Anyone fancy a debate..?

Use this forum to suggest topics, and to find others to debate with.

Anyone fancy a debate..?

Postby Tab » Fri Nov 12, 2010 7:20 pm

I've been thinking a lot about individuality and 'authenticity' recently, and come to the conclusion it's damn near impossible, if not totally impossible, to be authentic in any real meaning of the word.

Three posts, with a reasonablely short response time 24-48 hours perhaps...

Any takers..?
Image
Click Logo For Blog
User avatar
Tab
Deeply Shallow
 
Posts: 8237
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 2:49 pm

Re: Anyone fancy a debate..?

Postby Humpty » Fri Nov 12, 2010 7:25 pm

No, the idea of "authenticity" has always seemed, ironically, kinda fake to me. I don't consider it a legitimate basis for determining something's quality. I don't even consider it a legitimate distinction, actually. EVERYTHING is authentic. Taco Bell is an authentic American fast food translation of Mexican cuisine. Carlos Mencia's jokes are an authentic rip-off of other peoples' jokes. etc. (I fucking hate Mencia, even more than I hate Dane Cook) If everything is authentic, the word becomes meaningless.
User avatar
Humpty
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1982
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 3:53 am

Re: Anyone fancy a debate..?

Postby Tab » Fri Nov 12, 2010 7:31 pm

But you Humpty, are you authentic..? How many Humpties are there, under the sun..?
Image
Click Logo For Blog
User avatar
Tab
Deeply Shallow
 
Posts: 8237
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 2:49 pm

Re: Anyone fancy a debate..?

Postby Humpty » Fri Nov 12, 2010 7:33 pm

I'm a robot
User avatar
Humpty
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1982
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 3:53 am

Re: Anyone fancy a debate..?

Postby Tab » Fri Nov 12, 2010 7:35 pm

Hmm. Then no, we'd better not debate, lest we fervently agree with one another.
Image
Click Logo For Blog
User avatar
Tab
Deeply Shallow
 
Posts: 8237
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 2:49 pm

Re: Anyone fancy a debate..?

Postby Humpty » Fri Nov 12, 2010 7:36 pm

You're a robot too?
User avatar
Humpty
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1982
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 3:53 am

Re: Anyone fancy a debate..?

Postby Tab » Fri Nov 12, 2010 7:50 pm

Beep beep, boop boop.
Image
Click Logo For Blog
User avatar
Tab
Deeply Shallow
 
Posts: 8237
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 2:49 pm

Re: Anyone fancy a debate..?

Postby anon » Fri Nov 12, 2010 7:52 pm

Can authenticity even be reasonably defined?
"Distraction is the only thing that consoles us for our miseries, and yet it is itself the greatest of our miseries." - Blaise Pascal

"The bombs we plant in each other are ticking away." - Edward Yang

"To a fly that likes the smell of putrid / Meat the fragrance of sandalwood is foul. / Beings who discard Nirvana / Covet coarse Samsara's realm." - Saraha
User avatar
anon
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 8274
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 7:59 pm
Location: In the meantime.

Re: Anyone fancy a debate..?

Postby Tab » Fri Nov 12, 2010 7:56 pm

For me it is simply the belief that you are you, and that your 'youness' is internally generated, crucially independent of external influences.

I of course, would argue the opposite.
Image
Click Logo For Blog
User avatar
Tab
Deeply Shallow
 
Posts: 8237
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 2:49 pm

Re: Anyone fancy a debate..?

Postby anon » Fri Nov 12, 2010 8:05 pm

Tab wrote:For me it is simply the belief that you are you, and that your 'youness' is internally generated, crucially independent of external influences.

I of course, would argue the opposite.

If I had time, this could be fun. Oh well...
"Distraction is the only thing that consoles us for our miseries, and yet it is itself the greatest of our miseries." - Blaise Pascal

"The bombs we plant in each other are ticking away." - Edward Yang

"To a fly that likes the smell of putrid / Meat the fragrance of sandalwood is foul. / Beings who discard Nirvana / Covet coarse Samsara's realm." - Saraha
User avatar
anon
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 8274
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 7:59 pm
Location: In the meantime.

Re: Anyone fancy a debate..?

Postby Humpty » Fri Nov 12, 2010 8:07 pm

Tab wrote:For me it is simply the belief that you are you, and that your 'youness' is internally generated, crucially independent of external influences.

Is this just another version of free will?
User avatar
Humpty
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1982
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 3:53 am

Re: Anyone fancy a debate..?

Postby objet petit a » Fri Nov 12, 2010 8:55 pm

Would Nietzsche's übermensch qualify as an authentic? If so, I will take.
Phase one, man objectifies in two cardinal numbers two collections he has counted; phase two, with these numbers he realizes the act of adding them up.
~Immanuel Kant

<<Warum willst du dich von uns Allen
Und unsrer Meinung entfernen? >>
- Ich schreibe nicht euch zu gefallen,
Ihr sollt was lernen.
~Goethe
User avatar
objet petit a
Thinker
 
Posts: 641
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 10:11 pm
Location: Borderless

Re: Anyone fancy a debate..?

Postby fuse » Fri Nov 12, 2010 8:57 pm

Tab,

If by "authentic in any real meaning of the word" you mean absolutely authentic, then I agree. We have all had the formal schooling of public/private education and the informal schooling of growing up with our parents, friends, and acquaintances, from whom we have learned many things and who have influenced us in a variety of ways. But there is no reason authenticity has to a zero-sum concept. If one simply thinks for herself, after weighing all her relevant experiences and in spite of those who may expect her to act out a different character and not out of any motive to conform or to oppose conformity, then she acts authentically.


Edit: I used to carry, as part of my signature, the phrase "thinking for oneself is the greatest act of nonconformity." It came to me in the car one day years ago as I was trying to express what I felt to be the true essence of nonconformity. And I think nonconformity is intimately related with authenticity. Anyhow, if you want to debate you can take this as my first post and start the clock from now.
Last edited by fuse on Fri Nov 12, 2010 9:03 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
fuse
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4539
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 5:13 pm

Re: Anyone fancy a debate..?

Postby Debaitor » Fri Nov 12, 2010 8:59 pm

Tab wrote:I've been thinking a lot about individuality and 'authenticity' recently, and come to the conclusion it's damn near impossible, if not totally impossible, to be authentic in any real meaning of the word.

Three posts, with a reasonablely short response time 24-48 hours perhaps...

Any takers..?

I'm game.

You take the position that Authenticity is very improbable and I take the position that Authenticity is very probable.

You post first and we will make responses in the allocated intervals to three posts each.
    One must have a right: until one acquires that {right}, one makes no use of [sophistry]. The Nietzscheans were dialecticians for that reason[.]
    [Antinietzsche, Dawn of the Idols, "The Problem of Sauwelios", section 1.]

    Religion is opiate of the Mass? Then Jews are pure Morphine! Let us now inject ourselves with that old, familiar sting.
    [Derailed Locomotive, "Re: Role of Private Intellect", 10-31-04 22:03.]
User avatar
Debaitor
The Antinietzsche
 
Posts: 544
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 2:49 am
Location: American Empire

Re: Anyone fancy a debate..?

Postby PavlovianModel146 » Sat Nov 13, 2010 1:12 am

fuse wrote:Tab,

If by "authentic in any real meaning of the word" you mean absolutely authentic, then I agree. We have all had the formal schooling of public/private education and the informal schooling of growing up with our parents, friends, and acquaintances, from whom we have learned many things and who have influenced us in a variety of ways. But there is no reason authenticity has to a zero-sum concept. If one simply thinks for herself, after weighing all her relevant experiences and in spite of those who may expect her to act out a different character and not out of any motive to conform or to oppose conformity, then she acts authentically.


Edit: I used to carry, as part of my signature, the phrase "thinking for oneself is the greatest act of nonconformity." It came to me in the car one day years ago as I was trying to express what I felt to be the true essence of nonconformity. And I think nonconformity is intimately related with authenticity. Anyhow, if you want to debate you can take this as my first post and start the clock from now.



If Tab accepts, I would suggest a longer post with more detail.
"Love is the gravity of the Soul" - Abstract -/-/1988 - 3/11/2013 R.I.P

Image
User avatar
PavlovianModel146
Ringing The Bell
 
Posts: 7084
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 4:56 am
Location: Ohio

Re: Anyone fancy a debate..?

Postby fuse » Sat Nov 13, 2010 1:57 am

Pav,

If Tab accepts, I would suggest a longer post with more detail.

Thanks for the tip. I have a tendency of being brief.
User avatar
fuse
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4539
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 5:13 pm

Re: Anyone fancy a debate..?

Postby Tab » Sat Nov 13, 2010 3:02 am

Humpty wrote:
Tab wrote:For me it is simply the belief that you are you, and that your 'youness' is internally generated, crucially independent of external influences.

Is this just another version of free will?


No, more a case of the freedom to be anything at all, at least anything unique or even novel.

objet petit a wrote:Would Nietzsche's übermensch qualify as an authentic? If so, I will take.


I've a nasty feeling that N.'s Überguy is all things to all men. So, I don't know to be frank. I don't know enough Nietzche anyway, to make it interesting for you.

fuse wrote:Tab,

If by "authentic in any real meaning of the word" you mean absolutely authentic, then I agree. We have all had the formal schooling of public/private education and the informal schooling of growing up with our parents, friends, and acquaintances, from whom we have learned many things and who have influenced us in a variety of ways. But there is no reason authenticity has to a zero-sum concept. If one simply thinks for herself, after weighing all her relevant experiences and in spite of those who may expect her to act out a different character and not out of any motive to conform or to oppose conformity, then she acts authentically.


Edit: I used to carry, as part of my signature, the phrase "thinking for oneself is the greatest act of nonconformity." It came to me in the car one day years ago as I was trying to express what I felt to be the true essence of nonconformity. And I think nonconformity is intimately related with authenticity. Anyhow, if you want to debate you can take this as my first post and start the clock from now.


It goes far, far deeper than you have imagined it to be.

Debaitor wrote:
Tab wrote:I've been thinking a lot about individuality and 'authenticity' recently, and come to the conclusion it's damn near impossible, if not totally impossible, to be authentic in any real meaning of the word.

Three posts, with a reasonablely short response time 24-48 hours perhaps...

Any takers..?

I'm game.

You take the position that Authenticity is very improbable and I take the position that Authenticity is very probable.

You post first and we will make responses in the allocated intervals to three posts each.


I don't mind if you want to team up with Fuse and debate with me. And as Pav says, have a think about what you want to say first in a bit more detail if you like.
Image
Click Logo For Blog
User avatar
Tab
Deeply Shallow
 
Posts: 8237
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 2:49 pm

Re: Anyone fancy a debate..?

Postby Debaitor » Sat Nov 13, 2010 3:03 am

Sure I will team up with Fuse, when do we start?

Shall we commence with the debate then give the whole community voting rights for which argument was superior?
    One must have a right: until one acquires that {right}, one makes no use of [sophistry]. The Nietzscheans were dialecticians for that reason[.]
    [Antinietzsche, Dawn of the Idols, "The Problem of Sauwelios", section 1.]

    Religion is opiate of the Mass? Then Jews are pure Morphine! Let us now inject ourselves with that old, familiar sting.
    [Derailed Locomotive, "Re: Role of Private Intellect", 10-31-04 22:03.]
User avatar
Debaitor
The Antinietzsche
 
Posts: 544
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 2:49 am
Location: American Empire

Re: Anyone fancy a debate..?

Postby Tab » Sat Nov 13, 2010 3:07 am

Yeah sure, it worked okay last time, after half a million bumps. Start tomorrow if you like - Do you want to go first or second, or shall we let Pav flip a coin..?
Image
Click Logo For Blog
User avatar
Tab
Deeply Shallow
 
Posts: 8237
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 2:49 pm

Re: Anyone fancy a debate..?

Postby Debaitor » Sat Nov 13, 2010 3:10 am

You go first, because I don't exactly know the point you are trying to get across with authenticity.

Then Fuse or I can go, depending on what Fuse wants. If fuse wants to respond first then he can respond first and last, while I respond in the middle, 3-posts each side of the debate. So if Fuse wants to post twice or once, that is up to him.
    One must have a right: until one acquires that {right}, one makes no use of [sophistry]. The Nietzscheans were dialecticians for that reason[.]
    [Antinietzsche, Dawn of the Idols, "The Problem of Sauwelios", section 1.]

    Religion is opiate of the Mass? Then Jews are pure Morphine! Let us now inject ourselves with that old, familiar sting.
    [Derailed Locomotive, "Re: Role of Private Intellect", 10-31-04 22:03.]
User avatar
Debaitor
The Antinietzsche
 
Posts: 544
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 2:49 am
Location: American Empire

Re: Anyone fancy a debate..?

Postby Tab » Sat Nov 13, 2010 3:12 am

Hokay-Kokey, I will post something up by tomorrow night. :D Yay, debate on.
Image
Click Logo For Blog
User avatar
Tab
Deeply Shallow
 
Posts: 8237
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 2:49 pm

Re: Anyone fancy a debate..?

Postby PavlovianModel146 » Sat Nov 13, 2010 3:28 am

Personally, I think that both Fuse and Debaitor should get one post following each of Tab's posts, if Tab accepts the handicap. Provided Fuse and Debaitor communicate a little with one another prior to posting, redundancy can be kept to a minimum.
"Love is the gravity of the Soul" - Abstract -/-/1988 - 3/11/2013 R.I.P

Image
User avatar
PavlovianModel146
Ringing The Bell
 
Posts: 7084
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 4:56 am
Location: Ohio

Re: Anyone fancy a debate..?

Postby fuse » Sat Nov 13, 2010 3:29 am

Sure Debaitor, let's do it! :)

Tab,

I'm game as well. I'll post second, after you. But can we see if someone wants to team up with you? A two-on-two debate sounds good. Maybe advertise for a partner in a new thread?
User avatar
fuse
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4539
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 5:13 pm

Re: Anyone fancy a debate..?

Postby Debaitor » Sat Nov 13, 2010 3:29 am

It wouldn't matter to me, but would be an obvious disadvantage to Tab.
    One must have a right: until one acquires that {right}, one makes no use of [sophistry]. The Nietzscheans were dialecticians for that reason[.]
    [Antinietzsche, Dawn of the Idols, "The Problem of Sauwelios", section 1.]

    Religion is opiate of the Mass? Then Jews are pure Morphine! Let us now inject ourselves with that old, familiar sting.
    [Derailed Locomotive, "Re: Role of Private Intellect", 10-31-04 22:03.]
User avatar
Debaitor
The Antinietzsche
 
Posts: 544
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 2:49 am
Location: American Empire

Re: Anyone fancy a debate..?

Postby fuse » Sat Nov 13, 2010 3:46 am

So how about a partner, Tab?
User avatar
fuse
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4539
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 5:13 pm

Next

Return to Challenges



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

cron