Perspective mapping

[Nah]

I'm trying to make something similar to "mind map", but with perspectives and relation between them.
This is an experiment and it can be useless for many readers.

How to think well


Definition and/or perception of Logic

The effect/nature of focusing: Separated reality = virtual world
- Different take: Constant Dysjunction
- Another angle: Unity or Separation?

Beginner's guide to "Perspective Logic"


Overhauling Philosophy (and/or our thinking, in general)

Desire based thinking




The motive behind our thought:
Desire of our mind - The absolute certainty

Why do you think? Why do you believe? What's the motivation?



How do we think?:
How our thought (may) evolve

Fixation => Contradiction => Question => Answer => Fixation

Absolutism VS. Relativism (of evaluations)

- Example of horizontal vs vertical perspective: Ignosticism

We tend to place a pair of opposing concept on the same plane, horizontally. And it can be useful to see them like this. However, closer look may reveal the vertical structure behind them, the recognition of negative aspect giving birth to the positive "concept" in another level of virtualized plane.


Theists presume whole a lot.
While recognizing some mistake of Theists, Atheists presume still a lot, in the opposite direction and in the reaction to Theistic indoctrination.
Agnostics presume a lot less. But they still presume about God (or rather the concept of it).
Ignostics presume even less. But they can be seen as an opposing pair of agnostics, just like Atheists are the opposing pair of Theists.
Ignostics are still in the reaction to the Theism, so to say, and they are still slightly interested in the subject of God (at the possibility of conceptualization), and identify themselves on the ground.

When we loose (or don't have from the beginning) the interest/obsession about God, we won't think about it nor identify ourselves in relation to God.

What prevents us from thinking freely?:
Self-defense (denial) behavior catalog

Thinking and Presumptions

Victim Mentality



Case studies:
Can you think logically?

Metaphysical Lust : What do you do with it?

Evaluating Maturity

Religions are for immature people who love to follow blindly

- Breakdown (or, the loss of a good man)

- Is existence not explainable?

- [url=http://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=171589\The Nature of Reality[/url]

- All Is Fare In Hope and Fear



Certainty, The sense, the feeling of certainty and reality:

On 'Certainty'

Reality (realness) showcase

- Disillusionment and Reality
- Religions, what are they?
- What is 'God' a metaphor for?


The sense of certainty/reality and disillusionment

Reality is made of multi-layered narrow mindedness

Awareness as the function of reality

- The Nature of Reality
- Is existence not explainable?
- metaphysics and logical positivism
- Materialism and metaphysics
- Belief

Certainty boosting

Certainty, absolute, revisited:
Fake certainty
- There are no absolute
- I Love Agnostics
- Boundaries

Certainty = presumption of permanence/persistence/universality



Logic, rationality, reasoning:
Definition and/or perception of Logic

Logic 911, 1-800, 011

- Logic 101

How to spot illogical thinking




Memo:
(Random) Notes on Awareness

- death and existence

- I am what I am



Temporary Notes:

Certainty = presumption of permanence/persistence/universality

Reality is made of multi-layered narrow mindedness (that comes with the certainty of separation)

Reality = Perspective (ensemble of focuses) that is very captivating and thus gives the sense of certainty. In other words, Reality is the ensemble of focuses that gives the impression of permanence/persistence/universality.

Separation itself isn't the problem.
And when we examine closely, all separation becomes blurred and vanishes, anyway.

It's more of the "certainty" that comes with the separation.
And the certainty of separation creates the "reality" (or the sense of reality), as far as I've seen.

Self referencing:
Perspective mapping

*

[The Last Man]

Interesting cross-section of articles youve chosen to bring together here. Perhaps you could tie it all together and say something about the relevance of this mapping? What does it seek to accomplish, other than giving those new to this website a place to get a quick sampling of various topics here? Is there some psychological significance to this topic, are you trying to make connections here that are not readily apparent, or perhaps trying to guide the reader to some sort of higher or more coherent understanding?

[Nah]

Interesting cross-section of articles youve chosen to bring together here. Perhaps you could tie it all together and say something about the relevance of this mapping? What does it seek to accomplish, other than giving those new to this website a place to get a quick sampling of various topics here?

It's mostly for myself and maybe some others interested in these things, and not really for readers (or new comers) in general. And it's mostly threads I wrote.

Although many of us presume whole a lot and pretend to be better than animal and intelligent and so on, I think many (if not most) of us lack awareness and rational clarity.
These threads are about how we are, currently, and why we are like this, as far as I've observed and thought about it.


I'm thinking about creating an index page for perspectives (by editing the OP), rather than index for terminology/concept (although words and concepts do have perspectives), that can be useful/interesting for certain people.
But it's a personal experiment, and I don't know how it'll go.

Is there some psychological significance to this topic, are you trying to make connections here that are not readily apparent, or perhaps trying to guide the reader to some sort of higher or more coherent understanding?

I do think more than 80% of population don't know how to think.
I mean, most people think merely by association, to feel better (by justifying emotional preferences), or without enough awareness of their own perspectives.
Most of us don't know how to think or what they are thinking, very well, and that is evident to someone who started to be a bit aware and rational.
So, in a way, I'm talking about things many people aren't very aware.
But also, these are so obvious that many people would not see the implication of the simple "focusing" mechanism and its nature. It works like a trap, a maze.

Anyway, as usual, I'm simply writing what I want to write, and it's really for myself than for others, although I think some people may find it interesting, too.

[The Last Man]

I do think more than 80% of population don't know how to think.
I mean, most people think merely by association, to feel better (by justifying emotional preferences), or without enough awareness of their own perspectives.
Most of us don't know how to think or what they are thinking, very well, and that is evident to someone who started to be a bit aware and rational.
So, in a way, I'm talking about things many people aren't very aware.
But also, these are so obvious that many people would not see the implication of the simple "focusing" mechanism and its nature.

This is incredibly insightful. I agree with you completely here. Maybe you could turn this discussion in that direction, find a way to use some of the posts from this website to create a plan or map for developing better thinking skills - for simply learning how to think which of course presupposes learning what thinking is, something I agree most people never bother to consider. The reactive and automatic nature of thought is one of those things that is so obvious, yet goes almost completely unnoticed. I have some thoughts along these lines, I have actually written some material on the subject, let me know if youre interested and I could maybe help you come up with some sort of plan or method here.

[Arcturus Descending]

Nah,

Hi Nah...how have you been doing?

I do think more than 80% of population don't know how to think.
I mean, most people think merely by association, to feel better (by justifying emotional preferences), or without enough awareness of their own perspectives.
Most of us don't know how to think or what they are thinking, very well, and that is evident to someone who started to be a bit aware and rational.
So, in a way, I'm talking about things many people aren't very aware.
But also, these are so obvious that many people would not see the implication of the simple "focusing" mechanism and its nature. It works like a trap, a maze.

I agree with you in here - 100%.

It's very difficult to *think* with awareness, without being tied to any emotional preferences or benefits, to start at the beginning so to speak, without the influence of ANYTHING personal or emotional.

And really, *focusing* does work like a trap, a maze, it draws you in and you are there...until it is finished.

[uglypeoplefucking]

I do think more than 80% of population don't know how to think.
I mean, most people think merely by association, to feel better (by justifying emotional preferences), or without enough awareness of their own perspectives.
Most of us don't know how to think or what they are thinking, very well, and that is evident to someone who started to be a bit aware and rational.
So, in a way, I'm talking about things many people aren't very aware.
But also, these are so obvious that many people would not see the implication of the simple "focusing" mechanism and its nature.

This is incredibly insightful. I agree with you completely here. Maybe you could turn this discussion in that direction, find a way to use some of the posts from this website to create a plan or map for developing better thinking skills - for simply learning how to think which of course presupposes learning what thinking is, something I agree most people never bother to consider. The reactive and automatic nature of thought is one of those things that is so obvious, yet goes almost completely unnoticed.

that's a typical philosopher's conceit - and a tired one at that. thinking is what it is - one needn't define it or be aware of it in order to do it effectively or usefully - yes, analysis and logic and so forth are skills that can be honed and refined, but they are not the end all be all of thinking, and they are something of which more people than not are capable, even if more people than not also fail to turn them into their life's pursuit the way a self-identified "thinker" might. and as far as the broader enterprise of thought is concerned there's nothing especially virtuous about making logic and analysis one's life pursuit

yes, the world is full of stupid people doing stupid things for stupid reasons - but stupidity is just as likely to result from thinking too much as from thinking too little - chasing one's rational tail, overanalyzing: those are activities that fuck the world up. And let's face it, there's not anything rare or especially insightful about pointing out that the world is full of stupid shit.

no special awareness is required to think properly - we think for all sorts of reasons - to imply that there is any "correct" way to think, and that that way involves keeping all thought strictly rational and self-aware - and thereby disqualify all other forms of thought from being examples of proper thought - well that's to impose restrictions on what should properly be, and ultimately is, an unrestrainable activity

[The Last Man]

There *are* different types or modes of thinking, and the habitual and automatic thought that most of us operate by is quite different in quality from a higher-order meta-thinking which encompasses self-awareness, honesty, intricacy and depth. Of course we can function on some basic level in society with our automatic, semiconscious thoughts, which are for the most part conditioned and determined with little or no input from us - but is this all you want to do? Operate as an automaton, a programed mindless herd-robot? Or do you want something more for yourself?

Do you want to be a slave to others, to society, to your programed reactive unconsciousness - a slave to inertia? Or do you want to potentially learn how to free yourself from these enslavements?

[finishedman]

Most people just want to have peace of mind I guess and all the hoopla about being something more usually entails some kind of effort that they would rather forego thank you very much. Society’s not so bad when one sees it as functional only. It allows for intelligent and sane living with others around and that’s it. Now boredom, that’s something else.

Boredom is a bottomless pit. There is no way you can be freed from boredom. You love your boredom, but all the time you are trying to free yourself from boredom. As long as you think that there is something more interesting, more purposeful, more meaningful to do than what you are actually doing, you have no way of freeing yourself from boredom. So, it goes on and on. If you don't entertain yourself with TV, you might go to the internet and listen to all kinds of cock-and-bull stories from me and others. Yeah. We’ll sell you some shoddy piece of goods - "Stand on your head, stand on your shoulders, do this and do that, and you will be all right."

But the basic question which none of us is willing to ask is: what is it that we want? Whether you are in Iran, in America, or in China, anywhere, what you are really interested in is the quest for permanent happiness. That is all that we are interested in. We devote ourselves to something or someone, anticipate and go on doing the same thing over and over again . And we continue to live in that prospect. But it does not help us to get what we are really interested in, namely, to be permanently happy. There is no such thing as permanence at all, let alone permanent happiness.

The quest for permanent happiness is a lost battle; but we are not ready to accept that fact. What we are left with is some moments of happiness and some moments of unhappiness. If we are not ready to accept that situation, and still demand a non-existent permanent happiness, we are not going to succeed.

It is not just a question of succeeding, or wanting to be in a permanent state of happiness, but that demand is the enemy of this living organism. The organism is not interested in happiness at all. It is only interested in its survival. What is necessary for the survival of this living organism is its sensory perceptions along with the sensitivity of the senses and nervous system. The moment you find yourself in a happy situation and tell yourself that you are happy, the demand that this happiness should continue for a longer time is bound to be there. And the more you try to prolong that sensation of happiness beyond its natural duration, the more there is danger for this system which is only interested in maintaining its sensitivity. So, there is a battle going on between your demand for permanent happiness and the demand of the body to maintain its sensitivity. You are not going to win this battle; yet you are not ready to give it up.

(this probably should have been over in the What is Happiness thread)

[Arcturus Descending]

finishedman,

Most people just want to have peace of mind I guess and all the hoopla about being something more usually entails some kind of effort that they would rather forego thank you very much. Society’s not so bad when one sees it as functional only. It allows for intelligent and sane living with others around and that’s it. Now boredom, that’s something else.

*Functional only*...how intelligent and sane do you actually find society to be when they are *just functional? * Perhaps that is part of the cause for boredom.

Boredom is a bottomless pit. There is no way you can be freed from boredom. You love your boredom, but all the time you are trying to free yourself from boredom.

In what way, do we *both* love our boredom - and at the same time, see it as a bottomless pit? It is true that we cannot sometimes be free from it...but may a long walk is helpful. I think boredom comes from having too much nervous energy...it just needs an outlet. It could a physical outlet like walking or exercise or it could be a mental one, such as reading a book, doing a crossword puzzle.

You spoke of loving your boredom. If you are talking about simple pleasant *idleness* where you can just sit around and be content, feel content, look around you, wherever you are, you are not actually being bored in that moment. You are feeling your existence in a non-moving way, I suppose you can say. Real boredom is not content, it is itching to be doing something, be somewhere, etc.. It is total dissatisfaction. It's possible that we feel our boredom because though we have all of this energy left unspent, we don't have the Will, albeit we have the desire, but not the will to get up and do something, entrophy has set in. It takes a lot of Will or willpower and time and thought to discover what we really want and many of us do not want to take that amount of time or spend that amount of energy. We would rather be sliding down the mountain on the seat of our pants than trudging up the mountain, huffing and puffing, but thoroughly exhilarated.

As long as you think that there is something more interesting, more purposeful, more meaningful to do than what you are actually doing, you have no way of freeing yourself from boredom.

Sure you do, JUST DO IT!!!! Get up and do something...and then it will happen.

So, it goes on and on. If you don't entertain yourself with TV, you might go to the internet and listen to all kinds of cock-and-bull stories from me and others. Yeah. We’ll sell you some shoddy piece of goods - "Stand on your head, stand on your shoulders, do this and do that, and you will be all right."

Or as I said, get out and take a walk. Or you can hug a tree I do that sometimes when I need to...you would be surprised how great that is. Or you can just try to take notice of everything that you can outside. It does take a certain amount of discipline to rise up out of our boredom.

But we can also allow ourselves to feel that boredom. Just to sit and let it filter through us. Meditate on the thoughts and the feelings of it. What is it trying to tell me, what is it that has brought me to this place called *boredom*?

But the basic question which none of us is willing to ask is: what is it that we want? Whether you are in Iran, in America, or in China, anywhere, what you are really interested in is the quest for permanent happiness. That is all that we are interested in. We devote ourselves to something or someone, anticipate and go on doing the same thing over and over again . And we continue to live in that prospect. But it does not help us to get what we are really interested in, namely, to be permanently happy. There is no such thing as permanence at all, let alone permanent happiness.

This is not necessarily true. True, many of us are, okay most of us are, at particular times. But that is not what is upmost within us.
And really when you think about, wanting to be happy - well, it isn't actually a negative thing, unless it is at the expense of others in our lives and causes them harm, where we actually deliberately do harm to others, with no regard for them. I am Not here speaking about doing our own thing - and our family and friends just not liking it, because they feel they have been left behind. We all have to answer to the call of the drummer, or I guess I should say the beat of the drummer, in our own way. This too leads to happiness.

The quest for permanent happiness is a lost battle; but we are not ready to accept that fact. What we are left with is some moments of happiness and some moments of unhappiness. If we are not ready to accept that situation, and still demand a non-existent permanent happiness, we are not going to succeed.

I think if we are actually out there seeking happiness, we will have more moments, many more moments of unhappiness. There is a saying, something to the effect of - *if you seek what you are looking for, you will not find it. If you do not seek it, it *will* come to you. ooooo, that gives me the chills, probably because it is true. Of course, that is not to say that we can't plan and do those things which give our lives meaning.

It is not just a question of succeeding, or wanting to be in a permanent state of happiness, but that demand is the enemy of this living organism. The organism is not interested in happiness at all.

Aren't you being a bit contradictory in here, or maybe I am not reading this correctly. We are the organisms, after all. Can we both seek and want happiness, and at the same time, not be interested in it? Hmmm...that actually does raise a question, I think. Perhaps many of us do want to be happy but at the same time do we really want to be happy, do we actually feel that we deserve happiness, and if it actually came and flew right in front of our faces, would we push it away or welcome it in? Perhaps part of the question of happiness is that we really do not believe that we deserve to be happy. And we also look for it as you say I think in all the wrong place, in every place where we would Not find it.

It is only interested in its survival. What is necessary for the survival of this living organism is its sensory perceptions along with the sensitivity of the senses and nervous system.

That could also be the beginning of what can let happiness in...we just have to let ourselves go and abandon ourselves to the feelings and sensations.

The moment you find yourself in a happy situation and tell yourself that you are happy, the demand that this happiness should continue for a longer time is bound to be there. And the more you try to prolong that sensation of happiness beyond its natural duration, the more there is danger for this system which is only interested in maintaining its sensitivity. So, there is a battle going on between your demand for permanent happiness and the demand of the body to maintain its sensitivity. You are not going to win this battle; yet you are not ready to give it up.

Yes, there has to be the balance of allowing it in, letting it take possession of us - happiness, that is - not holding on at all, sitting within it, letting it absorb us within the moment, saying Yes to it, feeling gratitude for it, and when it is ready to take its leave - say a thank you and get on with your life. Whatever causes happiness doesn't leave us, like I said somewhere above this thread. It leaves an imprint on the soul...

(this probably should have been over in the What is Happiness thread)

Yes, you're right...If you copy (not cut) and paste yours over there...I will too.

[Arcturus Descending]

There *are* different types or modes of thinking, and the habitual and automatic thought that most of us operate by is quite different in quality from a higher-order meta-thinking which encompasses self-awareness, honesty, intricacy and depth. Of course we can function on some basic level in society with our automatic, semiconscious thoughts, which are for the most part conditioned and determined with little or no input from us - but is this all you want to do? Operate as an automaton, a programed mindless herd-robot? Or do you want something more for yourself?

Do you want to be a slave to others, to society, to your programed reactive unconsciousness - a slave to inertia? Or do you want to potentially learn how to free yourself from these enslavements?

You tell him!!

I want something more!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

...I WANT TO FLY....says little Maynard Seagull. I want to fly too. Well, maybe in my case, I need to learn to walk more and fly less. I want to fly more with the wings of my mind into places where I have not often been and perch there and learn of those places. After all, what is Life...it is not just about flying over the ocean and grabbing up the fish and flying away. I WANT TO TRULY FLY as I have never flown before.

[uglypeoplefucking]

There *are* different types or modes of thinking, and the habitual and automatic thought that most of us operate by is quite different in quality from a higher-order meta-thinking which encompasses self-awareness, honesty, intricacy and depth. Of course we can function on some basic level in society with our automatic, semiconscious thoughts, which are for the most part conditioned and determined with little or no input from us - but is this all you want to do? Operate as an automaton, a programed mindless herd-robot? Or do you want something more for yourself?

Do you want to be a slave to others, to society, to your programed reactive unconsciousness - a slave to inertia? Or do you want to potentially learn how to free yourself from these enslavements?

to be frank, this kind of rhetoric really leaves me cold. of course there are different modes of thinking - but there's nothing to the assumption that most people are semiconscious automotons besides prejudice, conceit and arrogance. the fact is, we pretty much end up living the same basic sort of life regardless of how much time we spend with our *heads in the clouds and our butts in ivory tower chairs* (just to reverse the prejudice for a moment) - we eat sleep shit fuck and work - some of us escape this mundane existence by reading philosophy, some others watch tv or drink booze or whathaveyou, but the end result is the same. There's nothing about meta-level thinking that makes you any less of a "slave to society" - if you want to get really "meta" about it, then we are ALL slaves to society regardless - we all need a paycheck (or some other source of income) to survive, we all need toilets and running water and transportation - there really is no freedom from such "enslavements". Inertia is a force of nature, and we all settle into it in one way or another - sure, you can be aware of all the existential implications of the fact that you are fated to forever push the boulder up the hill, but that doesn't change what you're doing, and it doesn't even necessarily make the task any easier. you've still got to push the damn rock whether or not you spend all your time contemplating the process and thinking up ways to make yourself feel special in what you're doing.

[Only_Humean]

...I WANT TO FLY....says little Maynard Seagull. I want to fly too. Well, maybe in my case, I need to learn to walk more and fly less. I want to fly more with the wings of my mind into places where I have not often been and perch there and learn of those places. After all, what is Life...it is not just about flying over the ocean and grabbing up the fish and flying away. I WANT TO TRULY FLY as I have never flown before.

What is this life if, full of care, we have no time to stand and stare?

Perhaps you'll like/already know this essay:
http://www.des.emory.edu/mfp/jcertain.html

[Arcturus Descending]

...I WANT TO FLY....says little Maynard Seagull. I want to fly too. Well, maybe in my case, I need to learn to walk more and fly less. I want to fly more with the wings of my mind into places where I have not often been and perch there and learn of those places. After all, what is Life...it is not just about flying over the ocean and grabbing up the fish and flying away. I WANT TO TRULY FLY as I have never flown before.

What is this life if, full of care, we have no time to stand and stare?

Perhaps you'll like/already know this essay:
http://www.des.emory.edu/mfp/jcertain.html

Thank you for that. I don't already know it and I will take the time to read it all. What little of it I read so far....chills, chills, chills....and more chills. His thoughts...Wow - Whitman...omg...he spoke my language...if only I could speak as he did. Wow....



Ps. I actually read much more of this later on...really very poignant and it does give one a much broader perception of the way in which others view the world. We judge as if ours is the only life, the only way in which to look at life, and the meaning that is given to our lives...overlooking what lies within others. I didn't express that well. Thanks for the hyperlink. I am not quite finished with it but it has opened my eyes to certain things.

[anon]

There *are* different types or modes of thinking, and the habitual and automatic thought that most of us operate by is quite different in quality from a higher-order meta-thinking which encompasses self-awareness, honesty, intricacy and depth. Of course we can function on some basic level in society with our automatic, semiconscious thoughts, which are for the most part conditioned and determined with little or no input from us - but is this all you want to do? Operate as an automaton, a programed mindless herd-robot? Or do you want something more for yourself?

Do you want to be a slave to others, to society, to your programed reactive unconsciousness - a slave to inertia? Or do you want to potentially learn how to free yourself from these enslavements?

to be frank, this kind of rhetoric really leaves me cold. of course there are different modes of thinking - but there's nothing to the assumption that most people are semiconscious automotons besides prejudice, conceit and arrogance. the fact is, we pretty much end up living the same basic sort of life regardless of how much time we spend with our *heads in the clouds and our butts in ivory tower chairs* (just to reverse the prejudice for a moment) - we eat sleep shit fuck and work - some of us escape this mundane existence by reading philosophy, some others watch tv or drink booze or whathaveyou, but the end result is the same. There's nothing about meta-level thinking that makes you any less of a "slave to society" - if you want to get really "meta" about it, then we are ALL slaves to society regardless - we all need a paycheck (or some other source of income) to survive, we all need toilets and running water and transportation - there really is no freedom from such "enslavements". Inertia is a force of nature, and we all settle into it in one way or another - sure, you can be aware of all the existential implications of the fact that you are fated to forever push the boulder up the hill, but that doesn't change what you're doing, and it doesn't even necessarily make the task any easier. you've still got to push the damn rock whether or not you spend all your time contemplating the process and thinking up ways to make yourself feel special in what you're doing.

It is a certain NiN or Matrix-like style of rhetoric, but I agree with what I'd surmise it's basic and less dramatic content to be - some people go about their daily "mundane" activities and feel oppressed by them, and some people feel liberated by them. It's not that some people are literally free of such activities, though some people may be free of some of them. It's about how we relate to them psychologically. We can do something about that. It's not inevitable that we feel enslaved by what is necessary.

[The Last Man]

There *are* different types or modes of thinking, and the habitual and automatic thought that most of us operate by is quite different in quality from a higher-order meta-thinking which encompasses self-awareness, honesty, intricacy and depth. Of course we can function on some basic level in society with our automatic, semiconscious thoughts, which are for the most part conditioned and determined with little or no input from us - but is this all you want to do? Operate as an automaton, a programed mindless herd-robot? Or do you want something more for yourself?

Do you want to be a slave to others, to society, to your programed reactive unconsciousness - a slave to inertia? Or do you want to potentially learn how to free yourself from these enslavements?

to be frank, this kind of rhetoric really leaves me cold. of course there are different modes of thinking - but there's nothing to the assumption that most people are semiconscious automotons besides prejudice, conceit and arrogance.

Unfortunately there is of course no way to reveal that I am not coming from such a position, which I admit many people who speak as I am here do come from. You are right that many of us put others down in order to justify ourselves, as we are *different* than they are - this is just a false self-deception, a resentimenting, as Nietzsche would say. I would assure you that my thoughts here are not arrived at from such a premise or intent, but as there is likely nothing I could say to so convince you, I suppose I will just leave it at that.

I guess I would ask you to consider the possibility that one might reach this sort of knowledge, of the automatic somnambulistic state of mind of most people, without such a conceit, prejudice and arrogance. Do you think this sort of realisation could come from a different, more honest, more non-judgmental perspective? I know for myself I have confirmed this many times over, with myself and other people, that much of the time we just do not think, we are not aware of ourselves or what is going on around us, and our thoughts, words and actions are as those of a programed robot, reacting deterministically to situations. The times where I can rise myself above this sort of state, I am able to see it more clearly. But I also know from experience that before I had begun this sort of work on myself, I was not able to see this somnambulism either. It is definitely something one has to experience in a direct and personal, deep way.

But like I said I agree with you that most people who take this critical view of people do so from a position of arrogance, prejudice, conceit - basically, resentiment.

the fact is, we pretty much end up living the same basic sort of life regardless of how much time we spend with our *heads in the clouds and our butts in ivory tower chairs* (just to reverse the prejudice for a moment)

Perhaps our outward conditions might not vary greatly, but what about internal content, what about who we are *inside*, our satisfaction with life, our self-esteem, our joy, our love and compassion for man, our desires and passions? Is there not room for such internal differences even if material conditions tend to be mostly unchanged? And is not this internal state far more important, perhaps even the most important part of what it means to be a human being? As the cliche goes, I would rather be happy than rich, if being rich means being miserable. Of course that is pretty simplistic and is quite cliche, but it summarises what I speak of here. Who we are inside seems to me to be the most important thing - and this personal internality might indeed be very different from person to person. I know for my own sake, mine has changed tremendously and substantially from time to time, so I have experienced these differences in internal state personally, and from this sort of knowledge I can tell much of how another person's internal state is. Not all of course, as no one can see into another person's mind, but enough to detect that there are fundamental differences in mood, affect, intellect, awareness, contentment between people.

But I also argue that attaining a better sort of internal state of mind can lead to living a different kind of life. So in a sense there are practical results and benefits from what I am talking about here.

- we eat sleep shit fuck and work - some of us escape this mundane existence by reading philosophy, some others watch tv or drink booze or whathaveyou, but the end result is the same.

Yes I see where you are coming from. You see philosophy as one more hedonistic escapism, simply a distraction from the stress of life. Something we do to cope. If this is your view of philosophy and of the ideas and possibilities contained and generated from philosophical thinking and contemplation, then certainly there is nothing I can say to dissuade you.

There's nothing about meta-level thinking that makes you any less of a "slave to society"

I can assure you, there is. But I guess you will not be convinced, despite that I have tried. Really I do not blame you, as there is little chance a person can escape this sort of somnambulism without experiencing it for themselves.

- if you want to get really "meta" about it, then we are ALL slaves to society regardless

In a sense, yes, most of us are, even the more 'enlightened' individuals that I speak of here - those who have "learned how to think" are still slaves in a way. But this does not preclude the possibility that there are different sorts of slavery, degrees if you will - nor does it preclude the possibility that we can progressively free ourselves from these bonds.

- we all need a paycheck (or some other source of income) to survive, we all need toilets and running water and transportation - there really is no freedom from such "enslavements".

These are just physical or biological needs. That is not the sort of slavery I speak of here. I do not see the basic requirements for life to sustain itself as enslavements per se, although of course they might become enslavements if another power witholds or regulates them to a point in order to coerce you into a position of being a slave.

Inertia is a force of nature, and we all settle into it in one way or another - sure, you can be aware of all the existential implications of the fact that you are fated to forever push the boulder up the hill, but that doesn't change what you're doing, and it doesn't even necessarily make the task any easier.

But what if you can realise that you are able to choose *not* to keep pushing the boulder up the hill? Knowledge leads to possibilities, and where we lack knowledge of a potential we are unable to realise that potential, unless by accident. And as you say, inertia keeps us contained in this way - we will not accidentally discover new ways to "stop pushing the boulder forever" on accident, it takes much time and energy to reach these perspectives for oneself.

you've still got to push the damn rock whether or not you spend all your time contemplating the process and thinking up ways to make yourself feel special in what you're doing.

I disagree - knowledge is power. Yes that is an overused phrase, but it is true. Knowledge can liberate us from bonds and limitations, just look at invention as a quick example. Or more personally, if you have the certain knowledge of how to, say, play the stock market and make a lot of money, or play the lottery and win a lot, then you dont have to work your mundane job anymore. The more knowledge you gain the more possibilities open up for you, and you *can* dramatically change your life's circumstances by taking advantage of these sorts of possibilities.

[finishedman]

I disagree - knowledge is power. Yes that is an overused phrase, but it is true. Knowledge can liberate us from bonds and limitations, just look at invention as a quick example. Or more personally, if you have the certain knowledge of how to, say, play the stock market and make a lot of money, or play the lottery and win a lot, then you dont have to work your mundane job anymore. The more knowledge you gain the more possibilities open up for you, and you *can* dramatically change your life's circumstances by taking advantage of these sorts of possibilities.

I told a hippie once to make something of him self. He asked why. I replied that if he gets up, goes to school, gets a good job and makes a lot of money, he wouldn't have to work any more. He replied, 'I ain't workin now!'

Anyway .... when it is fully understood that you have little freedom of action, that there’s nothing at all you can do to free yourself from the burden of culture, what is there expresses itself. The intelligence that is there can function much more effectively than all the solutions that man has come out with through his thinking. If you accept your being here exactly the way you are, then you are not in conflict with society. Culture has put the demand in you that is pushing you in the direction of wanting to change yourself into something. That is what the culture has done, put in you. If you want to do something, they say, "Boy, look here, watch your step." That is what they are doing, the society. "Watch your step" it says. So, that has put fear in you. Then at the same time it talks of freeing yourself from fear, and courage and the whole thing -- be a peerless man -- that is only for the purpose of using you as a pawn in maintaining the status quo of society.

That is why it is teaching courage, it is teaching fearlessness, so that it can use you to maintain the continuity of the society. You are a part of that. That is why every time you want to act, what is there is fear and the impossibility of acting. The society is not out there, the culture is not out there, it's in you, and unless you are free from that you cannot act.

Man is not able to act, because he is all the time thinking in terms of the freedom to act. "How can I be free to act?" That's all that you are concerned about, the freedom. But you are not acting that freedom. The demand for the freedom to act is preventing the action, which is neither social nor anti-social.

So, you are free if you accept yourself and your situation. That's all. You are not in conflict with the society any more. You will not be any use to the society. On the other hand, if you become a threat to the society, the society will liquidate you.

You are a neurotic because you want two things at the same time. It is that which has created this problem for you. Wanting two things at the same time. You want to bring about a change in yourself. The change is the demand of the society, so that you can become a part of that and maintain the continuity of the social structure without any change. The second thing is, you want change. This is the conflict.

When the demand for bringing up any change in you ceases, then the concern to change the world around you also comes to an end, ipso facto. Both of them are finished. Otherwise, your actions will be a danger to the society. They will liquidate you, that's for sure. So, you are ready to be liquidated by that social structure, that is the courage.

[uglypeoplefucking]

Unfortunately there is of course no way to reveal that I am not coming from such a position, which I admit many people who speak as I am here do come from. You are right that many of us put others down in order to justify ourselves, as we are *different* than they are - this is just a false self-deception, a resentimenting, as Nietzsche would say. I would assure you that my thoughts here are not arrived at from such a premise or intent, but as there is likely nothing I could say to so convince you, I suppose I will just leave it at that.

I guess I would ask you to consider the possibility that one might reach this sort of knowledge, of the automatic somnambulistic state of mind of most people, without such a conceit, prejudice and arrogance. Do you think this sort of realisation could come from a different, more honest, more non-judgmental perspective? I know for myself I have confirmed this many times over, with myself and other people, that much of the time we just do not think, we are not aware of ourselves or what is going on around us, and our thoughts, words and actions are as those of a programed robot, reacting deterministically to situations. The times where I can rise myself above this sort of state, I am able to see it more clearly. But I also know from experience that before I had begun this sort of work on myself, I was not able to see this somnambulism either. It is definitely something one has to experience in a direct and personal, deep way.

Can you elaborate on what you see as the "automatic, somnambulistic" state of mind? To me it just seems self-evident that much of our mental activity is automatic and in a way thoughtless - i don't think it takes any special insight to realize this, nor do i see it as a problem - humans are to a large extent programmed, biological machines - that doesn't mean we never think profound or insightful thoughts, after all it's our minds that make the human machine such a wonder - but i guess i just disagree with you about how rare such thoughts are among the general population. I think most human minds deserve more credit than you (or Nietzsche, for that matter) give them.

Perhaps our outward conditions might not vary greatly, but what about internal content, what about who we are *inside*, our satisfaction with life, our self-esteem, our joy, our love and compassion for man, our desires and passions? Is there not room for such internal differences even if material conditions tend to be mostly unchanged? And is not this internal state far more important, perhaps even the most important part of what it means to be a human being? As the cliche goes, I would rather be happy than rich, if being rich means being miserable. Of course that is pretty simplistic and is quite cliche, but it summarises what I speak of here. Who we are inside seems to me to be the most important thing - and this personal internality might indeed be very different from person to person. I know for my own sake, mine has changed tremendously and substantially from time to time, so I have experienced these differences in internal state personally, and from this sort of knowledge I can tell much of how another person's internal state is. Not all of course, as no one can see into another person's mind, but enough to detect that there are fundamental differences in mood, affect, intellect, awareness, contentment between people.

sure , there are differences, i don't deny that some people are smarter or more insightful than others - i just don't think your assesment of the majority of the population is a fair one - and i feel certain that many people can and do acheive contentment, good moods, and positive affects without any necessary intellectual enlightenment of the sort you seem to be talking about.

But I also argue that attaining a better sort of internal state of mind can lead to living a different kind of life. So in a sense there are practical results and benefits from what I am talking about here.

What do you see as the practical benefits of meta-level / philosophical thinking that can't be gained in other ways?

I also think there are downsides to such modes of thought which you are glossing over.

Yes I see where you are coming from. You see philosophy as one more hedonistic escapism, simply a distraction from the stress of life. Something we do to cope. If this is your view of philosophy and of the ideas and possibilities contained and generated from philosophical thinking and contemplation, then certainly there is nothing I can say to dissuade you.

So you see philosophy as a loftier endeavor - but what has it done for humankind besides provide us with mental distraction from the mundane contingencies of the lives we lead? even if it DOES provide the special sort of enlightenment you seem to be talking about that's still just a means of intellectual overcoming of more mundane circumstance without any necessary change in the circumstances themselves - like i said we all ultimately still lead the same sorts of lives regardless of where our minds may wander. Even boddhisatvas have to grapple with social restrictions and the physical confinements of embodied life.

I can assure you, there is. But I guess you will not be convinced, despite that I have tried. Really I do not blame you, as there is little chance a person can escape this sort of somnambulism without experiencing it for themselves.

see, i understand (i think) what you and Nietzsche describe when you talk about transcendence or whatever, it just seems to me that you and he use it as a way of lifting yourselves above the pack in a way that isn't really practically or pragmatically substantial, but simply more masturbatory than anything else. After all, even you admit:

In a sense, yes, most of us are, even the more 'enlightened' individuals that I speak of here - those who have "learned how to think" are still slaves in a way.

in the end, it seems to me you're just inventing a problem and thinking your way around it - i guess that's fine, but it's just a mental exercise, i don't think it's revelatory or virtuous in any grand cosmic or universal sense. i get reflexively suspicious when people try to elevate philosophical thought that way. The universal ideal still eludes even you, Nietzsche and the rest of humanity (probably because it doesn't exist, but that's another argument)

But this does not preclude the possibility that there are different sorts of slavery, degrees if you will - nor does it preclude the possibility that we can progressively free ourselves from these bonds.

yes, there are degrees of everything - but, insofar as slavery and freedom are mere states of mind, then anyone who is content with their lot in life is just as free as anyone who feels they have achieved intellectual enlightenment.

These are just physical or biological needs. That is not the sort of slavery I speak of here. I do not see the basic requirements for life to sustain itself as enslavements per se, although of course they might become enslavements if another power witholds or regulates them to a point in order to coerce you into a position of being a slave.

then what is it that makes slaves of the majority?

But what if you can realise that you are able to choose *not* to keep pushing the boulder up the hill? Knowledge leads to possibilities, and where we lack knowledge of a potential we are unable to realise that potential, unless by accident. And as you say, inertia keeps us contained in this way - we will not accidentally discover new ways to "stop pushing the boulder forever" on accident, it takes much time and energy to reach these perspectives for oneself.

but they are just perspectives in the end - the contingencies don't change with the perspective - so someone who starts out happy to push the boulder is no more a slave than someone who has convinced themselves that they aren't pushing boulders (even though they probably still are but have simply chosen to be willfully blind to the fact - it's the human condition after all)

knowledge is power. Yes that is an overused phrase, but it is true. Knowledge can liberate us from bonds and limitations, just look at invention as a quick example. Or more personally, if you have the certain knowledge of how to, say, play the stock market and make a lot of money, or play the lottery and win a lot, then you dont have to work your mundane job anymore. The more knowledge you gain the more possibilities open up for you, and you *can* dramatically change your life's circumstances by taking advantage of these sorts of possibilities.

yes, but people change circumstances using knowledge all the time- it's not a process that only a few philosophically enlightened people partake in - even stupid and mediocre people can make good using knowledge - what i don't get is what the benefits are of the opinion (and perhaps we should oppose opinion and knowledge here for now) that everyone ELSE is living a life of automotonish enslavement, besides the simple feeling of being special or different when, practically speaking, one is still basically the same. In the end i belive that the only philosophical knowledge that is in any way enlightening or freeing is the knowledge that we really don't know anything, regardless of who we are. Anything beyond that strikes me as narcissism, not enlightenment. I'm not calling you a narcissist (tho Nietzsche certainly was) only that with the point of view you espouse you are nurturing certain narcissistic tendencies which we all have, but which we all should be trying to overcome.

[Nah]

I do think more than 80% of population don't know how to think.
I mean, most people think merely by association, to feel better (by justifying emotional preferences), or without enough awareness of their own perspectives.
Most of us don't know how to think or what they are thinking, very well, and that is evident to someone who started to be a bit aware and rational.
So, in a way, I'm talking about things many people aren't very aware.
But also, these are so obvious that many people would not see the implication of the simple "focusing" mechanism and its nature.

This is incredibly insightful. I agree with you completely here. Maybe you could turn this discussion in that direction, find a way to use some of the posts from this website to create a plan or map for developing better thinking skills - for simply learning how to think which of course presupposes learning what thinking is, something I agree most people never bother to consider. The reactive and automatic nature of thought is one of those things that is so obvious, yet goes almost completely unnoticed. I have some thoughts along these lines, I have actually written some material on the subject, let me know if youre interested and I could maybe help you come up with some sort of plan or method here.

Well, I think we can learn about our own tendencies that prevent us from thinking clearly, if we really wanted.
I mean, we can simply observe how we think, and that is what I've been doing since I was a little kid.
Although it may take very long time and effort to learn (because of our automatic self-deceiving tendencies), I guess it can be done even without external help.
It's true that external information and guidance can be helpful, but I think it's more of the matter of one's own desire.
Moreover, I do think thinking very logically is contrary to the operating principle of the physical reality (and possibly even the non-physical one).
So, I think this kind of thing is reserved for some odd bunch of people somehow determined to seek the dead end of logic, and I'm not really interested in helping/educating others in general.

I'm open to discussion if someone is interested in something like this and if I'm interested in the interest of the person, but it's not happening, often, recently.

[Nah]

Nah,

Hi Nah...how have you been doing?

As usual.

[Arcturus Descending]

Nah,

Hi Nah...how have you been doing?

As usual.

Hi Nah. It IS so good that you stepped in here with your two words. I hope that you are well.