You have anything on your mind this week?
General musings on how most people don’t actually believe other people exist and cannot conceive that their actions can have consequences for others
“Rule by unprincipled exception versus rule by principled injustice” is fertile ground for thought.
it’s a slippery see-saw
principles basically only have force when they are unyielding, but no principle can account for all possibilities
A truly principled society will inevitably be undone by an unfortunate consequence of principle
Maybe the reason paradoxes are so common is the flexibility they allow for shimmying types of forward motion.
I think I may be reinventing Heidegger’s idea of dialectic.
Well they force you to confront the fact that there’s either an inconsitency in your beliefs or you’re conceptualizing something the wrong way
this is why they are such a useful tool for education
one could lay a strong foundation for potential wisdom by doing nothing more than studying paradoxes and memorizing proverbs
I’d grant that they encourage mental flexibility, but I’m inclined to constrain the value of that.
Children’s minds and bodies are flexible by nature and there’s no use in having them stretch.
There’s some value for adolescents.
It’s very important for adults, who tend to hurt themselves through rigidity.
I wonder what’s the mental equivalent of tai chi.
Reasoning from first principles?
I would say that though haha
Meditating on paradoxes is more like isometric stretching.
Well, reasoning from first principles tai chi is about gently taking every joint of the body through it’s motion.
Correction: Taking every joint through its motion, multiple of which in tandem to practice the mental attitude necessary for coordination.
What’s the equivalent of a mental “joint”?
oooo…that’s actually a really good question
taboos? emotional blockages?
I suppose a mental joint means the axis along which strength/ability can be exercised, so it would be the different types of intelligence.
So mental tai chi would be the gentle application of all the submodules of IQ.
I.e. Relaxed, wide-ranging conversation that stretches verbal and performance in tandem, say by walking along the beach.
So there you go, mental tai chi is going for a walk through the woods and talking through various easy problems with someone.
This feels emotionally satisfying
I like it so much that I distrust it, but i can’t see an easy refutation
But this is probably correct
And it takes us back to Aristotle so we’re in good company
How about going back to your solipsism -> transference one?
Or maybe a better formula would be solipsism -> impunity.
Here’s another paradox for you: why do materialism and solipsism correlate?
Philosophically, you’d expect the opposite.
Solipsism: “Only I exist.”
Materialism: “The existence of what I call ‘me’ is an illusion created by things that actually exist and are not me.”
“There is only mind.”
“There is only matter.”
And yet, decadence predicts them both very strongly.
Is it nothing more complicated than rationalizing moral impunity?
Why then do both also correlate with bigly IQs, which also correlates with a revealed preference for moral behavior?
I suppose the core factor is individual morality.
Call it “locus of judgment”.
The difference being a sensitivity to consequences as part of the bargain. A high-functioning person inclines to solipsism and materialism due to an attitude of extreme ownership, i.e. “I alone can cause anything (solipsism), but I must be mindful that the effects are exactly what I intend (materialism).”
A low-functioning person inclines to solipsism and materialism due to an attitude of extreme disownment. “I alone can experience pleasure and pain (solipsism), and nothing else matters anyway (materialism).”
So the difference is mostly in the way they come to materialism. The smartypants gets there by the necessity of pragmatism and empiricism, and the criminal gets there by mental simplicity.
In either case we have the self-justifying, acting man so admired by insecure intellectuals.
Primitives and mad scientists.
Rick and Morty.
The society that can support materialism is the one in which people don’t need to really engage with others to survive
Hence, no need to really believe in other people
I was just thinking that. Materialism is a post-materialist morality.
Operationally speaking, how does one cure this? Hard to see an approach that doesn’t involve repeated exposure to painful consequences
Materialism is, in the case of both the brute and the mad scientist, an expression of the will to power.
People living in scarcity have more of a “will-to-food”.
But power can be described as the confident assurance of future food.
If someone had the sense to experience privation willingly, I’d probably suggest fasting.
It’s the most direct.
And you don’t have to plan a trip to the Himalayas.
But I guess some people have nothing better to do or talk about than wOrLd TrAveL.
Well it’s the same “will-to-power” of materialism just expressed very slightly differently
I done figured it out. It’s just habituation.
People travel because they get bored, and they talk about it because getting bored means you’re rich.
My indifference to the appeal of new scenery comes from my extreme resistance to habituation.
Probably from living in my head, if we’re being honest.
I don’t get bored of the tree outside my window here because I barely register it anyway.
People aspire to be bored because they think that it means they’re deep
I don’t think dimwits aspire to be bored, but yes I can see that as a midwit thing.
I think for dimwits it’s just a status signal they recognize.
Speaking as a deep person, the characteristic signal you’re looking for is disappointment.
In fact, I’d describe tragedy as the high end of disappointment.
Hence the association.
I’m inclined to agree with that
What makes a tragedy a tragedy is that it could have been avoided
somewhere along the line unwise choices were made
we find ourselves disappointed that different outcomes did not take place
and ideally think about how we could have done better and will do better in the future, which was originally the point
Uh oh, I’m experiencing focus problems from the context switch to memes.
Me: Starts looking up memes
Also me: loses all focus