Philosophy Discussion Forums

Synthesis wrote: Please consider the following. If you step out and peer up into the night sky [approximately 44.34 degrees, 35 minutes, 21 seconds facing due north], there is an object sitting on a an asteroid which is approximately 425M light years away [sorry, there is also no light available]. What can you tell me about this object?

Your cube is what you believe it is only from an extremely narrow point-of-view, and then, it is really not that at all. The layers of subjectivity that gives rise to our human reality are infinite and ever changing [as all conditions surrounding, change]. Believing that we can truly understand anything close to its actual Reality is foolhardy given the infinite variability at play.

The entire of basis of science [that we can get closer and closer to the truth] is similar to a small child who believes that he can protect himself from the monsters in the closet by hiding under his pillow. There is no need to understand any of these things. Eat when you are hungry, sleep when you are tired, help others when you are able, so on and so forth. Attempting to understand has only led to misery in this world.

You're talking about attaining absolute objectivity/understanding, which indeed is impossible. You're just restating the principles of Kant, which imo are quite correct. I agree.

But your "solution" is not a solution at all. Men have to try and understand things. That's how we're wired. The solution is to find out how to attain a higher level of consciousness...

Atreyu wrote:You're talking about attaining absolute objectivity/understanding, which indeed is impossible. You're just restating the principles of Kant, which imo are quite correct. I agree.

But your "solution" is not a solution at all. Men have to try and understand things. That's how we're wired. The solution is to find out how to attain a higher level of consciousness...

I am not suggesting anything of the kind. What I am inferring is that the human mind can come nowhere close to Reality, so far away, in fact, that the result of our intellectual miscalculations have been disastrous [on balance]. Please examine our species' historical record in this regard.

I would have no problem siding with you in believing that if man could get close enough to the Truth [intellectually, which might result in an overall positive outcome], but, again, get out your boxscore of the 20th century and refresh your memory of the transgressions that went down, beginning to end.

As much as the perma-Bulls would like to hang their hats on a few accomplishments here and there, the human suffering that has taken place because of man's inability to perceive/interpret with accuracy, clearly demonstrates the outcome, time and again. Greed, anger, and delusion are intellectual constructs and the basis of most evil [actions] that goes down in the name of every damn rationale.

Atreya, your position is much like that of central bankers who swear that what they do is the interests of all people.

Synthesis wrote:

Atreyu wrote:You're talking about attaining absolute objectivity/understanding, which indeed is impossible. You're just restating the principles of Kant, which imo are quite correct. I agree.

But your "solution" is not a solution at all. Men have to try and understand things. That's how we're wired. The solution is to find out how to attain a higher level of consciousness...

I am not suggesting anything of the kind. What I am inferring is that the human mind can come nowhere close to Reality, so far away, in fact, that the result of our intellectual miscalculations have been disastrous [on balance]. Please examine our species' historical record in this regard.

I would have no problem siding with you in believing that if man could get close enough to the Truth [intellectually, which might result in an overall positive outcome], but, again, get out your boxscore of the 20th century and refresh your memory of the transgressions that went down, beginning to end.

As much as the perma-Bulls would like to hang their hats on a few accomplishments here and there, the human suffering that has taken place because of man's inability to perceive/interpret with accuracy, clearly demonstrates the outcome, time and again. Greed, anger, and delusion are intellectual constructs and the basis of most evil [actions] that goes down in the name of every damn rationale.

Atreya, your position is much like that of central bankers who swear that what they do is the interests of all people.

OK, so what is your alternative? Random actions, since no one knows anything on which to base a decision?

LuckyR wrote:

Synthesis wrote: (Nested quote removed.)

I am not suggesting anything of the kind. What I am inferring is that the human mind can come nowhere close to Reality, so far away, in fact, that the result of our intellectual miscalculations have been disastrous [on balance]. Please examine our species' historical record in this regard.

I would have no problem siding with you in believing that if man could get close enough to the Truth [intellectually, which might result in an overall positive outcome], but, again, get out your boxscore of the 20th century and refresh your memory of the transgressions that went down, beginning to end.

As much as the perma-Bulls would like to hang their hats on a few accomplishments here and there, the human suffering that has taken place because of man's inability to perceive/interpret with accuracy, clearly demonstrates the outcome, time and again. Greed, anger, and delusion are intellectual constructs and the basis of most evil [actions] that goes down in the name of every damn rationale.

Atreya, your position is much like that of central bankers who swear that what they do is the interests of all people.

OK, so what is your alternative? Random actions, since no one knows anything on which to base a decision?

Thousands of years ago, folks figured out that simply accepting things as they are is, "The Way." If you do not allow your intellect to alter Reality, then what you must do, becomes apparent. It is taking Reality and morphing it into your personal reality that creates all the problems [greed, fear, anger, delusion, etc.].

It's that simple.

Animals have habits of what we might call understanding that have led to their survival (though tomorrow they may not).

We find ourselves with many of these habits. We question the instincts and extend the understandings. On person is inclined to lose hope and just give up.
Another accepts that his existence requires the animal's seeming humility regarding a world full of vexing partially known objects.

Synthesis wrote:

LuckyR wrote: (Nested quote removed.)


OK, so what is your alternative? Random actions, since no one knows anything on which to base a decision?

Thousands of years ago, folks figured out that simply accepting things as they are is, "The Way." If you do not allow your intellect to alter Reality, then what you must do, becomes apparent. It is taking Reality and morphing it into your personal reality that creates all the problems [greed, fear, anger, delusion, etc.].

It's that simple.

Except that things aren't what they appear to be, according to your theory. Basic circular logic. Sorry, there's no "there" there.

Synthesis wrote: Thousands of years ago, folks figured out that simply accepting things as they are is, "The Way." If you do not allow your intellect to alter Reality, then what you must do, becomes apparent. It is taking Reality and morphing it into your personal reality that creates all the problems [greed, fear, anger, delusion, etc.].
It's that simple.

This "don't think, just do" approach - do you suppose it has ever led to someone making a big mistake?

Chili wrote:

Synthesis wrote: Thousands of years ago, folks figured out that simply accepting things as they are is, "The Way." If you do not allow your intellect to alter Reality, then what you must do, becomes apparent. It is taking Reality and morphing it into your personal reality that creates all the problems [greed, fear, anger, delusion, etc.].
It's that simple.

This "don't think, just do" approach - do you suppose it has ever led to someone making a big mistake?

Suppose you are buzzing down your favorite bumper to bumper freeway [with your fifteen hundred of your closest friends] at 80mph. In order to maintain life, you must make [literally] an infinite number of calculations and decisions every moment. What would happen if you decided to "think-out" the decisions you were making in the common way we think about thinking?

In simply acting [IOW, seeing things as close as possible to what they really are] instead of applying our rationale, [generally speaking] we will make the best decisions. The less processing, the closer we are to the Truth. It is why our first impression is generally the correct one.

Synthesis wrote: In simply acting [IOW, seeing things as close as possible to what they really are] instead of applying our rationale, [generally speaking] we will make the best decisions. The less processing, the closer we are to the Truth. It is why our first impression is generally the correct one.

Malcolm Gladwell went to some lengths to describe how and when this works, when it works. It doesn't always work!

A person practices until certain things become "second nature" or "muscle memory". In those cases, enormous success can come from getting your mind out of the way.

Then, there's Luke Skywalker just letting go and letting God- I mean the force. Some people will report things like this happening. But most of the time it is best to be smart and think things through. There's just no getting away from it.

Chili wrote:

Synthesis wrote: In simply acting [IOW, seeing things as close as possible to what they really are] instead of applying our rationale, [generally speaking] we will make the best decisions. The less processing, the closer we are to the Truth. It is why our first impression is generally the correct one.

Malcolm Gladwell went to some lengths to describe how and when this works, when it works. It doesn't always work!

A person practices until certain things become "second nature" or "muscle memory". In those cases, enormous success can come from getting your mind out of the way.

Then, there's Luke Skywalker just letting go and letting God- I mean the force. Some people will report things like this happening. But most of the time it is best to be smart and think things through. There's just no getting away from it.

Give me an example of when it's best to, "think things through."

Synthesis wrote: Give me an example of when it's best to, "think things through."

Are you a financially self-sustaining adult?
Have you ever made a decision?
What level of education have you attained?

Or, at least, these are the incredulous questions which spring to mind. Take them as you wish.

Chili wrote:

Synthesis wrote: Give me an example of when it's best to, "think things through."

Are you a financially self-sustaining adult?
Have you ever made a decision?
What level of education have you attained?

Or, at least, these are the incredulous questions which spring to mind. Take them as you wish.

There a two ways to approach a situation. One is to do what many would [what you suggest], that is, "think it through." The other method is to follow the course I suggest, which is to see things as they are. If you choose option two, the answers sought make themselves apparent immediately. If you choose option one, then you will begin with Reality, then subjecting it to all of your fears, anxieties, desires, so on and so forth. What you will end up with is rarely the best decision, instead, one which is consistent with your emotional/intellectual baggage.

Which path do you believe is the more prudent?

Synthesis wrote: There a two ways to approach a situation. One is to do what many would [what you suggest], that is, "think it through." The other method is to follow the course I suggest, which is to see things as they are. If you choose option two, the answers sought make themselves apparent immediately. If you choose option one, then you will begin with Reality, then subjecting it to all of your fears, anxieties, desires, so on and so forth. What you will end up with is rarely the best decision, instead, one which is consistent with your emotional/intellectual baggage.

Which path do you believe is the more prudent?

Seeing things "as they are" is the approach of a child, or someone who has never been wrong, or does not admit nor remember being wrong. Debates take place here and elsewhere because the 3 blind men have different views of taking Elephants "as they are."

I don't take what you're saying at face value. You don't know what you're saying.

Chili wrote:

Synthesis wrote: There a two ways to approach a situation. One is to do what many would [what you suggest], that is, "think it through." The other method is to follow the course I suggest, which is to see things as they are. If you choose option two, the answers sought make themselves apparent immediately. If you choose option one, then you will begin with Reality, then subjecting it to all of your fears, anxieties, desires, so on and so forth. What you will end up with is rarely the best decision, instead, one which is consistent with your emotional/intellectual baggage.

Which path do you believe is the more prudent?

Seeing things "as they are" is the approach of a child, or someone who has never been wrong, or does not admit nor remember being wrong. Debates take place here and elsewhere because the 3 blind men have different views of taking Elephants "as they are."

I don't take what you're saying at face value. You don't know what you're saying.

All things knowable are constantly changing. If you are interested in variety, you have infinite choice. If it is the Truth you seek, then you might wish to consider things as they are.

And you are 100% correct when you state that I do not know what I am saying. You just don't know why.

Synthesis wrote:

Chili wrote: (Nested quote removed.)


Are you a financially self-sustaining adult?
Have you ever made a decision?
What level of education have you attained?

Or, at least, these are the incredulous questions which spring to mind. Take them as you wish.

There a two ways to approach a situation. One is to do what many would [what you suggest], that is, "think it through." The other method is to follow the course I suggest, which is to see things as they are. If you choose option two, the answers sought make themselves apparent immediately. If you choose option one, then you will begin with Reality, then subjecting it to all of your fears, anxieties, desires, so on and so forth. What you will end up with is rarely the best decision, instead, one which is consistent with your emotional/intellectual baggage.

Which path do you believe is the more prudent?

Well, if you have low down right sided abdominal pain and nausea and vomiting and you feel weak and hot and all you want to do is crawl in bed and curl into a ball, I suggest you think it through and head to the ER to have your appendix out instead of dying in your bed.