Reason and Reality

There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
User avatar
Typhoon
Posts: 27242
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm
Location: 関西

Reason and Reality

Post by Typhoon »

Quillette | Reason and Reality in an Era of Conspiracy
During the last three years, I have surveyed around 600 students and found some depressing trends. Approximately half of these students believe they have dreams that predict the future. Half believe in ghosts. A third of them believe aliens already visit our planet. A third believe that AIDS is a man-made disease created to destroy specific social groups. A third believe that the 1969 moon landing never happened. And a third believe that Princess Diana was assassinated by the royal family. Importantly, it’s not the same third that believes all these things. There is not a consistently gullible group that believes every wacky thing. Rather, the same student will be utterly dogmatic about one strange theory, but dismissive and disdainful about another.

There appears to be a two-step breakdown in critical thinking. Unlimited information, without logical training, leads to a crude form of skepticism in students. Everything is doubtful and everything is possible. Since that state of suspended commitment is not tenable, it is usually followed by an almost arbitrary dogmatism.
May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
User avatar
Nonc Hilaire
Posts: 6168
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:28 am

Re: Reason and Reality

Post by Nonc Hilaire »

Typhoon wrote:Quillette | Reason and Reality in an Era of Conspiracy
During the last three years, I have surveyed around 600 students and found some depressing trends. Approximately half of these students believe they have dreams that predict the future. Half believe in ghosts. A third of them believe aliens already visit our planet. A third believe that AIDS is a man-made disease created to destroy specific social groups. A third believe that the 1969 moon landing never happened. And a third believe that Princess Diana was assassinated by the royal family. Importantly, it’s not the same third that believes all these things. There is not a consistently gullible group that believes every wacky thing. Rather, the same student will be utterly dogmatic about one strange theory, but dismissive and disdainful about another.

There appears to be a two-step breakdown in critical thinking. Unlimited information, without logical training, leads to a crude form of skepticism in students. Everything is doubtful and everything is possible. Since that state of suspended commitment is not tenable, it is usually followed by an almost arbitrary dogmatism.
People do fall short in critical thinking, but when the people are decieved by false official information illogical opinions are assured. The professor neatly chooses the wierdest versions of unofficial narratives and avoids AGM, the Kennedy and King assassinations, chemtrails, the deep state and other "conspiracy theories" which have been proven that the so-called poor thinkers are often correct.

Even when their conclusions are incorrect they often identify important unasked questions and facts which the official narrative spinners ignore.
“Christ has no body now but yours. Yours are the eyes through which he looks with compassion on this world. Yours are the feet with which he walks among His people to do good. Yours are the hands through which he blesses His creation.”

Teresa of Ávila
noddy
Posts: 11318
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 3:09 pm

Re: Reason and Reality

Post by noddy »

to play devils advocate.... this is called multicultural.

if people want the semi embarrased about your own culture anglo scientist thing to be dominant they better work out how to propogate it :P
ultracrepidarian
Simple Minded

Re: Reason and Reality

Post by Simple Minded »

noddy wrote:to play devils advocate.... this is called multicultural.

if people want the semi embarrased about your own culture anglo scientist thing to be dominant they better work out how to propogate it :P
:lol:

Amen. What is more multi-cultis than subjective beliefs in troof?

People who don't think like me are something-ist or something-phobes!
User avatar
kmich
Posts: 1087
Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2014 11:46 am

Re: Reason and Reality

Post by kmich »

I suppose it always amusing to address the foolishness of others, but it is not as entertaining to deal with one’s own. It always reassuring to view oneself as reasonable and others less so or to find some distance that a light-hearted archness offers from the entire problem.

If the author’s recommendations for educational improvements requiring such things as classes in logic and fallacies of argumentation were a solution, those who study such subjects should be less prone to irrational biases than everyone else. I have not found that to be the case. Probably the greatest logician of the 20th century, Kurt Gödel, died of starvation after refusing to eat since he feared his food was being poisoned. Smart, well educated people just tend to be better at defending their biases.

Goofiness in memory, understanding, and reasoning, is a universal factor in our perennial human, mixed-up-ness. The best have some insight into their failings, and the worst deny them and insist on their righteousness or their “objectivity.” Dostoevsky parodied in this by narrating the story of the logical atheist intellectual, Ivan Karamazov, becoming incredulous and unable to cope with the visitation of the Devil who reflected his confused and troubled conscience.

People need reliable information to live but they also need to have narratives that give existential meaning to their lives and communities. For millennia, human beings gathered in dwellings, temples, around campfires to share stories about ancestors, their relationship with nature, and the various gods and powers that dwell in their world. “Fact,” particularly as we understand it today, did not enter into these discussions. These were narratives that have formed the basis of meaningful understandings of life and death over periods of our history in order to provide the people of the time with the courage to face the threats and challenges of living, losing loves lived and lost, social dislocation, and dying. These were not lectures in science, logic, or historical scholarship. They form the basis of scripture, art, and literature, the myths and narratives that have guided human communities from Vedic hymns, to Greek tragedies, to the narrative of the Exodus from Egypt, to the Beatitudes, and so on. Are these narratives “rational,” “logical,” or “historical?” Not particularly, but that was not the point for most of them. Did Euripides employ his Deus ex Machina because he believed such powers were “facts” or as dramatic devices to illustrate insights and meanings of life as he understood them in his tragedies?

In our past, these existential narratives were guarded by stable, religious traditions, but as these have receded in power and importance in many “developed” societies, our stories have been increasingly turned over to the laws and institutions of government and to the assorted institutions of politics, education, press, and commerce. Wherever we are in history though, when major change and dislocation happens, and people no longer have the narratives available that are adequate for the existential challenges of their age, the process is similar. People lose faith in their contemporary religious or secular institutions and traditions, and this spawns increasing self-absorption as individuals and within fragmented groups. This, in turn, instigates un-moored group and personal narratives not in the service of shared, transcendent meaning, but instead to further a self-preoccupied narcissism, to nurse grievances, and to justify group paranoia.

That is pretty much where we are in the US today. We lack not only a sense of shared citizenry or collective good, but even a shared body of fact or a collective mode of reasoning toward the truth. Do I have an answer? No, not really. Further logical training will not be of much use in addressing this. Our secular institutions have been so neglected, maligned and deteriorated, I cannot see any narrative emerging from any of those that will help us discover meanings we can all share to go forth together as a people. Our religious institutions have become parasitic and useless, one hooked into therapeutic culture spawning feel good about yourself and positive thinking narratives, and the other side hooked into politics with the fetishization of power, grievance, and strident, partisan animosities toward the perceived "other." Our decadence is not debauchery but terminal self-absorption which can be understood as an irreversible condition — the last stage before societal collapse.

My faith informs me that the emergence of a guiding shared narrative for us all could be provided through the grace of God, but I also know that God is unlikely to assist souls lost in the wilderness bumping into trees and into each other until they confront that soul crushing wasteland that they have created for themselves and those who have suffered to know them and seek God's grace and forgiveness. I have endured that humiliating process more than once in my own life. I don’t foresee that happening for our nation in my lifetime, although my pessimism, perhaps born of my experiences over the past year, may be my own, irrational bias.
noddy
Posts: 11318
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 3:09 pm

Re: Reason and Reality

Post by noddy »

well, that is the battle of the moment is it not.

as a personal example on this in my programming/electronics world I recently did a contract with indian and bangladeshi contracters and if someone had of done a survey on rationality using these metrics it would have looked terrible indeed.

most (heh) of the guys were highly rational and reality based within the subset of the task at hand however the moment you left that and moved to life in general all sorts of beliefs are possible... interactions with dead ancestors, reincarnation, cooky conspiracy theories, faith healing, to name but a few

a shared narrative is a fragile thing - push to hard and you get blow back and accusations of cultural genocide, ignore it and you get seperate nations forming within the larger one.

rationality is itself only a tool for solving physical problems - it doesnt help so much with an enjoyable life.
ultracrepidarian
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Reason and Reality

Post by Mr. Perfect »

Fascinating.
Censorship isn't necessary
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Reason and Reality

Post by Mr. Perfect »

Typhoon wrote:Quillette | Reason and Reality in an Era of Conspiracy
During the last three years, I have surveyed around 600 students and found some depressing trends. Approximately half of these students believe they have dreams that predict the future. Half believe in ghosts. A third of them believe aliens already visit our planet. A third believe that AIDS is a man-made disease created to destroy specific social groups. A third believe that the 1969 moon landing never happened. And a third believe that Princess Diana was assassinated by the royal family. Importantly, it’s not the same third that believes all these things. There is not a consistently gullible group that believes every wacky thing. Rather, the same student will be utterly dogmatic about one strange theory, but dismissive and disdainful about another.

There appears to be a two-step breakdown in critical thinking. Unlimited information, without logical training, leads to a crude form of skepticism in students. Everything is doubtful and everything is possible. Since that state of suspended commitment is not tenable, it is usually followed by an almost arbitrary dogmatism.
1) I do not have dreams that predict the future. Not yet ;) . But I experience deja vu once a month.
2) I don't believe in ghosts
3) I am highly skeptical of aliens
4) I don't think AIDS is man made
5) I believe in the moon landing
6) I have no opinion on Princess Diana, other than she died in a car crash
Censorship isn't necessary
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Reason and Reality

Post by Mr. Perfect »

kmich wrote:I suppose it always amusing to address the foolishness of others, but it is not as entertaining to deal with one’s own. It always reassuring to view oneself as reasonable and others less so or to find some distance that a light-hearted archness offers from the entire problem.

If the author’s recommendations for educational improvements requiring such things as classes in logic and fallacies of argumentation were a solution, those who study such subjects should be less prone to irrational biases than everyone else. I have not found that to be the case. Probably the greatest logician of the 20th century, Kurt Gödel, died of starvation after refusing to eat since he feared his food was being poisoned. Smart, well educated people just tend to be better at defending their biases.
Sometimes well educated aren't even smart. Read Paul Krugman's twitter some time.
Goofiness in memory, understanding, and reasoning, is a universal factor in our perennial human, mixed-up-ness. The best have some insight into their failings, and the worst deny them and insist on their righteousness or their “objectivity.” Dostoevsky parodied in this by narrating the story of the logical atheist intellectual, Ivan Karamazov, becoming incredulous and unable to cope with the visitation of the Devil who reflected his confused and troubled conscience.

People need reliable information to live but they also need to have narratives that give existential meaning to their lives and communities. For millennia, human beings gathered in dwellings, temples, around campfires to share stories about ancestors, their relationship with nature, and the various gods and powers that dwell in their world. “Fact,” particularly as we understand it today, did not enter into these discussions. These were narratives that have formed the basis of meaningful understandings of life and death over periods of our history in order to provide the people of the time with the courage to face the threats and challenges of living, losing loves lived and lost, social dislocation, and dying. These were not lectures in science, logic, or historical scholarship. They form the basis of scripture, art, and literature, the myths and narratives that have guided human communities from Vedic hymns, to Greek tragedies, to the narrative of the Exodus from Egypt, to the Beatitudes, and so on. Are these narratives “rational,” “logical,” or “historical?” Not particularly, but that was not the point for most of them. Did Euripides employ his Deus ex Machina because he believed such powers were “facts” or as dramatic devices to illustrate insights and meanings of life as he understood them in his tragedies?
Yes and no.
In our past, these existential narratives were guarded by stable, religious traditions, but as these have receded in power and importance in many “developed” societies, our stories have been increasingly turned over to the laws and institutions of government and to the assorted institutions of politics, education, press, and commerce.
Only if you let it. I have turned over less to "institutions" than ever before in my life.
Wherever we are in history though, when major change and dislocation happens, and people no longer have the narratives available that are adequate for the existential challenges of their age, the process is similar. People lose faith in their contemporary religious or secular institutions and traditions, and this spawns increasing self-absorption as individuals and within fragmented groups. This, in turn, instigates un-moored group and personal narratives not in the service of shared, transcendent meaning, but instead to further a self-preoccupied narcissism, to nurse grievances, and to justify group paranoia.
I think it is more to do with social media. You are just hearing things you wouldn't have heard before.
That is pretty much where we are in the US today. We lack not only a sense of shared citizenry or collective good, but even a shared body of fact or a collective mode of reasoning toward the truth.
Some of us do. Some of us don't.
Do I have an answer? No, not really. Further logical training will not be of much use in addressing this. Our secular institutions have been so neglected, maligned and deteriorated, I cannot see any narrative emerging from any of those that will help us discover meanings we can all share to go forth together as a people. Our religious institutions have become parasitic and useless, one hooked into therapeutic culture spawning feel good about yourself and positive thinking narratives, and the other side hooked into politics with the fetishization of power, grievance, and strident, partisan animosities toward the perceived "other." Our decadence is not debauchery but terminal self-absorption which can be understood as an irreversible condition — the last stage before societal collapse.
I'm looking at GDP numbers and it looks like we are heading for the moon.
My faith informs me that the emergence of a guiding shared narrative for us all could be provided through the grace of God, but I also know that God is unlikely to assist souls lost in the wilderness bumping into trees and into each other until they confront that soul crushing wasteland that they have created for themselves and those who have suffered to know them and seek God's grace and forgiveness. I have endured that humiliating process more than once in my own life. I don’t foresee that happening for our nation in my lifetime, although my pessimism, perhaps born of my experiences over the past year, may be my own, irrational bias.
Would be interested to hear more.
Last edited by Mr. Perfect on Fri Dec 22, 2017 2:53 am, edited 2 times in total.
Censorship isn't necessary
Simple Minded

Re: Reason and Reality

Post by Simple Minded »

kmich wrote:I suppose it always amusing to address the foolishness of others, but it is not as entertaining to deal with one’s own. It always reassuring to view oneself as reasonable and others less so or to find some distance that a light-hearted archness offers from the entire problem.

If the author’s recommendations for educational improvements requiring such things as classes in logic and fallacies of argumentation were a solution, those who study such subjects should be less prone to irrational biases than everyone else. I have not found that to be the case. Probably the greatest logician of the 20th century, Kurt Gödel, died of starvation after refusing to eat since he feared his food was being poisoned. Smart, well educated people just tend to be better at defending their biases.

Goofiness in memory, understanding, and reasoning, is a universal factor in our perennial human, mixed-up-ness. The best have some insight into their failings, and the worst deny them and insist on their righteousness or their “objectivity.” Dostoevsky parodied in this by narrating the story of the logical atheist intellectual, Ivan Karamazov, becoming incredulous and unable to cope with the visitation of the Devil who reflected his confused and troubled conscience.

People need reliable information to live but they also need to have narratives that give existential meaning to their lives and communities. For millennia, human beings gathered in dwellings, temples, around campfires to share stories about ancestors, their relationship with nature, and the various gods and powers that dwell in their world. “Fact,” particularly as we understand it today, did not enter into these discussions. These were narratives that have formed the basis of meaningful understandings of life and death over periods of our history in order to provide the people of the time with the courage to face the threats and challenges of living, losing loves lived and lost, social dislocation, and dying. These were not lectures in science, logic, or historical scholarship. They form the basis of scripture, art, and literature, the myths and narratives that have guided human communities from Vedic hymns, to Greek tragedies, to the narrative of the Exodus from Egypt, to the Beatitudes, and so on. Are these narratives “rational,” “logical,” or “historical?” Not particularly, but that was not the point for most of them. Did Euripides employ his Deus ex Machina because he believed such powers were “facts” or as dramatic devices to illustrate insights and meanings of life as he understood them in his tragedies?

In our past, these existential narratives were guarded by stable, religious traditions, but as these have receded in power and importance in many “developed” societies, our stories have been increasingly turned over to the laws and institutions of government and to the assorted institutions of politics, education, press, and commerce. Wherever we are in history though, when major change and dislocation happens, and people no longer have the narratives available that are adequate for the existential challenges of their age, the process is similar. People lose faith in their contemporary religious or secular institutions and traditions, and this spawns increasing self-absorption as individuals and within fragmented groups. This, in turn, instigates un-moored group and personal narratives not in the service of shared, transcendent meaning, but instead to further a self-preoccupied narcissism, to nurse grievances, and to justify group paranoia.

That is pretty much where we are in the US today. We lack not only a sense of shared citizenry or collective good, but even a shared body of fact or a collective mode of reasoning toward the truth. Do I have an answer? No, not really. Further logical training will not be of much use in addressing this. Our secular institutions have been so neglected, maligned and deteriorated, I cannot see any narrative emerging from any of those that will help us discover meanings we can all share to go forth together as a people. Our religious institutions have become parasitic and useless, one hooked into therapeutic culture spawning feel good about yourself and positive thinking narratives, and the other side hooked into politics with the fetishization of power, grievance, and strident, partisan animosities toward the perceived "other." Our decadence is not debauchery but terminal self-absorption which can be understood as an irreversible condition — the last stage before societal collapse.

My faith informs me that the emergence of a guiding shared narrative for us all could be provided through the grace of God, but I also know that God is unlikely to assist souls lost in the wilderness bumping into trees and into each other until they confront that soul crushing wasteland that they have created for themselves and those who have suffered to know them and seek God's grace and forgiveness. I have endured that humiliating process more than once in my own life. I don’t foresee that happening for our nation in my lifetime, although my pessimism, perhaps born of my experiences over the past year, may be my own, irrational bias.
Very well written and interesting, as always kmich. I appreciate the honest self-analysis.

Not sure if "America" is more splintered today than previously, or it is simply a matter of more distractions and foci. When everyone becomes a commentator and broadcaster, it is simply easier to be aware of the 300,000,000+ parallel universes existing in the US, or the 7,000,000,000+ parallel universes existing in the world.

As always, the internal battle must come first. "Between stimulus and response, man has the ability to choose!" But choice even includes which stimuli to focus upon and which to ignore.

Based on my experience with people, the groups of "us" and "them" are always in flux. Easy to witness heated arguments about religion or politics get tossed aside when it comes time to accomplish a common task or enjoy a shared form of recreation.
User avatar
kmich
Posts: 1087
Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2014 11:46 am

Re: Reason and Reality

Post by kmich »

Simple Minded wrote: Not sure if "America" is more splintered today than previously, or it is simply a matter of more distractions and foci. When everyone becomes a commentator and broadcaster, it is simply easier to be aware of the 300,000,000+ parallel universes existing in the US, or the 7,000,000,000+ parallel universes existing in the world.

As always, the internal battle must come first. "Between stimulus and response, man has the ability to choose!" But choice even includes which stimuli to focus upon and which to ignore.

Based on my experience with people, the groups of "us" and "them" are always in flux. Easy to witness heated arguments about religion or politics get tossed aside when it comes time to accomplish a common task or enjoy a shared form of recreation.
I sometimes wished I shared your optimism, SM. I suppose it is reassuring to believe that common purposes will be rediscovered in the face of new challenges. After all, there certainly have been more serious periods of splintering in our history, and the conventional wisdom has usually been that we have gone through worse before and managed to do fine, so we will do so again. However, there is nothing inevitable in history, and human collective arrangements rise and fall.

Yes, we do have choices to make and to be responsible for, and, yes, our reflective "internal battles" will be necessary, but how will our decisions move beyond solipsism to engage others? How will our decisions as a society be formed? Our reasoning always flows from assumptions, and its effectiveness depend entirely upon their validity. What if assumptions are not only not shared, but also any shared method to determine truth and falsehood is not available? What if what is true is ultimately determined by only what supports one’s own identity, attitudes, and beliefs? Will our social and political institutions step in to provide us a common ground for determining truth from falsehood? I find that very unlikely. These have either been sorely neglected (laws, legal processes, and infrastructures), co-opted by different groups for partisan purposes (religions, education, the press, the courts), or customarily and opportunistically denigrated (i.e. the “government”).

What if we face a crisis, a serious economic downturn (we are overdue), a pandemic, or a war? If our institutions have rotted, would we as citizens rise to the occasion? We have been cultivated to be consumers of things, ideas, and identities, and not to be citizens with a common destiny in a shared, civil society. We have become complacent, cynical, and/or tribalistic, each of which would serve to deflect any responsibility for urgent problems with a passive shoulder shrug, a knowing ersatz “worldly wise” sneer or attempt at dark humor, or acrimonious finger pointing and recriminations to our favored outsiders and enemies. Exploiting such attitudes to their advantage, aspiring tyrants with their single party systems promising "order" and a return to a lost, national greatness are frequently the historical antidote to such situations.

I honestly hope I am wrong for the sake of my children and future generations. Over the years, I probably have seen too much of how easy it is for societies to become undone and how difficult it frequently is to recover any semblance of community.
Simple Minded

Re: Reason and Reality

Post by Simple Minded »

kmich wrote:
Simple Minded wrote: Not sure if "America" is more splintered today than previously, or it is simply a matter of more distractions and foci. When everyone becomes a commentator and broadcaster, it is simply easier to be aware of the 300,000,000+ parallel universes existing in the US, or the 7,000,000,000+ parallel universes existing in the world.

As always, the internal battle must come first. "Between stimulus and response, man has the ability to choose!" But choice even includes which stimuli to focus upon and which to ignore.

Based on my experience with people, the groups of "us" and "them" are always in flux. Easy to witness heated arguments about religion or politics get tossed aside when it comes time to accomplish a common task or enjoy a shared form of recreation.
I sometimes wished I shared your optimism, SM. I suppose it is reassuring to believe that common purposes will be rediscovered in the face of new challenges. After all, there certainly have been more serious periods of splintering in our history, and the conventional wisdom has usually been that we have gone through worse before and managed to do fine, so we will do so again. However, there is nothing inevitable in history, and human collective arrangements rise and fall.

Yes, we do have choices to make and to be responsible for, and, yes, our reflective "internal battles" will be necessary, but how will our decisions move beyond solipsism to engage others? How will our decisions as a society be formed? Our reasoning always flows from assumptions, and its effectiveness depend entirely upon their validity. What if assumptions are not only not shared, but also any shared method to determine truth and falsehood is not available? What if what is true is ultimately determined by only what supports one’s own identity, attitudes, and beliefs? Will our social and political institutions step in to provide us a common ground for determining truth from falsehood? I find that very unlikely. These have either been sorely neglected (laws, legal processes, and infrastructures), co-opted by different groups for partisan purposes (religions, education, the press, the courts), or customarily and opportunistically denigrated (i.e. the “government”).

What if we face a crisis, a serious economic downturn (we are overdue), a pandemic, or a war? If our institutions have rotted, would we as citizens rise to the occasion? We have been cultivated to be consumers of things, ideas, and identities, and not to be citizens with a common destiny in a shared, civil society. We have become complacent, cynical, and/or tribalistic, each of which would serve to deflect any responsibility for urgent problems with a passive shoulder shrug, a knowing ersatz “worldly wise” sneer or attempt at dark humor, or acrimonious finger pointing and recriminations to our favored outsiders and enemies. Exploiting such attitudes to their advantage, aspiring tyrants with their single party systems promising "order" and a return to a lost, national greatness are frequently the historical antidote to such situations.

I honestly hope I am wrong for the sake of my children and future generations. Over the years, I probably have seen too much of how easy it is for societies to become undone and how difficult it frequently is to recover any semblance of community.
Well stated, and much to think about. I need to spend some more time thinking. It just seems to me that during relatively good times, people often get very petty, and focus on trivial stuff. Very few common threats exist these days I think.

Lots of different zip codes out there, I'm sure some are exactly what you are looking for or may contain what you think has been lost.

Lots of imaginary dragons have taken the place of common goals or shared interests. Back when there were only 3 channels on TV, and only one sport per season in high school, there was less opportunity to splinter.

but I'm not sure I'm an optimist, but it seems to me in cyberspace/virtual reality, there is no common ground, simply imagination.

"The mind is a place in itself, and can make a heaven of hell or a hell of heaven."
Last edited by Simple Minded on Sat Dec 23, 2017 1:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Heracleum Persicum
Posts: 11571
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 7:38 pm

Re: Reason and Reality

Post by Heracleum Persicum »

.
kmich wrote:.
Simple Minded wrote:.
Not sure if "America" is more splintered today than previously, or it is simply a matter of more distractions and foci. When everyone becomes a commentator and broadcaster, it is simply easier to be aware of the 300,000,000+ parallel universes existing in the US, or the 7,000,000,000+ parallel universes existing in the world.

As always, the internal battle must come first. "Between stimulus and response, man has the ability to choose!" But choice even includes which stimuli to focus upon and which to ignore.

Based on my experience with people, the groups of "us" and "them" are always in flux. Easy to witness heated arguments about religion or politics get tossed aside when it comes time to accomplish a common task or enjoy a shared form of recreation.
,
I sometimes wished I shared your optimism, SM. I suppose it is reassuring to believe that common purposes will be rediscovered in the face of new challenges. After all, there certainly have been more serious periods of splintering in our history, and the conventional wisdom has usually been that we have gone through worse before and managed to do fine, so we will do so again. However, there is nothing inevitable in history, and human collective arrangements rise and fall.

Yes, we do have choices to make and to be responsible for, and, yes, our reflective "internal battles" will be necessary, but how will our decisions move beyond solipsism to engage others? How will our decisions as a society be formed? Our reasoning always flows from assumptions, and its effectiveness depend entirely upon their validity. What if assumptions are not only not shared, but also any shared method to determine truth and falsehood is not available? What if what is true is ultimately determined by only what supports one’s own identity, attitudes, and beliefs? Will our social and political institutions step in to provide us a common ground for determining truth from falsehood? I find that very unlikely. These have either been sorely neglected (laws, legal processes, and infrastructures), co-opted by different groups for partisan purposes (religions, education, the press, the courts), or customarily and opportunistically denigrated (i.e. the “government”).

What if we face a crisis, a serious economic downturn (we are overdue), a pandemic, or a war? If our institutions have rotted, would we as citizens rise to the occasion? We have been cultivated to be consumers of things, ideas, and identities, and not to be citizens with a common destiny in a shared, civil society. We have become complacent, cynical, and/or tribalistic, each of which would serve to deflect any responsibility for urgent problems with a passive shoulder shrug, a knowing ersatz “worldly wise” sneer or attempt at dark humor, or acrimonious finger pointing and recriminations to our favored outsiders and enemies. Exploiting such attitudes to their advantage, aspiring tyrants with their single party systems promising "order" and a return to a lost, national greatness are frequently the historical antidote to such situations.

I honestly hope I am wrong for the sake of my children and future generations. Over the years, I probably have seen too much of how easy it is for societies to become undone and how difficult it frequently is to recover any semblance of community.

.


Notion, American civil war from 1861 to 1865, changed the culture, settled things, mistaken, misunderstood.

Those mindsets can not be settled by defeat in battlefield, neither can be legislated.

There many America .. mid America, East coast America, West Coast America, Southern states , norther states .. they different people, different culture, different values, different worldview, different level of education .. some utterly atheists, others sincerely believing in "Rupture" or universe made in 7 days .. and .. everybody armed to their teeth.

Above issues are not settled by American civil war from 1861 to 1865 .. in contrary, those issues below ash.

America in war with itself, in many fronts .. racial, religion, economic, intolerance etc

Canada, beginning with a "clean sheet of paper", SM :lol:

Canada has non of the "cultural" (and many other) issues US has .. make your bet :D

.
noddy
Posts: 11318
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 3:09 pm

Re: Reason and Reality

Post by noddy »

ultracrepidarian
Simple Minded

Re: Reason and Reality

Post by Simple Minded »

Heracleum Persicum wrote:.


Notion, American civil war from 1861 to 1865, changed the culture, settled things, mistaken, misunderstood.

Those mindsets can not be settled by defeat in battlefield, neither can be legislated.

There many America .. mid America, East coast America, West Coast America, Southern states , norther states .. they different people, different culture, different values, different worldview, different level of education .. some utterly atheists, others sincerely believing in "Rupture" or universe made in 7 days .. and .. everybody armed to their teeth.

Above issues are not settled by American civil war from 1861 to 1865 .. in contrary, those issues below ash.

America in war with itself, in many fronts .. racial, religion, economic, intolerance etc

Canada, beginning with a "clean sheet of paper", SM :lol:

Canada has non of the "cultural" (and many other) issues US has .. make your bet :D

.
yep humans are a messy lot. Freedom of association means people discriminate based on skin color, hair color, eye color, height, weight, wealth, zip codes, occupations, etc. You have only scratched the surface.

Your points are only a big deal to people like yourself. People who are obsessed with group identity and who live in the past. Maybe 15% of the population. But they all have microphones.

America is only at war with itself by the measure of those who wish to rule by enforcing one-size-fits-all (the size they think is proper). They need to learn to celebrate diversity! ;)

If you think there are yuge differences between the US and Canada, you need to get out more HP. Seriously! Unplug from biased MSM and rent a car.

Large populations both encourage and defy stereotyping. So many potential datapoints to measure, and so many conflicting datapoints to resolve. One can find whatever they are looking for, and of course ignore whatever data does not fit their prejudices.

Be careful what you wish for HP! With that long, common, unguarded border between us, if the US goes tits up, Canada as our 51st state won't be far behind. Shortly after you hear that flushing sound, your world will start spinning.

Remember, we're all armed to the teeth..... not even so much as a painted line between us....... :evil:
Last edited by Simple Minded on Sat Dec 23, 2017 3:32 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Simple Minded

Re: Reason and Reality

Post by Simple Minded »

:D

The science is settled. We are better! Therefore they have no rights! And we can ignore them.

HP will be posting pictures of the First Nations people who live in his house on his nickel any day now...... :P
noddy
Posts: 11318
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 3:09 pm

Re: Reason and Reality

Post by noddy »

Simple Minded wrote:
:D

The science is settled. We are better! Therefore they have no rights! And we can ignore them.

HP will be posting pictures of the First Nations people who live in his house on his nickel any day now...... :P
he doesnt need to - clean slate, they dont exist, never did.
ultracrepidarian
Simple Minded

Re: Reason and Reality

Post by Simple Minded »

noddy wrote:
Simple Minded wrote:
:D

The science is settled. We are better! Therefore they have no rights! And we can ignore them.

HP will be posting pictures of the First Nations people who live in his house on his nickel any day now...... :P
he doesnt need to - clean slate, they dont exist, never did.
On this point, I have to concede, HP is right. The Canadian model is much better and more effective. Denial is always the most efficient way of dealing with trouble.

Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil.
User avatar
Parodite
Posts: 5642
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 9:43 pm

Re: Reason and Reality

Post by Parodite »

Simple Minded wrote:
yep humans are a messy lot. Freedom of association means people discriminate based on skin color, hair color, eye color, height, weight, wealth, zip codes, occupations, etc. You have only scratched the surface.

Your points are only a big deal to people like yourself. People who are obsessed with group identity and who live in the past. Maybe 15% of the population. But they all have microphones.

America is only at war with itself by the measure of those who wish to rule by enforcing one-size-fits-all (the size they think is proper). They need to learn to celebrate diversity! ;)
Indeed bro. Maybe it's only 15% who bother with group identity over the top style, but it could be growing. Wouldn't be surprised of it is and will grow the coming decades.

An interesting pain-point is the discussion among people who want civic nationalism versus those who want ethnic nationalism. Both groups abhor regressed leftism, socialism, SJW, Islamism etc but disagree about who can or should occupy the seats of a national identity.

CNs believe that people who share by and large the same cultural, moral and political values can form a national entity.

ENs believe that we all are tribal by nature, that ethnicity and race define our primal loyalty whether we like and admit it or not. They want voluntary segregation along ethnic/racial lines.

ih4RYO1te8s

If labeling matters, I would define myself now as a classical liberal who subscribes to civic nationalism but am willing to consider the plight of the ethnic nationalists. They just come off a tiny whiny. If you seek friends, feel homey among people with the same shades of whiteness or blackness..why would I care? Why would they care if as a white guy I reproduce with a dark skinned woman? I have the feeling not many really care if I do.. and I will pray that continues to be the case.

The good thing about the USA and the West in general seems to me that you don't need to care much about who other people sleep with, reproduce with, what god they believe or not believe in and all the other crummy details and differences that come into play and disappear again in the ever changing reality. Western democracies are civic democracies, thus far and hopefully for a long time to come! Our maybe tribal ethnic natures, or in general the need for group identity/group belonging as individuals can nicely be channeled and expressed through competition in sports and even in politics; if we do it in a civil way and agree that democracy and free speech trump all others.

The freedom to organize a party and invite people you like, with the right mix of similarities and differences that works for you, stands unchallenged. You can even decide to live in close proximity of each other and have a club house for regular cosey socializing. You have a voice in a democracy. You pretty much can say anything you want and express it the way you want in the bigger environment. What more can you ask for. For now, the ethnic nationalists are just another brand of millennial whiners or hard core same old racists.
Deep down I'm very superficial
Simple Minded

Re: Reason and Reality

Post by Simple Minded »

Amen. You...., or the you I imagine.... and I are largely in agreement. Are you a typical member of your community, or an extremist?

I am still waiting for the day I get to meet a stereotypical member of the ________ community. Why are these communities so diverse? I can only labels my files with 8 characters.....

I loved the video. “OMG, she is like, so totally blonde!” “I love labelling others, while despising those who label others incorrectly! OMG! What is their problem?”

You can’t have too many clichés and labels per sentence. “Boomer bullshit” was one of my favorites. A few minutes ago, I did not even know CN's existed, now, I know they are a threat to civilization itself.

Some days, all the inkblots seem like predators! Or as someone once said "The troubles hardest to bear are those that never come."



The flux and the filters fascinate me. “There are 300+ million other people in “our” country, many of whom disagree with me. The American experiment is not working! “

I think a lot of “our common identity/experience” was minimized when modern technology greatly reduced the once common experience of subduing nature. In some parts of Merika, snow and leaves are common seasonal enemies. Karma? Don't talk to me about that BS!

We carefully select the variables we focus upon (or ignore) to enable use of our filters to sort and label “others,” then the righteous get upset by the data their filters produce showing that their prejudices are well founded. “See! I told you! They're all like that!”

Hopefully, the continued parsing of group identity will eventually result in about 7 billion group identity labels, none of which should be individuals, cause that would be hyper-individualist, and we all hate those f**kers!.
User avatar
Heracleum Persicum
Posts: 11571
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 7:38 pm

Re: Reason and Reality

Post by Heracleum Persicum »

.


IS Faith Better Than Doubt ?

This question is compounded during periods like this one, when faith seems to distort reality rather than clarify it, when it’s easily manipulated for low rather than high purpose and when some of those who claim to be people of faith act in ways that bring dishonor to it and themselves.

..

The apostle Thomas clearly thought so. According to the Gospel of John, the other disciples told Thomas that they had seen the risen Lord, to which Thomas replied he wouldn’t believe until he put his fingers in the nail marks in Jesus’ hands and put his hand into Jesus’ side.

Fast-forward a week, when Thomas encounters Jesus, who tells him, “Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe.” Thomas does, to which Jesus replies, “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”

:lol:

Well, don't want hurt feelings, SM, but, this whole thing remembers one at Andy Warhol artwork .. Burgers, hotdogs and ketchup on the wall.

.
User avatar
Heracleum Persicum
Posts: 11571
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 7:38 pm

Re: Reason and Reality

Post by Heracleum Persicum »

fLJBzhcSWTk
User avatar
Typhoon
Posts: 27242
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm
Location: 関西

Re: Reason and Reality

Post by Typhoon »

May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
Simple Minded

Re: Reason and Reality

Post by Simple Minded »

Typhoon wrote:From Socrates to today.

The Spectator | The tradition continues . . .
some things are timeless. Like elitists.

I think it was Abraham Lincoln who said "God must love the deplorables, he made so many of them."
User avatar
Miss_Faucie_Fishtits
Posts: 2152
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 9:58 pm

Re: Reason and Reality

Post by Miss_Faucie_Fishtits »

What we call rational thought is often just a daisy chain of fallacies:

http://bigthink.com/Mind-Matters/so-wha ... ean-anyway

A classic on the topic.......
She irons her jeans, she's evil.........
Post Reply