The Psychology of the Other..

Funny how those with a high sense of aesthetic are all on the same psychological page, in regard to their physical state of being i.e. come Winter… it’s not about fattening up, but about relying on the healthy stores that we built up over the abundance of Summer, to get us through those cold unabundant months of scarcity, and fat accumulation is then kept to a minimum… so entering into Spring lean as opposed to fattened-calf.

Take all the time required or don’t get to it at all. If the moment was lost in time well then. Press out wrinkles when the iron is hot, when it’s cool, fold laundry or a zillion other projects. A hot iron has it’s purpose.

Well Mowk, I think you have enough material here to work with… a progressional piece, just like minds (and hearts) do, so progressing it organically is the way to go.

How does that relate to dasein though? :slight_smile:

Maybe Iambiguous will tell us here.

The terms You/Others think in, are not the terms we All think in… so not speaking in segregative/stereotyped/disillusioned etc. terms, but in terms arrived at from within… such analyses deemed narcissistic/arrogant/egotistical, because they do not serve You/Others well.

Self = continuum of interactions held together by memory - first hand (experiential, Memes) + second hand (DNA, Genes). Negation of otherness.
Ego = lucid part of self, or the self which is gradually becoming self-aware.
Body = past made present and interpreted as appearance; sum of all past nurturing - the presence of what has been determined by the organism’s interaction with world.
Mind = dynamic self interacting in the present; that which is determining the future.
Body + Mind = synthesis of automated reactivity and real time choice selection that often contradicts the previous - usurps automatism.

Without this negation there is no life and there is no awareness.
Nihilism takes this to an extreme negation of reality - arbitrary and selective, or total. The degree determines the level nihilism has been applied to cope with an indifferent threatening world.

Other = that which is not I. That which is outside the self’s willful control, requiring physical, or the body’s intermediacy.
The body’s activities - conscious or not - are expressions of the organism’s will, i.e., focus of its aggregate energies upon an object/objective.

Most all pyschology can be tied to our animal instincts. Some twisted due to sentience. Our pack/herd instinct/s are a core of this.

Now advance from that logical starting point and see how genetic dispositions - evolved over time because of their success - can become memetically transformed - even inverted to contradict their origins and primal utilities.

Take a look at this
I found that most interesting of your reply. Very true and very applicable to many if not most species of animals. Memes are not just used by humans. Will reply more tomorrow. I have to be awake at 3am

Yes…memes as extensions of genes.
Genes use DNA, memes use language, semiotics.
As there is a selfish gene, there is a selfish meme.
As there are organisms, there are superorganisms.
Just as genes synthesize and reproduce, so too memes synthesize and reproduce.
Just as there are compatible and incompatible genes; there are compatible and incompatible memes.

I’m not too familiar with memes but memes are a new buzzword. Is a meme as effective or as meme-like when it is accompanied by other images, pictures? All the memes I’ve seen as of late have been a combo of words and images. And are images actual language?

Yes, symbols and language, which are symbols, are all part of semiotics.
Semiotics are representations of abstractions. They are art, or a form of technology.
An externalization of the esoteric, via a medium.
Vocalizations using patterned sequences uses the medium of atmosphere. A rudimentary form of semiotics many species possess.

Not I (other) should be mentioned first. That’s the game, and that is where it all takes place. You wanna argue the point. It wouldn’t exist without not I.

Self? =D>

…which is of particular relevance on a forum like this where we know “the other” primarily through words on a virtual page. Yet based on the choices and arrangements of words one reads, the mind conjures a subjectivity at once like and different from one’s own.

Through the understanding of words in either/or absolutes.
Through the use of word as mediators between mind and world, and not between mind and other minds or mind and text, representing other minds.
By circumventing the apparent world around you, d the focus upon text - scripture - or the approach towards world via a proxy - an icon, idol.

Interesting. When the first hominids/apes showed facial expression and sounds to express emotion, others adopted them. Which they taught to the next generation and so on until the memes became genetic. One does not have to teach an infant to laugh or cry nor smile or frown. In lower order of animals the meme to gene transfer would quite likely take far far less generations due to simpler minds.
In future generations it would be interesting to see if new evolve in infants especially as more and more humans are interbreeding with different ethnicities and cultures. What do you think?

Yes, facial expressions are a form of information exchange.
A donkey braying, a wolf howling, also forms of memetic exchange of esoteric data - externalization of esoteric, inconspicuous, states.
Vocal language evolved first, then written language. It represents an externalization of memories in the form of a code - sequence, order, via a medium.

Interbreeding dilutes memories. It tends towards a median state. It is not a progress but a regress for the superior of the two.
Hundreds of thousands of cultivated potentials diminished, diluted.
See how man breeds desired traits in dogs. He doesn’t rely on chance, on luck,

Actually I have to disagree based on experience over the decades of working and living with varieties of species from birds up to cattle.
Not only do mixbreeds tend to have healthier bodies they tend to learn and retain knowledge far better than linebred. Linebred stagnate in learning capabilities and pass weaknesses on not to just one but all or most.
Chickens are the most interesting of this. The original purebreds of my employer and mine live/dshorter lives and were/are dumb and incapable of really learning once into adulthood. Instincts are it. A young has a flexible mind. Examples are lengthy. If you wish I will add a couple.
Now first generation mixes are not significantly different as far as the mind goes but, it is notable as far as health and lifespan. By the third generation of mixing there is a definite change in the birds mental abilities. Mixing a third generation that comes from 4 original breeds to a purebred , the chicks lean towards the mixed abilities more so than the pure line. There is generally a chick that leans toward the pure.
This genetic play works even with higher order animals.
While linebred carries attributes that could be lost, the overall affects of mixbreeding tilts that scale appreciably for the overall benefits.
Look at humanity started. Scientists are proving that a couple or several breeds of Ape/hominid bred with other breeds. And on and on as conquering promoted breeding with the conquered different. Our pack/herd instincts and egos created the present humans by mixing. Only the past 1000 years or so has mixbreeding ceased as pack/herds became significantly large enough so that inbreeding is not an issue. Incest showed early issues with health and became overall frowned upon and forbidden through laws and cultures.
Line breeding like incest is a dead end and is fatal to evolution.

As is evident here on ILP… why are we not looking to the future, instead of being forced to relive the past? which is not of our present making… is this justifiable?

Wait a minute, kriswest. Are you saying Aegean is wrong again?

face palm