Kantsian, Marxian… whatever sian, sm or anything like that, do you think its Metooism?
I think it is. And I think it’s a sm that most of us have been developing firmer and firmer since birth. And I think it’s the motherofbad.
I would shout to everyone: use your mind and experience, to make a judgment. The only reason to read Das Kapita and s***s like that, should not be study, but to criticise. If you can find something wrong with them, then you’re the man! Why? Because nobody is ever completely right. Things need to get clearer and righter, and they do. Metooism is just some kind of a lag and drag, I think.
“ooooh…philosophy! I wanna be smart too! I’ve read the right books, so I must be philosophical…I want to get people to think I’m something I may really not be.”
Of course, I may be misunderstanding what Unigor was really trying to say, but this is just how I interpreted it.
I think what I Uniqor was trying to say was: people should rely on their own thoughts and observations more often, than just simply asume that what others say is reliable, no matter how others may seem trustworthy.
The biggest tradegies in history were fundamentally caused by Metooism. Too often, Metooism leads ideas to the negative extreme.
Ever wonder why you can’t stand out of the crowd in whatever business you do? You follow too much and innovate too little.
That’s why originality is always regarded as presious and genius. It is only originality that pushes the wheel of mankind’s history forward. Metooism on the other hand, make the rolling slow.
However, Uniqor never tries to say: screw others, revolution is my motto.
it is very difficult to seperate out your “own” thoughts from the thoughts of others which you revcieve…
for instance…
I doubt that you were present for these big tradgedies… unless you are simply making it up, I assume that you are relying almost completely on the stories of others passed on to you via paper, bits and bytes… whatever…
you might consider that a trivial example… and the point that we shouldnt mindlessly bow to appeals from authority (“Kant said X” or “you should read Latour 1994 because he shows Y” “everyone knows after Godels that Z”) is a valid one.
but at the end of the day I doubt there is much that we think, much in our way of thinking or even our ability to be a subject, which doesnt come from our interaction with others and our recieving of others ideas and creatively engaging with them no doubt, but ultimately we are being fed into and it’s through the medium of others thoughts that we ourselves think…
ie. others ideas constrain and enable all our own ideas…
I can’t deny what you’ve said, but can’t deny my own thoughts about Metooism either.
Conclusion: too much philosophy make matters worse. Kant knew this, and he said that human reasoning can’t really cope with abstract ideas. So I wonder, what is the origin of abstraction.
yeah I was just trying to pour some irritating grey into your otherwise fairly straightforward gripe about people taking certain authors words as law…
there is one problem however… it depends on wether you believe that knowledge is something discovered or something developed…
because if you think that it is discovered then certainly, avoiding the distorting influence of “metoism” would be important so that you can discover, unmediatedly, the things you wish to know.
if you consider knowledge to be something created by people, well then it would make more sense to get up to date with current lines of thought so that you can situate yourself in that on-going creation… to ignore important thinkers would be to actualy abandon the development of knowledge or at best start right at the beginning again.
I tend to think it’s a bit of the last tempered with the first… you do ultimately situate yourself in traditions of thought… but sometimes perhaps the best thing is to self-consciously set them aside when they don’t seem to be achieving anything…
of course your choice about that matter is mediated by your pplacement in traditions of knowledge… so the problem continues… trying to seperate out “outside influence” from “authentic ideas” (or however you wish to think of it) is a very sticky situation… just look at the path writtings on “ideology” have taken… it’s an intuitive problem, but one which can’t stand up to itself… it begs to many questions…
