Hi Jason (have changed thread, since this seems more to do with
psychology & identity than it does to "greens").
I don't want to waste time on semantical arguments here ... but we have
may differing concepts of "belief" ... which I think of as being
emotional/subconscious to a greater degree than they are explitic
and articulated. The notion of stripping away belief structures is
less valid than notions of excorcising psychological imbalance
(through hypnosis and psychotherapy).
For example, I happen to think all the main world religions are
intellectually "wrong" in making their various supernatural claims. But
those who follow these religions do so for social and emotional reasons, and
not open to persuasion out of their faiths by intellectual argument alone.
>In any case, observationally your belief is clearly wrong-- or do you not
>see millions of ongoing examples of individual humans falling prey to
>limiting belief structures?
You are inserting a value judgement "falling prey" to "limiting" beliefs.
fairy stories &c. can be very comforting for individuals, and the
benefits may outweigh the intellectual doubts.
There are valid differences in beliefs also ... I only agree in part with
the Extropian principles ... since Extropianism is just one brand of
after-humanity, and I represent a different brand (direct posthuman). It
isn't fair to say one or the other is "limiting" or "clearly wrong."
There is a tendency to generalise and over-simplifying ... especially
those steeped in the failed human-era Philosophical quagmire.
>Huh? I -do- have an ego (it's true) but in what fashion have you seen it
>reflected unflatteringly in my previous post?
Simply the over-concern with and drive for personal power .... I suffer from
this trait also on occasions. As a therapist, sometimes I find it good to
boost the self-esteem and sense of worth of a client (ego-strengthening, the
Western way) and sometimes it might be useful to deflate the ego and stand
back (ego-dissolution, the Eastern way).
> All environments are mental constructs .. sense data isn't direct.
> "The world is located in consciousness" (Kuhlenbeck).
> Our (E-1) brain generates a phantom median eye out of the same
> action potential/ neural information that carries generic sense-data ...
> this is the ONLY explanation of consciousness that squares Leibnitz' Law.
With MVT, or with the Idealist proposition? MVT is the key to all of this.
>You're going to make me do this again, ain'tcha? Okay...
>Environments have decreased relevancy to our existence is we don't actually
>get to "mentally interface" with them.
No, aeons ago our ancestors' behaviour was governed by sunlight
& the primal eye, whereas nowadays our E-1 brains have infinite-state
capability (self-organising) since they are no longer governed by the
(primal eye) external clock.
>I'm not directly referencing some core truth of reality, but rather
>remarking on an empowering means by which we might consider interfacing
>it. I'm not talking Rocket Science (tm) here either-- simply: a) be aware
>of how we are capable of interacting with reality, and be) take advantage
>it to optimise our existence.
We can't "interface" with reality directly .. merely model it and make
representations ... as well as painting it/ writing music/ explore it thru
> By rehearsal and constant practice, we become more like the think
> we pretend to be, but they are all "thought-constructs" still.
> It is just a case of finding our most accurate/ comfortable option.
> All these roles are subject to change ... the point is we should aim
> to become "more than human." Immortality is earnt, not given.
If "pretending" to be those things adds observable value to your existence,
and aids in achieving certain goals, then I say go for it. (Premises which
are, perhaps, debatable.)
It seems to me that most roles & beviour are "learnt" at some stage on some
level, and thus all our behaviour is "pretence" or acting" even if we often
successfully disguise this pretence from ourselves! The best liars are those
can convince themselves of their lies.
All I am saying is (1) understand this, and (2) use it to your advantage by
writing and editing your own script, don't pretend to be a character that
others have scripted for you. There are better things to be than "human" ..
this is just a tired old legacy label ... but then presumably we are all
and agree with this statement?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:50:30 MDT