, have no cultural preference based on beliefs and still interact... it is an interesting subject, a very interesting subject, actually -

To have no culture, but to still have ways to interact. I've been searching for that very thing - I think it is important.

I just bought some books by Jaques Derrida as well. And I own a few by Crowley - his Book of Thoth is amazingly well-written.

CretumOrbis

You can sharpen and hone the word all you like, but it's still an imprecise weapon. I'm trying not to poke out anyone's eye with it when I happen to cross their path, though.

Still tryin' to get the hang of that thing...

The best quote I read about being tactful described it as getting your point across without accidentally causing someone harm. A very interesting and more precise take, for a few reasons -

You remain honest, yet polite. There is reason for not wanting to accidentally cause distress - it impacts your relationship. And keeping this mindset allows you to be conversational while still getting your point across -

"Hey, you know what I think, we should have Caesar Salad tonight instead of Greek!"
"Really? But I was hoping to make Greek."
"Well - how about we try it next time or do both?"

I dunno, you just sort of skip the whole negative part.

Yet, you still maintain the freedom to chastise someone if you wish to intentionally - but can you figure out the exact amount that is appropriate? I would say a dash of spice is enough.

"I simply will not allow Caesar Salad in this house."
"Mother - that is ridiculous."

I just think it makes things more precise.