|
Blue_Lux
τό κᾰτᾰπεπτωκός φροντιστής


Registered: 12/07/19
Posts: 2,151
Loc: chillin' on Charon's skiff
|
Re: Can anything be proven? [Re: Freedom]
#28563983 - 12/01/23 04:12 PM (1 month, 26 days ago) |
|
|
Okay let me be a little bit more specific. Check this out. I don't recommend watching it. Actually. I recommend NOT watching it. These IV drip BS reels are designed to give you a certain type of passifying pleasure.
I don't know if my algorithm is messed up or something, but this is the kind of recommendations I get from YouTube. Beware. It is everywhere. Take care not to be an unwitting propagator.
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,530
|
Re: Can anything be proven? [Re: Blue_Lux]
#28563992 - 12/01/23 04:18 PM (1 month, 26 days ago) |
|
|
unpost it then
--------------------
_ 🧠 _
|
Blue_Lux
τό κᾰτᾰπεπτωκός φροντιστής


Registered: 12/07/19
Posts: 2,151
Loc: chillin' on Charon's skiff
|
Re: Can anything be proven? [Re: Blue_Lux]
#28564005 - 12/01/23 04:34 PM (1 month, 26 days ago) |
|
|
Here is an example of Freud making shapes out of words in my head at least.
"It was my experiences of how psychical energy is so readily displaceable along certain paths of association, and how indestructible is the persistence of the traces made by psychical processes, that in fact suggested to me that I should try out this kind of transposition into imagery of the unknown. To avoid misunderstanding, I must add that I am not attempting to proclaim that cells and fibres, or the neurone systems that are taking their place nowadays, are these psychical pathways, although it would be possible to represent such pathways - even if it cannot yet be indicated how - by organic elements of the nervous system."
It is hard to explain this feat, because it really has to be led up to in writing, but yeah.
|
Blue_Lux
τό κᾰτᾰπεπτωκός φροντιστής


Registered: 12/07/19
Posts: 2,151
Loc: chillin' on Charon's skiff
|
|
Why would I unpost my example? Examining the Title is sufficient.
|
Kickle
Wanderer



Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 17,851
Last seen: 1 hour, 7 minutes
|
Re: Can anything be proven? [Re: Blue_Lux]
#28564027 - 12/01/23 04:44 PM (1 month, 26 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Blue_Lux said: I find it astonishing how people can be baffled with questions already explored by, for instance, Nietzsche 150 years ago.
My best guess is that this is cyclic. Every generation thinks they are reinventing the wheel rather than taking the same human ride (aka on the same wheel). Every newborn learns to walk. It's not as if one kid learns and done, no need for baby steps ever again. Some knowledge does last longer than others but all fade to impermanence and get rehashed. Baby steps all over again. Or so it seems to this human.
-------------------- Why shouldn't the truth be stranger than fiction? Fiction, after all, has to make sense. -- Mark Twain
|
Bardy


Registered: 04/02/14
Posts: 2,184
Last seen: 11 minutes, 48 seconds
|
Re: Can anything be proven? [Re: Kickle]
#28564050 - 12/01/23 05:06 PM (1 month, 26 days ago) |
|
|
I think you’re right Kickle. And I think it’s got to do with my original question..
We can build on science because we can each see proof of how things work, test theories and solidify which ones work with inter generational technology and mathematics.
Philosophy, answers about morality, answers about how to live a good life and all that kind of stuff isn’t able to be proven in the same sense, or at all, and isn’t usually self evident (that it’s bad to murder people I think is maybe self evident because it seems to be innate). Because of this, each of these kinds of things needs to be figured out by every individual during the course of their own lives (if they’re free thinkers). Things change too, so maybe sometimes the answers to these kinds of questions change… I dunno 🤷🏼♂️
|
Blue_Lux
τό κᾰτᾰπεπτωκός φροντιστής


Registered: 12/07/19
Posts: 2,151
Loc: chillin' on Charon's skiff
|
Re: Can anything be proven? [Re: Kickle]
#28564054 - 12/01/23 05:12 PM (1 month, 26 days ago) |
|
|
This is my main problem. I am a nerd, and so I expect to read all the books possible to be read. But, of course, just as Borges wrote in the Library of Babel, this is impossible. Which books to read? Going to whatever sparks your interest will only get you so far, and pleasure in fiction, at least I feel, makes me think... well I could be using this time to read something else. It is also a problem in itself when you have read so much that you cannot find much interest in communicating with people, because you then spend your time thinking "Well, if they had only read this, this, and this... we could converse about something greater." I think this is part of why Freud had agoraphobia, and I suspect agoraphobia is directly proportional to how much time you have spent alone with the thoughts of someone else. I think, however, there is a much more intimate experience reading the words of someone in a book, of nonfiction, although fiction has its merits. Anne Bronte blew my mind, for instance. I still get chills thinking about her book The tenant of wildfell hall. I see libraries not full of books but of living remnants of souls just waiting to speak to you, and I also think immortality can truly be attained through writing. This is why, among a couple other reasons, I claim Cicero conquered death.
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,530
|
Re: Can anything be proven? [Re: Blue_Lux]
#28564078 - 12/01/23 05:30 PM (1 month, 26 days ago) |
|
|
we have to answer our own questions, but the groundwork laid by others have shown us a lot that is worth reviewing.
in fact if we skip reviewing the work done in biology and medicine to reveal the systems in play in our lives, then we will not be able to push the envelop farther, and we will throw ourselves back into perplexity.
some stuff, however, needs to be skipped as a hubristical detour, ergo not all passages from each great contributor are as good as others.
Editing this mess is a nightmare, but it is our nightmare.
--------------------
_ 🧠 _
|
Blue_Lux
τό κᾰτᾰπεπτωκός φροντιστής


Registered: 12/07/19
Posts: 2,151
Loc: chillin' on Charon's skiff
|
|
I have this struggle between science and philosophy. i love science, but as Im sure you know... Scientists and philosophers can debate each other like Tweedledee and tweedledum. science often leads me to philosophy only for philosophy to lead me back to science, due to its insufficiencies. Philosophy often goes to an abstract land where the concrete is hard to place. science however can lead to a deterministic conundrum wherein important ethical and existential questions seem inexplicable. I think you are right. There must be a healthy balance.
i was talking to a man earlier today who made the argument that medieval Christianity provided the backdrop for science, and he didn't think the industrial revolution could have occurred in ancient Rome. i think that is a fair point. I find it very strange however that something could provide an opposite which would subsequently seem impossible to have been provided by it. I'm not sure about this, but it seems all possibilities must be kept open, because we can't be sure what could be right around the corner.
|
Bardy


Registered: 04/02/14
Posts: 2,184
Last seen: 11 minutes, 48 seconds
|
Re: Can anything be proven? [Re: Blue_Lux]
#28564346 - 12/01/23 07:47 PM (1 month, 26 days ago) |
|
|
Hasn’t science been done long before in other cultures though? I don’t know the answer to this, it just feels as though it’s unrealistic to assume that science began in the Industrial Revolution. Maybe only more primitive forms of science?
I’m probably not the person to make any solid statements about this because my knowledge of history is shocking… ly bad.
Edited by Bardy (12/01/23 07:48 PM)
|
Kickle
Wanderer



Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 17,851
Last seen: 1 hour, 7 minutes
|
Re: Can anything be proven? [Re: Bardy]
#28564366 - 12/01/23 08:00 PM (1 month, 26 days ago) |
|
|
I think it would be very strange if humans at all points in history have not tried to systematically observe their existence. And arguably far better at it in certain respects, worse in others.
-------------------- Why shouldn't the truth be stranger than fiction? Fiction, after all, has to make sense. -- Mark Twain
|
Blue_Lux
τό κᾰτᾰπεπτωκός φροντιστής


Registered: 12/07/19
Posts: 2,151
Loc: chillin' on Charon's skiff
|
Re: Can anything be proven? [Re: Bardy]
#28564371 - 12/01/23 08:03 PM (1 month, 26 days ago) |
|
|
His argument was that the Romans were phobic of anything that produced technology that reduced labor, because of the massive gap between a small elite and a gigantic working class. I don't think this is completely accurate, but then again perhaps. I did mention Democritus and Epicurus, and as well that Plato thought atomism was logically absurd. Cicero too thought atomism was not accurate. He said, well the atom has been split. The debate still exists too between the idea of infinitely small ball bearing like pieces of reality and the idea for instance that string theory supports, but it is in fact clear that photons and atoms exist. Epicurus wrote about collections of atoms forming together what is conceptually the same thing as molecules and compounds. I think indeed science was created by the Greeks and Egyptians, and I would support the argument that modern science is not necessarily dependent on the industrial revolution and mediaeval Christianity; however, that is the series of events that has led to the splitting of the atom and etc. I support the idea that the Romans, given a couple more hundred years, would have found electricity and then everything that follows from that, but maybe not. Maybe there is a necessity at work that has required for things to turn out this way. I don't particularly like this idea, but it could be the case. I tend to go toward the doom and gloom totalitarian takeover theory of the 4th century, of the deliberate suppression of science and philosophy, but perhaps how we got here has been more accidental than expected. The currency of the Roman empire was diluted so much over the course of the 2nd and 3rd century that perhaps it was inevitable. I worry about the same thing happening today.
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,530
|
Re: Can anything be proven? [Re: Blue_Lux]
#28564415 - 12/01/23 08:34 PM (1 month, 26 days ago) |
|
|
what about the steam engine, the Romans did not have that, but it was a pivotal thing - capping the colonial periods and introducing modern experimental versions of social management.
Quote:
Copilot wrote me this synopsis: The steam engine used for trains and the industrial revolution was the result of a series of inventions and improvements by different people over time. Some of the most important contributors were:
Thomas Savery
Thomas Savery (c. 1650-1715), who invented the first steam-powered pump in 16981. Thomas Newcomen
Thomas Newcomen (1664-1729), who improved Savery’s design and created the first practical steam engine in 17122. James Watt
James Watt (1736-1819), who added a separate condenser and a rotary motion to Newcomen’s engine, making it more efficient and versatile in 1763 and 178123. Matthew Boulton
Matthew Boulton (1728-1809), who partnered with Watt and helped him manufacture and market his steam engines2. Richard Trevithick
Richard Trevithick (1771-1833), who built the first steam locomotive in 18044. George Stephenson
George Stephenson (1781-1848), who improved Trevithick’s design and built the first public railway line using steam locomotives in 1825. These inventors and engineers transformed the use of steam power from a limited and expensive source of energy to a widespread and cheap one that could drive machinery, transport goods and people, and fuel the industrial revolution.
It followed a time of guilds developing metal technology beyond Roman abilities enough with enough social technical support to make and use engines.
The guilds not the churches enabled this. IMO.
--------------------
_ 🧠 _
|
Blue_Lux
τό κᾰτᾰπεπτωκός φροντιστής


Registered: 12/07/19
Posts: 2,151
Loc: chillin' on Charon's skiff
|
Re: Can anything be proven? [Re: Bardy]
#28564418 - 12/01/23 08:37 PM (1 month, 26 days ago) |
|
|
I want to get this thought coherent... I have been reading this book by Freud about Jokes. He basically goes completely full force like a microscope into the inner workings of the mind with regard to jokes, witticisms and pleasantries. It is so frustrating however that he doesn't ever mention psychedelic drugs. Psychedelics cause intense laughter. His theory of laughter involves the release of inhibited pleasure. This made me think however that we are maybe much more given to laughter than we actually do laugh, because we are simply not capable... Terence Mckenna thinks we were actually an orgiastic, psychedelic taking species, and that this was ubiquitous in the ancient world, far before Babylon and Egypt. I wonder if all of this work from Freud, and really the whole of psychology and philosophy is really leading us backwards to a fuller future of psychedelics where the common attitudes of comedy and pleasure seeking become obsolete, and consequently so do philosophy and psychology become obsolete.
|
Blue_Lux
τό κᾰτᾰπεπτωκός φροντιστής


Registered: 12/07/19
Posts: 2,151
Loc: chillin' on Charon's skiff
|
|
excellent point
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,530
|
Re: Can anything be proven? [Re: Blue_Lux]
#28564479 - 12/01/23 09:25 PM (1 month, 26 days ago) |
|
|
Freud got association established, the rest is weakly patched together.
--------------------
_ 🧠 _
|
Bardy


Registered: 04/02/14
Posts: 2,184
Last seen: 11 minutes, 48 seconds
|
Re: Can anything be proven? [Re: Blue_Lux] 1
#28564542 - 12/01/23 10:18 PM (1 month, 26 days ago) |
|
|
When the Greeks were talking about atoms they were talking about the smallest indivisible parts that make up everything. They would not consider what we call atoms today to be atoms. Stings are the new Ancient Greek atoms.
|
Heroic Dosage
Psychonaut Storyteller



Registered: 11/30/23
Posts: 30
Loc: Hyperspace
Last seen: 1 month, 6 days
|
Re: Can anything be proven? [Re: Bardy]
#28564629 - 12/02/23 12:38 AM (1 month, 26 days ago) |
|
|
This conversation has passed me by, which Iove, but I wanted to say...
[Quote]they often show what we have been ignoring as well, which is an extremely valuable view to access.
THIS.
The fact that we can discover otherwise 'unknown unknowns' about problematic areas of our lives through psychedelics, I believe is where their power lies.
|
sudly
Darwin's stagger

Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,797
|
|
All psychedelics do in my experience is ground you, they make you face your current dilemmas and allows you to simply acknowledge what's infront of you, unimpeded by concerns of timely matters.
They catalyse an overwhelming sense of acceptance in my experience.
Well, if you accept them for what they are in the first place. A drug.
-------------------- I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,530
|
Re: Can anything be proven? [Re: sudly]
#28564740 - 12/02/23 04:48 AM (1 month, 26 days ago) |
|
|
usually they make me go to the washroom it is a wonderful place.
--------------------
_ 🧠 _
|
|