Why is this exhausting me

[Taknamay]

EDIT: Eh, I've decided to abandon this thread. Please don't think I'm running away or anything, I just don't think this is the right forum to discuss these things. When I made the thread I was just frustrated with a couple people at the time. Please pardon me if this is the improper way of doing things.

And for the record, crazedratsshadow, free will =/= will.

[Beautiful sky]

It's your ideas and you can't push them across or at least need to have some assurance that others are receiving it effectively. It's exhausting when you're doing and without the extraverted functions involved. I hear you fine and have agreed with many of your posts. Stick with the people who give you reassurance that what you're doing is working; we'll support you. My boyfriend said something really interesting; he said, tell people what you think, if you must, tell them more than once, but set a limit then walk away, when they start seeing things your way, then you can say, "well, I'm glad you're starting to see things my way; it took you some time to come around."

[Taknamay]

Okay, well I'm glad someone agrees with many of my posts >_>

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by and . As in, I only talk to myself about these things? <_<

[FDG]

Yeah, stop explaining them, it's better.

[Beautiful sky]

Okay, well I'm glad someone agrees with many of my posts >_>

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by and . As in, I only talk to myself about these things? <_<

lol, no. Ti is having ideas and wanting them to thrive on their own, without the person's need or effort in pushing them through; both Ti and Fi with Ne creative have Se PoLR, so they are more concerned about their ideas but get frustrated when they don't get realized by others; Se PoLR is inability to just let things be without effecting you on a thought (Ti) or emotional (Fi) level (because the object reflects back at the subject's emotional response towards it).

[Taknamay]

Okay, I think I understand a bit better now. >_>

[Aiss]

I propose that there are eight simple explanations for human action:

• Moralism - Because it is right.
• Assimilationism - Because everyone else does it.
• Survivalism - Because I need to.
• Primitivism - Because it is in my nature.
• Nihilism - Because I can.
• Appetitism - Because it feels good.
• Voluntarism - Because I want to.
• Disciplinism - Because I choose to.

omg. change the number before someone correlates it to socionics in some way. powers of two are EVIL.

[anndelise]

For some reason, I am getting tired of debate. I try to explain things to people, and they don't understand. Maybe it's because my beliefs are highly eccentric, to the point where nobody on earth could possible share my beliefs. Maybe it's because I'm insane. But after a few minutes of explaining it, I feel like nothing was gained at all whatsoever.

I consider myself a surrealist. I believe that desires and perceptions are more important than objective reality.

well, for starters, it seems that you are talking about beliefs.
Just as you are debating your belifes, others are debating theirs. You want to explain your beliefs and be understood...they want to explain theirs and be understood.

If you are busy explaining your beliefs, there's not much mention of you attempting to understand their beliefs. So it's like you and them talking over each other. Nothing gets resolved unless you convert them to your beliefs...or they convert you to yours, or you both reference someting that is more objective and that both trust as being more true.

However, you believe that desires and perceptions (aka beliefs) are more important than objective reality. Yet, you're trying to convert others to your own beliefs....where's the respect for the other person's desires and perceptions?

Perhaps its exhausting because when talking billions of people, billions of perceptions, billions of desires, that's a whole lot of complexity you're trying to "resolve" in a few debates with a few people.

[Taknamay]

I'm not trying to convert anyone, I just want people to understand. But sometimes they look at me like I'm a madman.

EDIT: I know what you are saying. Sometimes someone will tell me exactly why they think it's okay for society to value physical beauty, and I find myself unable to agree with them on any level.

[Beautiful sky]

I'm not trying to convert anyone, I just want people to understand. But sometimes they look at me like I'm a madman.

You're not a madman; maybe it is us, the other EII, who understand you and agree with you and who are not making an active effort to comfort you in saying to you or showing you that we get what you're saying.

For some reason, I am getting tired of debate. I try to explain things to people, and they don't understand. Maybe it's because my beliefs are highly eccentric, to the point where nobody on earth could possible share my beliefs. Maybe it's because I'm insane. But after a few minutes of explaining it, I feel like nothing was gained at all whatsoever.

I consider myself a surrealist. I believe that desires and perceptions are more important than objective reality.

well, for starters, it seems that you are talking about beliefs.
Just as you are debating your belifes, others are debating theirs. You want to explain your beliefs and be understood...they want to explain theirs and be understood.

If you are busy explaining your beliefs, there's not much mention of you attempting to understand their beliefs. So it's like you and them talking over each other. Nothing gets resolved unless you convert them to your beliefs...or they convert you to yours, or you both reference someting that is more objective and that both trust as being more true.

However, you believe that desires and perceptions (aka beliefs) are more important than objective reality. Yet, you're trying to convert others to your own beliefs....where's the respect for the other person's desires and perceptions?

Perhaps its exhausting because when talking billions of people, billions of perceptions, billions of desires, that's a whole lot of complexity you're trying to "resolve" in a few debates with a few people.

Spoken like a mirror to show that there are many possibilities before concrete judgements

[anndelise]

I'm not trying to convert anyone, I just want people to understand. But sometimes they look at me like I'm a madman.

so, you're not trying to get them to perceive things how you perceive them?

Why are you explaining anything to them, then?
And what, then, are you debating about?

[FDG]

I'm not trying to convert anyone, I just want people to understand. But sometimes they look at me like I'm a madman.

EDIT: I know what you are saying. Sometimes someone will tell me exactly why they think it's okay for society to value physical beauty, and I find myself unable to agree with them on any level.

Well you don't need any reason, it's just an instinctive biological mechanism which operates to a varying degree and in a subjective fashion.

Plus, many of your points can be easily agreed upon on a theoretical basis, but being a living human being requires their constant violation. Thus anyone in deep agreement with your own worldview would ultimately not be alive and able to agree. It's a self-defeating meme, thus there's a natural resistance towards its dilution.

[Taknamay]

Maybe I'm not exhausted by the debate itself, maybe I'm just exhausted because I have to reiterate so many of my beliefs to make people understand. That is; because the things I'm thinking about are so intertwined, I can't just explain one thing.

I guess that's why posting this was refreshing: I have all/most of my ideas in one place.

[Beautiful sky]

Yeah, I like it.

Nice system. It works.

[DirectorAbbie]

I believe that desires and perceptions are more important than objective reality.

Okay...you're nuts.

[redbaron]

EDIT: I know what you are saying. Sometimes someone will tell me exactly why they think it's okay for society to value physical beauty, and I find myself unable to agree with them on any level.

why does it have to be okay or not okay? It's just a fact of life. You can disagree all you want, but physical beauty IS valued.

[Trevor]

I believe that desires and perceptions are more important than objective reality.

Okay...you're nuts.

:-)

[Taknamay]

Okay...you're nuts.

I suspected that may have been the problem.

[Taknamay]

I think that because reality was incapable of satisfying my desires, I slid into irreality to find what I want.

EDIT: Although, it is relevant to note that I am sliding back into a partial reality.

[InkStrider]

I think that justice is overrated in our society. I don't see an inherent need to punish people who wrong things. If someone did something wrong, it was either because they did not think it was wrong or they don't believe in right and wrong. In the case of the former, it would be wrong to punish them because they believed they were doing the right thing. In the case of the latter, it is wrong to punish them because they do not understand right and wrong.

While there is logic in such a view, the world is illogical in that it operates on the madness of human emotions to an important extent. It is easy for a person to theoretically say I have such and such a stance, but when injustice is inflicted, can one really escape from the desire to not see justice served? As per the Golden Rule, it is natural to want to repay good with good, and likewise evil with evil. Every action has its consequence, good or bad and men can never escape from the consequence of their own actions, regardless of whether they believe their actions had been borne out of good intention or bad, and whether they are able to differentiate between right and wrong.

I think that because reality was incapable of satisfying my desires, I slid into irreality to find what I want.

We have to come back to reality eventually, and to turn away from the comforts of the unreal. Reality will always remain the ultimate judge regardless of what may exist in our heads, because it is only in reality that we may actually obtain what we want.

[rat1]

For some reason, I am getting tired of debate. I try to explain things to people, and they don't understand. Maybe it's because my beliefs are highly eccentric, to the point where nobody on earth could possible share my beliefs. Maybe it's because I'm insane. But after a few minutes of explaining it, I feel like nothing was gained at all whatsoever.

I guess I might as well list some of the beliefs I have.

• I consider myself a surrealist. I believe that desires and perceptions are more important than objective reality.
  
  You are wrong
  
• I am an idealist, in the sense that I am the opposite of a materialist. I believe that the existence of material relies on the ability to perceive it, whereas consciousness is independent. Think about this: If no consciousness existed in the universe, who would be there to observe it? Nobody. If nobody observes it, of what significance is it? Without an observer, reality become meaningless. On the other hand, a consciousness without a universe can still exist because the consciousness can observe its own thoughts.
  
  Your conscious mind is made of organic matter. Consciousness is an emergent property of matter. There is even minute consciousness at the atomic level in the relationship between atoms. Thus there cannot be a world where matter exists without an observer- the relativity between atoms is essentially each observing the other. Infact, I'd argue the basic function of an atom is akin to observation. Your limited definition of consciousness has caused you to be confused about reality.
  
  
• I am a determinist, but I do not believe in the necessity of causality. That is to say, I believe in only one past, present and future. Yet at the same time, I do not believe that one event necessarily comes from another or leads to another. I think that sometimes, events simply occur for no apparent reason.
  
  Then you are not a determinist, you are a hybrid of free will and determinism.. you actually consider the distinction meaningless whether you realize it or not. You could be called a phenomenologist.
  
• I think that justice is overrated in our society. I don't see an inherent need to punish people who wrong things. If someone did something wrong, it was either because they did not think it was wrong or they don't believe in right and wrong. In the case of the former, it would be wrong to punish them because they believed they were doing the right thing. In the case of the latter, it is wrong to punish them because they do not understand right and wrong.
  
  The function of punishment is to uphold society. I do think punishment is overused in our society but I'm not an abolitionist towards it. A total lack of punishment is a degradation of society, which is counter evolutionary and sort of impossible to accomplish.
  
• I think that survival is overrated in our society. If the universe is going to end, what difference does it make what we do until then? The universe will not be worse off without the human race.
  
  Survival is overrated by who? If we are rating our own survival, I hardly think we have overrated it.
  
• I think that beauty is overrated in our society. There is nothing wrong with being ugly. And yet women continue to wear makeup, shave their legs and underarms, all to turn themselves into something they are not. The worst part of it is that it becomes an expectation, and somehow the ones who refuse to wear makeup are the strange ones. I think men have the same problems, but I don't see it nearly as often.
  
  I think this comes from people being disconnected from one another and detached from their senses. Women who don't wear makeup are actually just as attractive to me. I think women overrate the real significance of all the dressing up they do. I told a girl once she looked just as well if not better without her hair died, without her strange outfit and makeup on and she told me she didn't care- she did it for herself and not for men. It's as if women have become preoccupied with the craft of beautification.
  

.

[Taknamay]

crazedratsshadow, I am going to respond to you later, but what struck me most was the fact that you said that I would be better described as a "phenomenologist" than a determinist. Are you speaking of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenomenology_(philosophy) ? Because I have always wondered if there was a better term for what I'm talking about.

[Taknamay]

You are wrong

That is a matter of opinion. "More important" is not something that can be argued without a common measure of importance.

Your conscious mind is made of organic matter. Consciousness is an emergent property of matter. There is even minute consciousness at the atomic level in the relationship between atoms. Thus there cannot be a world where matter exists without an observer- the relativity between atoms is essentially each observing the other. Your limited definition of consciousness has caused you to be confused about reality.

I know what you are talking about. It is certainly a valid explanation, but there's something I fail to understand. Is there a difference between the human consciousness and the atomic consciousness? I find it difficult to empathize with the atom, because the atom seems to act upon formula, not will.

Then you are not a determinist, you are a hybrid of free will and determinism.. you actually consider the distinction meaningless whether you realize it or not. You could be called a phenomenologist.

This is probably true.

The function of punishment is to uphold society. What you're advocating is a degradation of society, which is impossible since it's counter evolution.

I understand that the function of punishment is to uphold society. I am merely saying that it is not inherently good.

Survival is overrated by who? If we are rating our own survival, I hardly think we have overrated it.

By humanists. Perhaps I should make that more clear.

I think this comes from people being disconnected from one another and detached from their senses. Women who don't wear makeup are actually just as attractive to me. I think women overrate the real significance of all the dressing up they do. I told a girl once she looked just as well if not better without her hair died, without her strange outfit and makeup on and she told me she didn't care- she did it for herself and not for men. It's as if women have become preoccupied with the craft of beautification.

Well, I suppose there is not much to say here. I understand that women don't only beautify themselves because society says so, but that doesn't mean it is not overrated by society.

[Taknamay]

We have to come back to reality eventually, and to turn away from the comforts of the unreal. Reality will always remain the ultimate judge regardless of what may exist in our heads, because it is only in reality that we may actually obtain what we want.

Yep. And that's why I'm here in reality, searching for something that does not exist

[ClownsandEntropy]

I believe that desires and perceptions are more important than objective reality.

Naturally, we have to determine what you mean by more important, otherwise to say it's more important is meaningless.

I believe that the existence of material relies on the ability to perceive it, whereas consciousness is independent. If no consciousness existed in the universe, who would be there to observe it? Nobody. If nobody observes it, of what significance is it?

I don't think that material's existence is reliant on someone perceiving it, and that without someone perceiving it it does not exist; that's how I interpret your first sentence. Moreover, the fact that substance does not gain meaning without a consciousness ("meaning" being a thing that only consciousness can assign, presumably) does not necessitate that consciousness is not material, does it? That is, could consciousness exist because of the way material works together? (However, if I get what you're saying, you don't think that the mind is solely material?)
[/QUOTE]

I am a determinist, but I do not believe in the necessity of causality...I think that sometimes, events simply occur for no apparent reason.

That is, you think some things happen for no cause, or no apparent cause? If the former, then how reliable is science in predicting things (unless you solely attribute these things with no cause to quantum changes, which science does account for, I believe). If the latter, then there could actually be a cause, not necessarily a single cause, but there was something that led it to happen?

I don't see an inherent need to punish people who wrong things. If someone did something wrong, it was either because they did not think it was wrong or they don't believe in right and wrong...I am not against the use of justice as a tool. I merely note that pleasure gained from sheer justice is misplaced.

I believe there are people who behave immorally, and understand it as wrong, but still do something wrong. That being said, no, there probably isn't an inherent need to punish people, and that you should probably not get pleasure from justice.

I think that survival is overrated by humanists. If the universe is going to end, what difference does it make what we do until then? The universe will not be worse off without the human race.

Don't humanists think we get meaning from ourselves, and hence, if there's no humans, there's no meaning for us; though I'm not too sure how related that is. Not too sure what distinguishes humanists' value of humans rather than other common points of view. Moreover, if the universe is not affected by whether we exist, then it's good if we exist, cos I find I derive more satisfaction from being alive than not.

[woofwoofl]

I consider myself a surrealist. I believe that desires and perceptions are more important than objective reality.

If my perceptions are too threadbare and/or separate from what constitutes objective reality, I could easily get killed (especially when riding a bike)...

I am an idealist, in the sense that I am the opposite of a materialist. I believe that the existence of material relies on the ability to perceive it, whereas consciousness is independent. Think about this: If no consciousness existed in the universe, who would be there to observe it? Nobody. If nobody observes it, of what significance is it? Without an observer, reality become meaningless. On the other hand, a consciousness without a universe can still exist because the consciousness can observe its own thoughts.

How is a consciousness supposed to exist without the physical means to support it?

I am a determinist, but I do not believe in the necessity of causality. That is to say, I believe in only one past, present and future. Yet at the same time, I do not believe that one event necessarily comes from another or leads to another. I think that sometimes, events simply occur for no apparent reason.

Everything must have a reason behind it, what else would cause it to happen, unless free will was factored in with that much weight?

As far as I know, the physical world, separate from sentience, is deterministic, and free will is the sole thing that can derail things...

I think that justice is overrated in our society (The concept of divine, karmic justice). I don't see an inherent need to punish people who wrong things. If someone did something wrong, it was either because they did not think it was wrong or they don't believe in right and wrong. In the case of the former, it would be wrong to punish them because they believed they were doing the right thing. In the case of the latter, it is wrong to punish them because they do not understand right and wrong. Now, with that said, I am not against the use of justice as a tool. I merely note that pleasure gained from sheer justice is misplaced.

Thank you

Concepts like justice, law, crap like that... there are few things in existence I hate as much as those concepts...

I think that survival is overrated by humanists. If the universe is going to end, what difference does it make what we do until then? The universe will not be worse off without the human race.

You're part of the universe... wouldn't you get lonely without human friends? They're pretty awesome, as is the technology that they create (which we're both using to convey these ideas in the first place)

I think that beauty is overrated in our society. There is nothing wrong with being ugly.

The more people think along those lines, the lower the bar is that I'll have to weigh myself against to make it past the median at least, so I won't discourage this too much

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

I consider myself a surrealist. I believe that desires and perceptions are more important than objective reality.

I agree. Being objective makes one lost and stuck. to navigate the world of human beings we must understand human beings emotionally. I think a lot of people misunderstand this because they think it means listening to other people's problems or being a therapist but that's not really what I mean... being objective drains personal energy. getting what we want emotionally enhances us. everybody is incredibly diff and unique and differences need to be respected more.

I am an idealist, in the sense that I am the opposite of a materialist. I believe that the existence of material relies on the ability to perceive it, whereas consciousness is independent. Think about this: If no consciousness existed in the universe, who would be there to observe it? Nobody. If nobody observes it, of what significance is it? Without an observer, reality become meaningless. On the other hand, a consciousness without a universe can still exist because the consciousness can observe its own thoughts.

There's no dichotomy. Your ideas come from substance matter itself, that's why the narcissistic hollywood CEO writer can create a tv show with everything that he wants in his fantasy, why porn is such a huge lure and hook for men. If there was no material or substance behind them, the Elite couldn't use it to control the human race and society, and make them always chase the carrot on the stick. They know what you want before you do. The excess of this makes everybody hate desire, and think of it as the enemy.

I don't know the exact scientific process behind how ideals are connected to matter, but again- humans are EMOTIONAL. Although you can be rational and scientific, you wouldn't really give a shit or understand it well unless you cared about it. The point is that it exists, and it's how people have been exploiting you from a safe distance for eons.

I am a determinist, but I do not believe in the necessity of causality. That is to say, I believe in only one past, present and future. Yet at the same time, I do not believe that one event necessarily comes from another or leads to another. I think that sometimes, events simply occur for no apparent reason.

Dimensions wrap around one another in a hexagonal shape, and traveling between dimensions will be possible one day but it will be so complicated. Again, the only thing that will matter is what the person desires and wants, and how those meshes with everybody else's desires that are so incredibly subjective by the way, one cannot categorize them. You could, for example, time travel until you fuck the person you always wanted - and each time you get killed somehow you would ressurect yourself and keep trying. The thrill of the chase and the violence but knowing that ultimately you could fuck around with dimensions until you get what you want will be such a freeing experience for humanity... the only enemy I have is the enemy within me. That is the nature of where evolution will take us. Now we of course think of it as narcissistic and evil and our current moral impulses won't really let us do it. Ie we still think there's so much great meaning in loss and death.

again we will merge and heal the dichotomy between 'animalistic' and 'metaphysical', knowing that it never existed in the first place. We will feel the teeth of things we once considered harmless and misty. And I can't wait for it.

I think that justice is overrated in our society (The concept of divine, karmic justice). I don't see an inherent need to punish people who wrong things. If someone did something wrong, it was either because they did not think it was wrong or they don't believe in right and wrong. In the case of the former, it would be wrong to punish them because they believed they were doing the right thing. In the case of the latter, it is wrong to punish them because they do not understand right and wrong. Now, with that said, I am not against the use of justice as a tool. I merely note that pleasure gained from sheer justice is misplaced.

Nobody cares. You will be punished by your lack of empathy or refusal to follow the rules no matter what you say or think. It's better to just play the game and work with the system instead of ranting against it, as that just makes you an asshole in the eyes of others. The bad guy is somebody everybody loves to hate, and making yourself be one just to prove a point will backfire on you too much. It's in your own best self-interest to be a goody goody, not somebody that plays devil's advocate.

I think that survival is overrated by humanists. If the universe is going to end, what difference does it make what we do until then? The universe will not be worse off without the human race.

Humanists don't value survival. They value empathy, kindness and treating each other w/respect.... and going their own way without hurting anybody else. And I used to believe that the world would be better off without humans too, but that is just a load of shit. Humans are too smart. We are above the world- and anything that can be above nature should rule it.

I think that beauty is overrated in our society. There is nothing wrong with being ugly.

The point of being 'narcissitically beautiful' in a people pleasing way isn't for the person doing it, it's for other people. But again beauty is really selfish and subjective and so we all have different turns on. Crazedrat isn't into women wearing make-up, but I am- but then again I'm not erotically attracted to women in the first place like he is. =p I'm not sure that you would be into a man rubbing his feet all over your face, but that would drive me wild.

[rat1]

You are wrong

That is a matter of opinion. "More important" is not something that can be argued without a common measure of importance.

No, it's really not. It's a known fact that your philosophical position is flawed and any educated person who reads this thread will notice this immediately. To you, it may seem like merely an opinion. To educated people, it is a fact.

I know what you are talking about. It is certainly a valid explanation, but there's something I fail to understand. Is there a difference between the human consciousness and the atomic consciousness? I find it difficult to empathize with the atom, because the atom seems to act upon formula, not will.

There is a vast qualitative difference, yes. I don't know why you bring up free will since we've already determined you're a phenomenologist; and if you were to bring up free will, I'd only refer you to phenomenology.

I understand that the function of punishment is to uphold society. I am merely saying that it is not inherently good.

Hence the revision. Yes, we do overpunish people.

By humanists. Perhaps I should make that more clear.

By 99.9% of human beings, I think you mean.

.