Try and prove this philosophy of mine misguided
Posted: 29 December 2011 10:42 AM   [ Ignore ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  4
Joined  2011-12-29

My claim is simple: people enjoy many arbitrary activities due to their own subconscious baggage which we’ve aquired as a result of an overly unnatural (another side to this is the diabetes epidemic), unminimalistic lifestyle. And ultimately, everything is the same. It’s the same core archetypes again and again and again, meaning only intensity is truly worth living for, unless one carries enough baggage as to make oneself neurotic. Then the most honest activity is one that causes both psychological and physiological intensity. It’s the only way of maximalizing liveliness. Here’s a few examples of how the baggage shows it self.

“All writers are vain, selfish and lazy, and at the very bottom of their motives lies a mystery. Writing a book is a long, exhausting struggle, like a long bout of some painful illness. One would never undertake such a thing if one were not driven by some demon whom one can neither resist nor understand.” - George Orwell.

Wittgenstein said philosophy repels those who suspect it is a timewaste due to language confusion in it, thus reinforcing language confusion in it. Too many philosophers have been freaks, this makes it overly obvious how society’s unminimalistic unnaturality has gotten to them SOMEHOW.

Non-physics scientists? “All science is either physics or stamp collecting.” - Rutherford telling it like it is regarding the gruntwork that is science, and yet those in it work long hours. The abstract parts of science as bloated (i.e. few jobs) also in the west and they too attract freaks. Mathematicians actually think of numbers as beautiful; how baggage-y. Every snowflake is unique but in the end its just variations of the same old archetype anyway. Nothing new under the sun. Now if one really tries to understand a subject there may be new such archetypes to uncover, new paradigms so to say but if one has taken to a bit more meta-y perspective beforehand it quickly becomes obvious only so much is ever possible within every such paradigm so its not that exciting after all. Also, some “core archetypes” in the ways of thought will obviously resonate through different fields, turning every new realization one may come over boring.

Idealism, morality. “act so as to treat people always as ends in themselves, never as mere means.” yeah who cares? Life goes on whether some philosopher sits around in his house. To care about the things Kant and others do is just an arbitrary use of one’s time. They must carry much subconscious baggage to have such great passion.

Perfectionism, aestheticism in general. Why care if a cord is a little messy? Some people actually care about such bull. A painting too. It’s just a painting. That’s that. While research has been done into human appreciation of symmetry and such, it doesn’t explain overly strong neatfreakery and how neatfreaks make a life out of aestheticism. If anything human appreciation of such should only only be a minor sidething to humanity. How can it not be their subconscious, unecessary baggage giving them an artificial enjoyment boost? I call this artifical cause I want to make the best choices as far as spending my time in life on things, and there’s no time for the unecessary, the simply idiosyncratic, the boring, the random, the arbitrary.

The concept of keeping a diary. Who really cares about the past? It ain’t coming back anyway. Better to be living a story than sitting around thinking about one, unless one has something yet learned for preparation for life.

Just visiting places. A city or whatever is really just another variation of the same old, same old concept.


Humans evolved to DO after all, not sitting around (sedentary). Slack activities induce no extremity or intensity. Everything else is just unnatural. Or pershaps something has passed me by, not illuminated by my limited psyche. Now, try to counter my points; prove that there’s something more to it, ultimately!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 December 2011 05:04 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2709
Joined  2011-04-24
PhilosopherQueen - 29 December 2011 10:42 AM

My claim is simple: people enjoy many arbitrary activities due to their own subconscious baggage which we’ve aquired as a result of an overly unnatural (another side to this is the diabetes epidemic), unminimalistic lifestyle. And ultimately, everything is the same. It’s the same core archetypes again and again and again, meaning only intensity is truly worth living for, unless one carries enough baggage as to make oneself neurotic. Then the most honest activity is one that causes both psychological and physiological intensity. It’s the only way of maximalizing liveliness. Here’s a few examples of how the baggage shows it self.

“All writers are vain, selfish and lazy, and at the very bottom of their motives lies a mystery. Writing a book is a long, exhausting struggle, like a long bout of some painful illness. One would never undertake such a thing if one were not driven by some demon whom one can neither resist nor understand.” - George Orwell.

Wittgenstein said philosophy repels those who suspect it is a timewaste due to language confusion in it, thus reinforcing language confusion in it. Too many philosophers have been freaks, this makes it overly obvious how society’s unminimalistic unnaturality has gotten to them SOMEHOW.

Non-physics scientists? “All science is either physics or stamp collecting.” - Rutherford telling it like it is regarding the gruntwork that is science, and yet those in it work long hours. The abstract parts of science as bloated (i.e. few jobs) also in the west and they too attract freaks. Mathematicians actually think of numbers as beautiful; how baggage-y. Every snowflake is unique but in the end its just variations of the same old archetype anyway. Nothing new under the sun. Now if one really tries to understand a subject there may be new such archetypes to uncover, new paradigms so to say but if one has taken to a bit more meta-y perspective beforehand it quickly becomes obvious only so much is ever possible within every such paradigm so its not that exciting after all. Also, some “core archetypes” in the ways of thought will obviously resonate through different fields, turning every new realization one may come over boring.

Idealism, morality. “act so as to treat people always as ends in themselves, never as mere means.” yeah who cares? Life goes on whether some philosopher sits around in his house. To care about the things Kant and others do is just an arbitrary use of one’s time. They must carry much subconscious baggage to have such great passion.

Perfectionism, aestheticism in general. Why care if a cord is a little messy? Some people actually care about such bull. A painting too. It’s just a painting. That’s that. While research has been done into human appreciation of symmetry and such, it doesn’t explain overly strong neatfreakery and how neatfreaks make a life out of aestheticism. If anything human appreciation of such should only only be a minor sidething to humanity. How can it not be their subconscious, unecessary baggage giving them an artificial enjoyment boost? I call this artifical cause I want to make the best choices as far as spending my time in life on things, and there’s no time for the unecessary, the simply idiosyncratic, the boring, the random, the arbitrary.

The concept of keeping a diary. Who really cares about the past? It ain’t coming back anyway. Better to be living a story than sitting around thinking about one, unless one has something yet learned for preparation for life.

Just visiting places. A city or whatever is really just another variation of the same old, same old concept.


Humans evolved to DO after all, not sitting around (sedentary). Slack activities induce no extremity or intensity. Everything else is just unnatural. Or pershaps something has passed me by, not illuminated by my limited psyche. Now, try to counter my points; prove that there’s something more to it, ultimately!

I can’t figure out what you’re actually talking about; the concept of “subconciousness baggage” almost sounds Freudian - and that would make it nonsense.  If you mean that modern life is “unnatural” because it is too complicated, I would disagree.  The term “unnatural” is wrong in itself, all human behavior is natural, and all things are natural.  Unnatural is often used by people to mean harmful or unnecessary,but human evolutionary behavior makes us want unnecessary or harmful things, and complication is an unavoidable consequence of “doing” as you put it.

 Signature 

Raise your glass if you’re wrong…. in all the right ways.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 December 2011 05:31 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1201
Joined  2009-05-10

mid atlantic, I feel the same way. It is hard for me to understand the claim. The OP could stand to use more precise terms and avoid the naturalistic fallacy.

 Signature 

“What people do is they confuse cynicism with skepticism. Cynicism is ‘you can’t change anything, everything sucks, there’s no point to anything.’ Skepticism is, ‘well, I’m not so sure.’” -Bill Nye

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 December 2011 08:03 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6159
Joined  2009-02-26

PhilosopherQueen
Humans evolved to DO after all, not sitting around (sedentary). Slack activities induce no extremity or intensity. Everything else is just unnatural. Or pershaps something has passed me by, not illuminated by my limited psyche. Now, try to counter my points; prove that there’s something more to it, ultimately!

Your points contradict themselves. Your conclusions, to me are incomprehensible. You speak of both physical and mental intensity. But unless you are a sportsperson these two are unrelated. Of course it is desirable to maintain physical fitness, but just to DO does not necessarily increase physical fitness or increase mental intensity.

Your example of scientists or mathematicians being engaged in mental intensity (you called them freaks) from a slack (sedentary position) contradicts your posit. Without thinkers we’d still be in the dark ages.
And a field laborer mindlessly toiling to meet his quota for the day may well develop early physical disabilities. But they feed physical needs and provide a source of income for their family.

We are no longer a hunter/gatherer which demand a minimum of baggage, both physical and mental. We have become specialized to be very good at one or the other. And specialization requires specialized tools. “One man’s garbage is another man’s treasure”
The hunter gene is now expressed in sports or wars. The gatherer gene, is now expressed in a million different ways of non aggressive (and sedentary) endeavors. Thats why we have gyms and health spas.

I do agree that we carry too much baggage, but that is usually in the form of stuff, which turns us into slaves to maintain our stuffs. But that is due to the intensity of greed.

Doing in itself is not sufficient, the doing of anything must be purposefully directed, whether it be physical or sedentary. Either/both are indispensable in todays world.

[ Edited: 29 December 2011 08:17 PM by Write4U ]
 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 December 2011 07:17 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1920
Joined  2007-10-28

My claim is simple: people enjoy many arbitrary activities due to their own subconscious baggage which we’ve aquired as a result of an overly unnatural (another side to this is the diabetes epidemic), unminimalistic lifestyle. And ultimately, everything is the same.

From the wiki on nihilism

Most commonly, nihilism is presented in the form of existential nihilism which argues that life is without objective meaning, purpose, or intrinsic value.

This philosophy is essentially problematic.

1. The belief that life has no intrinsic value is unjustified nonsense.

2. What are the virtues of a minimalist lifestyle?

3. “And ultimately, everything is the same” is specious reasoning.

4. Is it not (the challenge to try and prove this philosophy as misguided) a form of vanity?

5. It appears you have a distorted perception of reality…....the subconscious baggage is in yourself.

You need more “animal faith”.

cheese

 Signature 

I am, therefore I think.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 December 2011 10:49 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3313
Joined  2011-11-04

PhilosopherQueen: ...only intensity is truly worth living for…

Taking the quote above as your central point, I would also like to define what you refer to as “baggage” as one’s motivators that are a factor of one’s history of reinforcement (and punishment).  Everyone has values though not everyone is acutely aware of them.  You may value having intense experiences. Is that or should we recognize that that is what life is all about? My guess is that a life lived with that as the core value would have a tremendous upside as well as tremendous costs.  Bottom line is that, generally speaking, I would leave it up to each individual to live according to their values as long as they didn’t impact in a terribly negative way on others.

 Signature 

As a fabrication of our own consciousness, our assignations of meaning are no less “real”, but since humans and the fabrications of our consciousness are routinely fraught with error, it makes sense, to me, to, sometimes, question such fabrications.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 December 2011 10:33 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 6 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  731
Joined  2007-06-20

Hmmm.  First post from a new member and it’s a wall of text.  Warning flag. 

So I read the first sentence.  Googled portions of it.  Found the same text recently posted on other fora.

I don’t think I’ll read the rest.  I doubt our new member will be back to discuss this.

 Signature 

PC

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 December 2011 04:10 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 7 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  4
Joined  2011-12-29

I can’t figure out what you’re actually talking about; the concept of “subconciousness baggage” almost sounds Freudian - and that would make it nonsense.  If you mean that modern life is “unnatural” because it is too complicated, I would disagree.  The term “unnatural” is wrong in itself, all human behavior is natural, and all things are natural.  Unnatural is often used by people to mean harmful or unnecessary,but human evolutionary behavior makes us want unnecessary or harmful things, and complication is an unavoidable consequence of “doing” as you put it.

Indeed, all is naural. But modern lifestyle is not integrated well with what the body is made for - this is why modern living is unnatural and furthermore unminimalistic as if it were minimalistic it would be *perfectly* integrated with the needs of the body and no unecessary bells and whistles causing disturbances. However, that is a bit idealistic for anything more than small groups to follow. Society may still be a bit excessive, and this may be possible to reduce in practice, but that’s besides my central point which is focused on what individuals can do.

As for baggage, everyone carries some irrational fears. I’m just about minimalizing it.

2. What are the virtues of a minimalist lifestyle?
3. “And ultimately, everything is the same” is specious reasoning.
4. Is it not (the challenge to try and prove this philosophy as misguided) a form of vanity?

2. Being able to use the body and the sensations it’s capable of having to the fullest. Having a reason to live, and not letting oneself rot away. 3. Everything’s the same in stories, as it’s the same archetypes time and time again. This also means that we have been introduced to a general concept, variations of that concept won’t be *just* as interesting as the first time we encountered it, and neither will bordering concepts be that fun to discover if we have some idea of kind of how it will look like if we look there. 4. I supposed you could put it that way, but most of all I’m checking if I’m wrong, which in case I need to rethink things.

Taking the quote above as your central point, I would also like to define what you refer to as “baggage” as one’s motivators that are a factor of one’s history of reinforcement (and punishment). 

Yes, you understand what I’m trying to say.

Everyone has values though not everyone is acutely aware of them.  You may value having intense experiences. Is that or should we recognize that that is what life is all about? My guess is that a life lived with that as the core value would have a tremendous upside as well as tremendous costs.  Bottom line is that, generally speaking, I would leave it up to each individual to live according to their values as long as they didn’t impact in a terribly negative way on others.

But values are moldable, and psychological tactics such as compartmentalization can be learned to lower neuroticism substantially. One also becomes more self-aware by examining oneself through studying philosophy, psychology, culture and the like. When one has become sufficiently de-neuroticized - not through roundabout methods like art aka sublimation, as they can go on for long before really geetting somewhere - things get boring quick and one needs strong stimulation, for what else is there but going through life like a living dead at that point? Of course, most people will just go on with life, so it’s not them I’m concentrating on here.

Your points contradict themselves. Your conclusions, to me are incomprehensible. You speak of both physical and mental intensity. But unless you are a sportsperson these two are unrelated. Of course it is desirable to maintain physical fitness, but just to DO does not necessarily increase physical fitness or increase mental intensity.

Do as in doing something giving intensity. As for getting intensity of both types, there’s always military and warfare. Or crime, if one leans that way. Although I very much prefer safety myself.

Your example of scientists or mathematicians being engaged in mental intensity (you called them freaks) from a slack (sedentary position) contradicts your posit. Without thinkers we’d still be in the dark ages.

If by mental intensity you mean the level of skill and concentration required, then yes, mental intensity indeed. However, that’s still overly cerebral. And on a moment-to-moment basis, there sure is a lot of time spent preparing and just trying methods & tricks out in science. If it’s experimental, then even more must be spent on preparations. Also, I think the mental aspect is quite different from that one feels under pressure, there’s not as much tension in it.

And a field laborer mindlessly toiling to meet his quota for the day may well develop early physical disabilities. But they feed physical needs and provide a source of income for their family.

Completely true, but not really relevant if one isn’t one of those.

We are no longer a hunter/gatherer which demand a minimum of baggage, both physical and mental. We have become specialized to be very good at one or the other. And specialization requires specialized tools. “One man’s garbage is another man’s treasure”
The hunter gene is now expressed in sports or wars. The gatherer gene, is now expressed in a million different ways of non aggressive (and sedentary) endeavors. Thats why we have gyms and health spas.

Tthat’s an interesting way of puting it.

I do agree that we carry too much baggage, but that is usually in the form of stuff, which turns us into slaves to maintain our stuffs. But that is due to the intensity of greed.

Greed I don’t get much myself. I suspect it’s just a form of rub-it-in, one-upping narcissism.

Doing in itself is not sufficient, the doing of anything must be purposefully directed, whether it be physical or sedentary. Either/both are indispensable in todays world.

Again, completely true. Society needs the gatherers and will march on regardless if an individual dismisses it. I don’t deny that at all. I just wanted to see how right or wrong I was. I’m not omniscient so there could be perspectives I’m missing.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 December 2011 05:10 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 8 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3313
Joined  2011-11-04

Philosopher Queen, If the jist of what you are saying is that the best one can do with one’s life is to live so that one experiences their life intensely, I would have to say maybe, because I don’t know the meaning of life. It seems to me that each of us has to do their best to figure that out for themselves. (Not to say that it is not a good idea to ask for input.) I would caution one with that perspective to consider whether they may just be an adrenaline junkie. Adrenals wear out eventually, then what.  Maybe a more moderate philosophy of living to maximize one’s enjoyment of life without always an insistence on intensity, would be more practical.

 Signature 

As a fabrication of our own consciousness, our assignations of meaning are no less “real”, but since humans and the fabrications of our consciousness are routinely fraught with error, it makes sense, to me, to, sometimes, question such fabrications.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 January 2012 01:34 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 9 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  4
Joined  2011-12-29

Yeah, that’s pretty much what I’m saying, TimB. After the adrenals wear out, well I’m not knowledgeable if anything will be even close to as intense as it used to be, the subjective experience that is (which we probably can get a beter view into through empirical data). If they wear out so much that it’s much weaker then I guess more slack activities become more worth doing. That also means aging REALLY sucks. But pershaps one can get transplanted new adrenal glands. Untill I have a better sense of the exact changes and how it affects experience, and possibly also experience it myself, I can’t get a wholly accurate picture of how life would need to be then. Maybe there’s more to it than just the adrenals too. Maybe a general outline for how the best lifestyle after adrenal wearout looks like can be made. Keeping in shape would still be necessary.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 January 2012 01:48 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 10 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3313
Joined  2011-11-04
PhilosopherQueen - 01 January 2012 01:34 AM

Yeah, that’s pretty much what I’m saying, TimB. After the adrenals wear out, well I’m not knowledgeable if anything will be even close to as intense as it used to be, the subjective experience that is (which we probably can get a beter view into through empirical data). If they wear out so much that it’s much weaker then I guess more slack activities become more worth doing. That also means aging REALLY sucks. But pershaps one can get transplanted new adrenal glands. Untill I have a better sense of the exact changes and how it affects experience, and possibly also experience it myself, I can’t get a wholly accurate picture of how life would need to be then. Maybe there’s more to it than just the adrenals too. Maybe a general outline for how the best lifestyle after adrenal wearout looks like can be made. Keeping in shape would still be necessary.

And using technology and other aides to enhance the perceptual abilities that fade…

Well, I wish you the best in your quest for an intense life, and Happy New Year to you and all.

 Signature 

As a fabrication of our own consciousness, our assignations of meaning are no less “real”, but since humans and the fabrications of our consciousness are routinely fraught with error, it makes sense, to me, to, sometimes, question such fabrications.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 January 2012 09:23 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 11 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  4
Joined  2011-12-29

Hey thanks man! smile Happy new year to you too.

[ Edited: 01 January 2012 01:46 PM by PhilosopherQueen ]
Profile