|
 Sclorch
Clyster
Registered: 07/12/99
Posts: 4,805
Loc: On the Brink of Madness
|
 Re: Fuck Yourself  [Re: In(di)go]
#984076 - 10/22/02 05:42 PM (22 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
And now Lozt Soul is promoting the digression....
--------------------
Note: In desperate need of a cure...
|
In(di)go
People of the sun.
 
Registered: 10/29/00
Posts: 8,157
Loc: Cologne, Germany
|
 Re: Fuck Yourself [Re: Sclorch]
#984118 - 10/22/02 05:58 PM (22 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
i escuse myself for "ruining your thread"
--------------------
|
 Strumpling
Neuronaut
Registered: 10/11/02
Posts: 7,571
Loc: Hyperspace
Last seen: 13 years, 8 months
|
Re: Fuck Yourself [Re: Sclorch]
#984227 - 10/22/02 06:36 PM (22 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
yay sclorch is on my ass again!!
sorry to throw your life off balance like that man.... please.. don't hit me.
edit #1 (addition): and hey why didn't you jump all over dee_N_ae for asking the question I was attempting to answer? see now if you answer my questions you are further contributing to the "end of days" for this thread so you're gunna ignore me right? good idea... oh and great thread-name by the way.
--------------------
Insert an "I think" mentally in front of eveything I say that seems sketchy, because I certainly don't KNOW much. Also; feel free to yell at me.
In addition: SHPONGLE
Edited by Strumpling (10/22/02 06:40 PM)
|
dee_N_ae
\/\/¡†¢h |-|øµ§³ ¢å†
Registered: 08/16/02
Posts: 2,473
Loc: The Shadow of Neptune
|
Re: Fuck Yourself [Re: Strumpling]
#984345 - 10/22/02 07:08 PM (22 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
My question was actually directed at Shroomism since it was his post I was replying to.
After considering the nature of this forurm I now realise I should have PM'd him the question so as not to upset those who stricly adhere to the forum rules.
Sorry for causing any trouble! 
Edited by dee_N_ae (10/22/02 07:08 PM)
|
buttonion
Calmly Watching
Registered: 04/04/02
Posts: 303
Loc: Kansas
|
 Re: Fuck Yourself [Re: Evolving]
#984357 - 10/22/02 07:10 PM (22 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Reality is it what exists despite denials, despite blindness to it.
The only defense of realism (as opposed to solipsism) is an appeal to pragmatism and social consensus, far from a logical proof. Yet if you are not a realist, you are blind or are in denial. How are you so sure?
Someone could use an appeal to pragmatism and social consensus to also support the existence of God. In the past, It could have been used to support now-known-to-be obsolete medical and other scientific theories, yet I?m sure in these cases you would not consider this argument so compelling.
Reality is what remains when the hallucinations stop, it imposes itself upon you even when you can't perceive it.
What if everyone was tripping and we all saw ?reality? in more or less the same way. Would what we all agreed on as reality then be reality? If not, why not? How do you know that our non-tripping perception is any closer to reality than tripping perception? An appeal to evolutionary theory?
We should not confuse an incomplete or faulty grasp of reality with the absence of it.
Against what standard do you compare someone?s perception of reality so as to know that it is more or less in line with real ?reality??
--------------------
Concepts which have been proved to be useful in ordering things easily acquire such an authority over us that we forget their human origins and accept them as invariable.- Albert Einstein
|
Phred
Fred's son
Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 10 years, 16 days
|
Re: Fuck Yourself [Re: buttonion]
#984622 - 10/22/02 08:10 PM (22 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
buttonion writes:
The only defense of realism (as opposed to solipsism) is an appeal to pragmatism and social consensus, far from a logical proof.
Pragmatism is a null concept if solipsism is an accurate description of the way things are. If you are all that exists, if reality is nothing more than a waking dream that your own consciousness is creating, then no course of action is more "pragmatic" than any other.
Social consensus is not required to verify that existence exists. It can only be verified ostensively, and ostensive verification does not require multiple individuals.
In the past, It (pragmatism and social consensus) could have been used to support now-known-to-be obsolete medical and other scientific theories, yet I?m sure in these cases you would not consider this argument so compelling.
Neither method is infallible. See Evolving's original answer: We should not confuse an incomplete or faulty grasp of reality with the absence of it.
What if everyone was tripping and we all saw ?reality? in more or less the same way.
The very fact that we aren't always "tripping" shows the efficiency of evolution. If one cannot rely on the validity of one's sensory input, one cannot make the necessary decisions necessary to survive; faulty data leads to incorrect decisions. All other factors being equal, the more accurate one's perception of reality is, the higher the chances of survival.
pinky
--------------------
|
Murex
Reality Hacker
Registered: 07/28/02
Posts: 3,599
Loc: Traped in a shell.
Last seen: 17 years, 4 months
|
Re: Fuck Yourself [Re: buttonion]
#984661 - 10/22/02 08:20 PM (22 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
In psycological tests, people have been studied with distorted perceptions for weeks and months- ex: Wearing glasses that turned everything upside-down. When they took off the glasses at the end of the test, they couldn't function normally for a while and stumbled around. Their new sight became normal after a while and they were able to function proplerly. I think one's reality can be seen in any way, the longer one sees their reality in one way, it becomes the norm.
Halluzonigenz make you see reality in other ways. It gives you another view, maybe something you never realized before because of your default view of reality.
Think about some iscects (like a fly) and how they view their reality from their bilogical eyes. Some animals can filter light differently too. Does that mean that we don't see all of what's to see?
--------------------
What if everything around you
Isn't quite as it seems?
What if all the world you think you know,
Is an elaborate dream?
And if you look at your reflection,
Is it all you want it to be?
|
Evolving
Resident Cynic
Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
|
Re: Fuck Yourself [Re: Phred]
#984773 - 10/22/02 08:48 PM (22 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Thanks Pinky, you addressed that before I saw it.
Buttonion, you seem to have misunderstood what I was saying. Basically it is this: reality exists independent of our senses and our interpretation of our sensory information or how our sensory information may integrate with our cognitive models of the universe. What is, has nothing to do with the mental state of the perceiver or perceivers (whether or not they are tripping), it has nothing to do with consensus or beliefs. How one is best able to identify reality does relate to these things and can be debated, however our life experiences and tools such as logic and science appear to be the best resources available. People can perform all sorts of mental masturbation to try and deny any kind of objective reality, but when the sniper's bullet hits your melon and the hydrostatic pressure causes it to explode (or you can take the example Sclorch was using)... that's reality. Those organisms that are best able to recognize it and adapt their behaviour to it are more likely to survive and flourish.
--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.' Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence. Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains. Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.
|
buttonion
Calmly Watching
Registered: 04/04/02
Posts: 303
Loc: Kansas
|
Re: Fuck Yourself [Re: Phred]
#984826 - 10/22/02 09:04 PM (22 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Social consensus is not required to verify that existence exists. It can only be verified ostensively, and ostensive verification does not require multiple individuals.
I?m reading ?ostensively? or ostensibly as ?apparently? here. Is this what you mean? So, because existence apparently exists than it does exist? A reflection of myself in the mirror is apparently me too.
Neither method is infallible. See Evolving's original answer: We should not confuse an incomplete or faulty grasp of reality with the absence of it.
OK, I get the point- just because we don?t have all of the pieces to the puzzle, we should not assume that there is no puzzle. But, of course, it is assumed in this statement that there is a reality to grasp (a puzzle), the very idea I am questioning. Just to clarify, I?m not attempting to prove idealism here- I actually don?t think proving either is possible (maybe with further research in consciousness). I am just wondering how one can have such a firm belief in realism when there is no way to be certain. It just seems that a lot of people who appear to base what few beliefs they are certain about in logical certainty do not realize that this belief cannot be.
All other factors being equal, the more accurate one's perception of reality is, the higher the chances of survival.
I don?t think that necessarily follows. I don't doubt that we are better able to survive while not tripping. But here's what I think: scientists would agree that our survival value is enhanced by being attuned to certain aspects of the environment- certain perceptual data (human faces, sexual areas, soothing sounds). But, does being attuned to these survival enhancing characteristics of the environment necessarily mean that we have a more accurate apprehension of reality? Not neccesarily- it could just as easily be that we have a less accurate perception.
Edit: Just to elaborate on that last point, it could be that we are too narrowly focused while not tripping, by and large attuned to survival cues at the expense of whatever else.
--------------------
Concepts which have been proved to be useful in ordering things easily acquire such an authority over us that we forget their human origins and accept them as invariable.- Albert Einstein
Edited by buttonion (10/22/02 09:09 PM)
|
buttonion
Calmly Watching
Registered: 04/04/02
Posts: 303
Loc: Kansas
|
Re: Fuck Yourself [Re: Evolving]
#984863 - 10/22/02 09:12 PM (22 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Those organisms that are best able to recognize it and adapt their behaviour to it are more likely to survive and flourish.
Check out the end of my response to Pinky
--------------------
Concepts which have been proved to be useful in ordering things easily acquire such an authority over us that we forget their human origins and accept them as invariable.- Albert Einstein
|
Evolving
Resident Cynic
Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
|
Re: Fuck Yourself [Re: buttonion]
#985060 - 10/22/02 10:12 PM (22 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
In reply to:
But, does being attuned to these survival enhancing characteristics of the environment necessarily mean that we have a more accurate apprehension of reality? Not neccesarily- it could just as easily be that we have a less accurate perception.
I agree, I can 'see' how organisms such as bacteria have a much narrower range of perception than humans and use a less complex model of their environment ('model' might be too fancy a term). Perhaps I should re-word my statement that you quoted. Those organisms that are best able to adapt their behaviour to reality are more likely to survive and flourish.
--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.' Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence. Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains. Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.
Edited by Evolving (10/22/02 10:13 PM)
|
Phred
Fred's son
Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 10 years, 16 days
|
Re: Fuck Yourself [Re: buttonion]
#985199 - 10/22/02 11:04 PM (22 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
buttonion writes:
I?m reading ?ostensively? or ostensibly as ?apparently? here.
No, I spelled it correctly. From the Oxford Dictionary of Current English: ostensive -- directly showing.
Fire can be SHOWN to be hot ostensively -- hold a match under your hand. Water can SHOWN to be wet ostensively -- walk in the rain. Etc.
No logical argument is required to demonstrate the existence of an entity ostensively. It can be directly experienced.
But, of course, it is assumed in this statement that there is a reality to grasp (a puzzle), the very idea I am questioning.
and
I am just wondering how one can have such a firm belief in realism when there is no way to be certain.
Of course there is no way to be CERTAIN. You cannot say with absolute 100% certainty that I, pinksharkmark, exist. You CAN say with 100% certainty that you, buttonion, exist.The probability that you are all that exists is almost infinitely tiny, but it is not IMPOSSIBLE that you are all that exists. The point is, if you ACT that way, you will soon die. Solipsism as a philosophy is fatal to the solipsist.
It just seems that a lot of people who appear to base what few beliefs they are certain about in logical certainty do not realize that this belief cannot be.
No philosophy is worth a pinch of coon shit if it cannot be validated against reality. The problem with solipsism is that there is no reality with which to validate. This is why I say that to a solipsist, such concepts as life, death, morality, pragmatism, etc. are null. It cannot be otherwise.
It just seems that a lot of people who appear to base what few beliefs they are certain about in logical certainty do not realize that this belief cannot be.
Logic is a process. It needs facts on which to operate; facts provided by your senses. Your senses demonstrate ostensively to you that entities exist which ARE NOT YOU. If you choose to regard your sensory data as invalid, what data WILL you accept as valid? How do you ACQUIRE this non-sensory data?
But here's what I think: scientists would agree that our survival value is enhanced by being attuned to certain aspects of the environment- certain perceptual data (human faces, sexual areas, soothing sounds).
None of those "aspects of the environment" are required for survival. What is much more critical is the ability to recognize water and food, for example, and to recognize hazards such as fire and predators.
But, does being attuned to these survival enhancing characteristics of the environment necessarily mean that we have a more accurate apprehension of reality?
Of course it does. If it didn't, the human race would have been extinct a long time ago. Note that as our senses are enhanced technologically (microscopes, telescopes, etc.) our apprehension of reality becomes increasingly accurate, and the number of individuals in the species increases. Note also how individuals lacking one or more of the senses are less likely to survive (absent the aid of other individuals with the full array of senses).
Just to elaborate on that last point, it could be that we are too narrowly focused while not tripping, by and large attuned to survival cues at the expense of whatever else.
At the expense of WHAT? Please explain what is more important than survival? If you are dead, no further actions are possible. In order to trip, one must first be alive.
pinky
--------------------
|
Sclorch
Clyster
Registered: 07/12/99
Posts: 4,805
Loc: On the Brink of Madness
|
 Re: Fuck Yourself [Re: buttonion]
#985221 - 10/22/02 11:12 PM (22 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Good replies buttonion, pinky, and evolving.
This is pretty much where I wanted this thread to go.
butt- the puzzle analogy... that's pretty much the way I see it.
------------------------------
Another thing I've thought about is how our limited perception almost forces us to take a pragmatic stance on many issues. We make "educated" guesses and the like in unfamiliar territory. Whatever works best (or is perceived to work best) is what is used in the future in similar situations. It's not perfect. But that's all we've got. Anything else is just assertion (unless it works consistently, in which case it is at least applied pragmatically).
--------------------
Note: In desperate need of a cure...
|
Strumpling
Neuronaut
Registered: 10/11/02
Posts: 7,571
Loc: Hyperspace
Last seen: 13 years, 8 months
|
Re: Fuck Yourself [Re: Sclorch]
#985236 - 10/22/02 11:17 PM (22 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
kinda goin off on a tangent here aren't ya?
--------------------
Insert an "I think" mentally in front of eveything I say that seems sketchy, because I certainly don't KNOW much. Also; feel free to yell at me.
In addition: SHPONGLE
|
ehud
Rocket Scientist
Registered: 10/23/01
Posts: 217
Loc: Middle America
Last seen: 21 years, 6 months
|
 move mountains [Re: Sclorch]
#985249 - 10/22/02 11:21 PM (22 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
when I was younger, in sunday school the teacher said that with faith you can move mountains. I think she was serious.
|
Sclorch
Clyster
Registered: 07/12/99
Posts: 4,805
Loc: On the Brink of Madness
|
Re: Fuck Yourself [Re: Strumpling]
#985259 - 10/22/02 11:23 PM (22 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
kinda goin off on a tangent here aren't ya?
Nope.
Laws of the universe, internal laws, etc... they all fit within the topic.
DMT, mushrooms, drugs in general, mystic experiences, and enlightenment have little to do with the topic.
I hope I didn't offend you (you DID read the disclaimer, right?).
--------------------
Note: In desperate need of a cure...
|
Sclorch
Clyster
Registered: 07/12/99
Posts: 4,805
Loc: On the Brink of Madness
|
Re: Fuck Yourself [Re: ehud]
#985330 - 10/22/02 11:42 PM (22 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
when I was younger, in sunday school the teacher said that with faith you can move mountains.
Yeah, it's a perverted version of "what was probably originally written in the bible" and what is written in the Gospel of Thomas:
48 Jesus said, "If two make peace with each other in a single house, they will say to the mountain, 'Move from here!' and it will move."
106 Jesus said, "When you make the two into one, you will become children of Adam, and when you say, 'Mountain, move from here!' it will move.
An entirely different message... substitute "faith" for "the way" and you get zen.
--------------------
Note: In desperate need of a cure...
|
Strumpling
Neuronaut
Registered: 10/11/02
Posts: 7,571
Loc: Hyperspace
Last seen: 13 years, 8 months
|
Re: Fuck Yourself [Re: Sclorch]
#985519 - 10/23/02 01:17 AM (22 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
in fact, the only way we can change things is by will....
That table will NOT move unless I will it to happen; as SOON as i'm willing it to happen, the action starts taking place: my body will get up, make its way to the table, and move the table. by "will alone" is an abstract idea - unless you're talking about Bill on his own, it just doesn't happen....
Even if there was some other force that could be taken advantage of, we'd still be using THAT externally from our sheer "will" to make it happen. Since we can't move things by will alone already, we won't be able to - there will have to be some other device in between the will and the action that makes the action happen - a force of some type will have to move that table - even if I were "telekenetic" there would be some kind of force i was putting on the table to get it to move, and that force would be a RESULT of my will, just as me standing up and moving it is. So far, various machines and life-forms still need to interact with objects to get them to move - that comes naturally with living objectively (its like somebody'd said - hell.. in your dreams you can make anything happen, but its still not just "by will" - you will it to happen, and your brain starts the processes that will make it happen). I don't know how else to explain what i'm trying to say.
-=- Matt/Strumpling -=-
i just deleted a half-page of stuff - you should be really glad too (but probably disappointed that i still posted this much, eh?)
edit #1 (addition): i guess what i mean by all this is that since will iteslf isn't an force.. it can't move things - it simply gets us to do whatever it is we need to do to get the action its willing... to happen.
--------------------
Insert an "I think" mentally in front of eveything I say that seems sketchy, because I certainly don't KNOW much. Also; feel free to yell at me.
In addition: SHPONGLE
Edited by Strumpling (10/23/02 01:33 AM)
|
GazzBut
Refraction
Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,773
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 1 year, 24 days
|
Re: Fuck Yourself [Re: Sclorch]
#986058 - 10/23/02 08:41 AM (22 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
If I can't do this stuff... it doesn't necessarily disprove solipsism, BUT it does mean that there is a system of "internal laws" that I cannot escape. If that is the case, then how did these laws "get there"?
If you cant do it, it means you cat do it! I cant fly a plane but thats not due to any factors other than my lack of experience. I cannot prove it for sure but i tend to believe 90% that there are many individuals throughout history and currently who have matrix like powers. This agrees with Shroomisms statement that these "laws" are there to be overcome. Laws are just human models laid on top of the bigger picture.
2. Fractal Reality (determinism, collective consciousness, we are all god, etc.):If I'm a branch of god... then I'm a branch of the will that governs this universe (or IS this universe or.... whatever). That being said, my mental fractal is only a partial view of the Great Fractal that is "God". Assuming I can shape my mental fractal (compatibilist's "free will") to match that of the Great Fractal... can I CHANGE the universe at my will? Or will I be forced to adopt the will of the Great Fractal?
This is what we were chatting about on the "Thoughts on how to achieve the perfect world" thread. True will is the will of the great fractal and i think we will only be able to cause effect that is in line with the will of the great fractal. Its like a built in fail safe, i think. But this is the paradox of free will. Following our ego's whims looking for happiness is, to me, free will in action. Unfortunately, it is like chasing shadows. When we submit to true will, the great fractal or barry the sprout who is the god of all, we will find ourself at peace. Anything we need will manifest itself for us. Through me but not by "my" will. Never truly by "my" will. Taking credit is the old style ego's method. We need a new improved ego V1.2 that allows energy to pass thru us without feeling the need to claim it as its own.
PEACE
--------------------
Always Smi2le
|
Sclorch
Clyster
Registered: 07/12/99
Posts: 4,805
Loc: On the Brink of Madness
|
Re: Fuck Yourself [Re: GazzBut]
#986402 - 10/23/02 11:29 AM (22 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
*rejects temporary belief system*
So... "true will" is puppet thinking? Fuck that. Free will is the only kind of will I'll EVER accept. My free will has been working out just fine for me. Hell, ever since I gave up praying and dependency on "greater forces", my life has been pretty damn stress-free. There's enough authority figures in the world already... I don't need another "invisible" one (keeping it anthropomorphic for fun  ).
--------------------
Note: In desperate need of a cure...
|
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Edit 
Reply 
1 2 all )
monoamine
whiterastahippie
Joshua
Demon
gribochek
Spiffy
Shroomalicious