|
durian_2008
Cornucopian Eating an Elephant



Registered: 04/02/08
Posts: 16,681
Loc: Raccoon City
|
Re: Can anything be proven? [Re: Rahz]
#28566522 - 12/03/23 09:41 AM (1 month, 25 days ago) |
|
|
I usually feel as though I can retrace my steps, logically, that my reality fits predictable patterns and stereotypes akin to Murphy's Law.
|
Blue_Lux
τό κᾰτᾰπεπτωκός φροντιστής


Registered: 12/07/19
Posts: 2,151
Loc: chillin' on Charon's skiff
|
Re: Can anything be proven? [Re: Rahz]
#28566535 - 12/03/23 09:51 AM (1 month, 25 days ago) |
|
|
Wasn't it David Hume, yes, who said. Oh yes!
" "reason is a slave to the passions” because reason is dragged, kicking and screaming, by the passions that determine our behavior." "
This is exactly what I was thinking about when I was thinking about an infant needing security and safety, and sateity, in order to be able to start to make knowledges of what is happening. Yes, but I think this primary security and safety, and this relates to homeostasis, becomes the very foundation of knowledge itself, and it is not merely passion but satisfaction. It is a positivity, against pain and chaos, which is unpleasant. The fact of its opposition to anything unpleasant additionally reinforces the pleasantness, which is the excess necessary for consciousness to be interested in sensed phenomena in such a way so as to be able to separate phenomena apart and also fuse them together with associations. Passion is not necessarily a slaver. Passion is the impetus of behavior. This is why I think the passion of Christ himself is the most interesting component. I think such passion can indeed be called godly, and that goes for any ultimate sense of love and concern either for humanity as a whole or for individual people. This can be seen in many people but instantiates in various ways.
|
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]
#28566547 - 12/03/23 10:05 AM (1 month, 25 days ago) |
|
|
An example is the typo I made on my 2nd to last post. I typed 'mimick' instead of mimic. The k itself is a childish letter after a c, especially in that word, because children mimic adults. This was probably because words themselves are imbued with psychic energy as they are made. A graphology of a child's handwriting is beautiful. And I actually don't mind misspellings. Noam Chomsky says there isn't any correct way to write or say anything, as long as meaning is communicated. I think misspellings or any unique differences you can see in people's handwritings say things themselves and in addition to the actual words expressing.
|
Blue_Lux
τό κᾰτᾰπεπτωκός φροντιστής


Registered: 12/07/19
Posts: 2,151
Loc: chillin' on Charon's skiff
|
|

Maybe this is a good example. The letter is from the 4th century. The graffiti is from Pompeii. I think it is interesting to note how different fonts say something different, and how, over time, even popular scripts and fonts have come into popularity. I think there is even maybe a dark side where font and script can be controlled or purposely kept from containing other meanings, and specifically pushing secretive or narrow or etc. meanings
|
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]
#28566595 - 12/03/23 10:52 AM (1 month, 25 days ago) |
|
|
And with all that said, it is true, you can cast spells in Latin but in every language too. This is why it is called a spell in the first place with some sort of incantation. This is what you could properly call the sorts of shapes different writers make in the back of your mind as you are reading them. Spells and charms. It really is then again like magic. And I think it is proper here to, lastly, mention that Roman Square Capital, you know, when it is all capitalized but squared out without spaces was a spiritual form of writing to the Romans and was reserved for important writings.
-------------------- ☆✮★⋆I ♡ the music, not the bling⋆★✮☆ https://rictornorton.co.uk/eighteen/1730news.htm 𝔦𝔫 𝔫𝔬𝔪𝔦𝔫𝔢 𝔟𝔬𝔫𝔦 𝔭𝔢𝔰𝔰𝔦𝔪𝔦 𝔪𝔞𝔩𝔬𝔯𝔲𝔪 𝔣𝔦𝔲𝔫𝔱 May I ask what your bud type is? ❂ LXIV⁶⁴AMOR ❂Profundæ lātissimæque vēritātēs amandæ sunt, sīc ideo necesse est: rēs maxima amanda est; pōtus sit is bene scīmus cum nōs id adeō explet, cum altō hīc movet īmus: rēs maxima omnis amor.
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,530
|
Re: Can anything be proven? [Re: Blue_Lux]
#28566607 - 12/03/23 11:09 AM (1 month, 25 days ago) |
|
|
BlueLux, I envy your path taken through graphology and linguistics. tell me, what is your favorite drug?
--------------------
_ 🧠 _
|
Blue_Lux
τό κᾰτᾰπεπτωκός φροντιστής


Registered: 12/07/19
Posts: 2,151
Loc: chillin' on Charon's skiff
|
|
My favorite drug was dextroamphetamine, but I refuse to take it anymore, because there are side effects. I can read an entire book in one sitting and retain almost everything if I take Adderall. That drug however has side too many negative side effects. So, I haven't taken it in a couple years now. The last time I took that I had a prescription for 20mg a day, for 'adhd' (dubious although I fit the criteria) but even that became uncomfortable. I'd say probably mushrooms are my favorite, and then mda or mdma. Then cannabis. I very rarely take ecstasy however
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,530
|
Re: Can anything be proven? [Re: Blue_Lux]
#28566744 - 12/03/23 12:55 PM (1 month, 25 days ago) |
|
|
I was going to say speed, which TBH is my fave of all drugs that I dont take any more because my other faves are so safe in comparison.
ATM shrooms are divine.
--------------------
_ 🧠 _
|
Bardy


Registered: 04/02/14
Posts: 2,184
Last seen: 12 minutes, 27 seconds
|
Re: Can anything be proven? [Re: Blue_Lux]
#28566769 - 12/03/23 01:20 PM (1 month, 25 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Blue_Lux said: I think there is actually a wordless apprehension, as in a grasp, not anxiety, necessary in order to understand complex writing. It is not necessarily mood but personality within the text itself. Maybe personality isn't the right word. But any great writer has a certain air, a pathos, an atmosphere in which the subject matter is treated. I think this is actually crucial to be aware of, but to my knowledge nothing like this is taught. A good way of explaining it is like if you read Plato or Freud or any person who developed a complete system of thought, after you have read a certain amount, you don't necessarily have to read anything else from them, because the wordless worldview organizing the structure of conceptions becomes like a mode wherein you could answer any question in their 'style,' for lack of better words. It is not however just a style. That would reduce it to mere aesthetics. It isn't mere aesthetics. I think, therefore, the present day consideration of postmodernism under the notion that a text can be interpreted in any way is completely ridiculous. This is just an excuse for being a poor reader. It takes practice and a cultivation of interest. Truths revealed are not mere playthings of a literary environment, unless you read completely removed from exactly that personal atmosphere of the writer themselves, which you begin to understand beyond words the more you read them.
Sarcasm cannot be detected through text based solely on the text. You need to know the person, and even then you can’t be sure all the time that they’re actually being sarcastic or not.
I get what you’re saying and it holds true for writers who are writing books (you know they’re being serious, and if they’re not they’ll make it known in some way), but it doesn’t hold true for a stranger on the internet.
I don’t know Durian, I’ve barely interacted with them. Durian usually writes two sentences, tops, by the look of it. Tone is hard to convey if you’re just making two short claims. There is definitely interpretation going on, and it seems like you might just be unaware that you were doing it in this case.
I agree that how the person interprets it is based on how they’re feeling at the time. I was getting (probably still am) sucked in by the internet again and putting too much energy into some kind of internet ego lol. But I definitely had to interpret it, I just chose to interpret it uncharitably.
Edited by Bardy (12/03/23 01:27 PM)
|
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]
#28566891 - 12/03/23 03:04 PM (1 month, 24 days ago) |
|
|
Are you aware it is exactly ambiguity of meanings that has made for instance Virgil, the Roman poet I find myself constantly mentioning, recognized as such a master of the Latin language? He does this on purpose knowing just what the words can be interpreted to mean, but he doesn't give you a definite picture. This can lead someone beginning to learn Latin to think they are seriously missing something when the words are often designed precisely in such a way for ambiguity and multiple interpretations. Someone said, I forget who, the true beauty in Latin Virgil's poetry is just how much is not said.
Or like here in Martial's Epigrammata
Quote:
Si quid lene mei dicunt et dulce libelli, Si quid honorificum pagina blanda sonat, Hoc tu pingue putas et costam rodere mavis, Ilia Laurentis cum tibi demus apri. Vaticana bibas, si delectaris aceto: Non facit ad stomachum nostra lagona tuum.
I hardly find this misunderstanding of postmodernism (to begin with) a serious reproach for prose-writing when it has been a paramount and very-much conscious aspect of poetry for literally millennia.
|
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]
#28566906 - 12/03/23 03:17 PM (1 month, 24 days ago) |
|
|
I have come across quite a few things with 4 and 5 separate meanings in Latin. Lucretius does it all throughout De Rerum Natura, On the Nature of Things. Quite fitting really. That's why it is a masterpiece. The translations cannot ever do it justice. It completely botches it and that is why much of translated Latin poetry is so turgid and flowery, and frankly annoying. I read from someone claiming that Virgil did a 7 way entendre, but I'm not sure what it is.
|
Bardy


Registered: 04/02/14
Posts: 2,184
Last seen: 12 minutes, 27 seconds
|
Re: Can anything be proven? [Re: Blue_Lux]
#28567127 - 12/03/23 05:36 PM (1 month, 24 days ago) |
|
|
Oh right. I thought you were trying to make the case that things can only be interpreted one “correct” way once you know the authors style. I must’ve got you wrong.
|
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]
#28567214 - 12/03/23 06:05 PM (1 month, 24 days ago) |
|
|
It isn't so much that there is a strict one way, but there is one set of ways. I think some people think it is likely to be able to interpret someone, say, Ralph Emerson as a white bigot christian who indirectly supported patriarchy. It's like...
Yeeah, prolly not. I get you may have got that.. But you didn't read it right...
No harm in trying to get people to look for the actual contexts of things instead of immediately categorizing something in accordance with their predilections or insufficient considerations. Piaget should be remembered. It isn't all about assimilating one's schema but accommodating it just as much.
|
Bardy


Registered: 04/02/14
Posts: 2,184
Last seen: 12 minutes, 27 seconds
|
Re: Can anything be proven? [Re: Blue_Lux]
#28567313 - 12/03/23 07:00 PM (1 month, 24 days ago) |
|
|
Yeah, it’s the persons real intentions that actually matter, not how you read it. We both agree about that.
It doesn’t take away from the fact that we encounter this problem of interpretation on the internet all the time though, which is why it is good practice to always give the most charitable reading you can. I try to… but I still often fail when I’m not paying proper attention.
Since Durian often posts two sentences that don’t contain many words I find a lot of their comments vague and difficult to interpret. It’s definitely humorous. But it’s easier to take it the wrong way. I like it when people are concise… but not everyone is all the time and I need to practice tolerance and compassion to some degree.
Edited by Bardy (12/03/23 07:05 PM)
|
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]
#28567354 - 12/03/23 07:20 PM (1 month, 24 days ago) |
|
|
The sole fact you think you need to practice tolerance and compassion means you are a good person. Probably not much to change. Philosophy is annoying. I personally like the philosophy of Sextus Empiricus because he starts from what you actually CAN say about anything, and if it is dubious at all... He just outright says we can't make any final statements about that, and we need to move onto something concrete instead of dabbling in dialectical battles where the subject matter is too ambiguous.
|
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]
#28567371 - 12/03/23 07:28 PM (1 month, 24 days ago) |
|
|
This is a fantastic book. Very easy to read. If you click the link it will download. Outlines of Pyrrhonism by Sextus Empiricus. He was a physician, not just a philosopher. He was centuries ahead of his time, I think. Nietzsche was heavily inspired by him.
https://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.sciacchitano.it/pensatori%2520epistemici/scettici/outlines%2520of%2520pyrronism.pdf&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwiK6ZHJ3fSCAxUGk4kEHYUTAQoQFnoECAoQAg&usg=AOvVaw3sVHAGa6evqEplrKVUXt8K
|
Bardy


Registered: 04/02/14
Posts: 2,184
Last seen: 12 minutes, 27 seconds
|
Re: Can anything be proven? [Re: Blue_Lux]
#28567448 - 12/03/23 08:08 PM (1 month, 24 days ago) |
|
|
Thanks so much 😊 I’ll check it out
|
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]
#28567454 - 12/03/23 08:10 PM (1 month, 24 days ago) |
|
|
obviously you don't have to, but if you want, there it is lol
|
Bardy


Registered: 04/02/14
Posts: 2,184
Last seen: 12 minutes, 27 seconds
|
Re: Can anything be proven? [Re: Blue_Lux]
#28567463 - 12/03/23 08:13 PM (1 month, 24 days ago) |
|
|
Yeah I’ll definitely have a read, it sounds interesting. You’re not putting a gun to my head haha
|
BrendanFlock
Stranger


Registered: 06/01/13
Posts: 4,216
Last seen: 2 days, 13 hours
|
Re: Can anything be proven? [Re: Blue_Lux]
#28567804 - 12/04/23 04:44 AM (1 month, 24 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Blue_Lux said: My favorite drug was dextroamphetamine, but I refuse to take it anymore, because there are side effects. I can read an entire book in one sitting and retain almost everything if I take Adderall. That drug however has side too many negative side effects. So, I haven't taken it in a couple years now. The last time I took that I had a prescription for 20mg a day, for 'adhd' (dubious although I fit the criteria) but even that became uncomfortable. I'd say probably mushrooms are my favorite, and then mda or mdma. Then cannabis. I very rarely take ecstasy however
Why not try DXM?
|
|