‹ First  < 3 4 5 6 7 >  Last ›
 
   
 

A Hateful Thread

 
bbearren
 
Avatar
 
 
bbearren
Total Posts:  3905
Joined  20-11-2013
 
 
 
23 April 2019 14:44
 
Nhoj Morley - 07 April 2019 08:47 PM

The problem remains, to whom am I surrendering?

Yourself.  There is no one else to whom you can surrender.

I’ll borrow a line from burt in this post in The Black Hole.  “I found, for example, that as a professor interacting with students I couldn’t be the same as when I was interacting with close friends (i.e., couldn’t be “me”) but had to put on the “professor” role because that’s what students expected and wanted and so it was necessary if I was to successfully do my job.”

If you surrender to the “professor”, you’ve not surrendered.  You must surrender to “me”.  No one else knows whose skeletons are in the closet, where the box of keys is hidden in the attic, under which rock in the garden the treasure is buried.  Once you have surrendered to “me”, you can untangle the knots, knock down the walls, tear off the facades, and relax.  To quote Popeye, “I am what I am and that’s all what I am.”

I was blessed at a young age to have a role model who had but a single role, that of being herself.  It’s difficult to lose one’s self when one does not fabricate places in which to hide.  Making no excuses means not having to make excuses.  Years ago when asked by my superintendent why I had not completed a fairly simple task he had assigned to me personally, I replied, “I failed miserably.”  He had nothing to say.

 
 
LadyJane
 
Avatar
 
 
LadyJane
Total Posts:  3520
Joined  26-03-2013
 
 
 
23 April 2019 15:30
 
Nhoj Morley - 23 April 2019 02:50 AM

First, our bioon forbearers could actually mitigate hippo with cinematic perception in a limited fashion that sticks to the order of things. Narrative perception mitigates Mr. Hippo via cinematic perception while allowing for changes in the order of things.

I think we were always in possession of the equipment we just didn’t tap into it for one reason or another.  I imagine we suspected something was there to tap into er else we wouldn’t have created things like gods til we figured it out.  When we finally did tap into it we took the ball and ran at breakneck speed on this tangent from the evolutionary path where the human trajectory developed an express lane to run alongside the bypass.  A convenient little number in many ways to say the least.  The hunter gatherer tribes of today can’t see the expressway from the bypass.  And other folks rarely use it but have the luxury of knowing that it’s there.  We probably went too far too fast but you can’t stop an avalanche by reasoning with it, I guess.  The whole space travel thing is none too shabby.

Unfortunately, the emergence of narrative ability first allows other people to mitigate our inclination to act on the knee jerk reactions of our bioon forbearers. Cognizant self-possession of the facility is a further achievement. It gives us Type A societies before it can give Type B’s. In its weakest form, it is only a tool of outside manipulation, which is still an advancement because one can follow what they are taught and pass it on. We have auto-narrators before and despite achieving self-possession. They are the jerky knees.

The inherited teachings of peace and love are often outshouted by violence and hate.  The Type A societies of today have punishing incentives to keep the knees of its citizens in check.  The rules we’re meant to follow won’t stop the flow of ideas.  It only mutes them temporarily in the countries they exist.  They can’t control the ideas in the heads of their inhabitants.  And when those living in Type B societies are under the impression they are free they’d better look around coz better angels will deceive.  Preventing the jerks from controlling the knees in the first place makes for a better legacy. 

Those thoughts do not necessarily start with feelings. Mr. Hippo will react directly to single and plain perceptions like fire or a projectile or a predator. Cinematic perception allows the bioon to consider multiple items in view, none of which is triggering Hippo by itself, and conclude there is a threat (or reward) and draw upon its memory. If that memory is a single and plain perception, Hippo will react to it.

I should’ve said sensation instead of feeling.  I’m thinking in terms of, say, encountering a spider.  The first time your skin crawls you might be wondering what the hell that creepy thing is with way too many legs.  After a certain amount of exposure, enough to realize they’re relatively harmless, you adapt to their presence and it tames the agitated hippo.  Your skin still crawls at the startling sight of them.  You’ve simply learned to let it settle.  In shorter and shorter order.  If the single or plain perception raising your hackles is the sight of a black person there’s clearly a lack of understanding and more exposure is required.  Like anything that isn’t a natural response and takes us by surprise.  After looking at it directly and examining where it comes from we’re able to begin the process of unlearning what we’ve learned.  Whatever awfulness managed to burrow into our mental catalogue and set up shop.  It’s the reason to be skeptical and why we shouldn’t lie to children.  It’s someone else’s story.

In some cases, like racism, it takes a whole story to see the threat. It must be sufficiently told at some point. The triggering is little more complicated but still well within a single second. They usually re-start with auto-narrators. That can be a mere flash of the imploring face of the one who told the story. Cinematic perception is then manipulated to see certain elements of the perception outside of the order in which they actually appear. I don’t mean how a sequence of events is ordered, rather how the steps of reasoning are ordered. The next cinematic conclusion will be what Hippo reacts to. That can result in a brilliant insight or an intangible prejudice.

Intangible prejudice, eh?  What would be a tangible prejudice?  A burning cross?  You would first have to know what a cross represents and what it means to the ones holding the torches.  And the associations of the elements introduced throughout the ritual.  Like, why the hooded linen?  You have to push past your own hippo to understand the other hippos then pay attention to the frames in the order they appear.  We rearrange the order tailored to our individual ability to reason long enough to see what happens next.  Then hippo reacts to that.  Then we do it again.  And hippo reacts to that.  If ushering the frames forward in this fashion doesn’t present results that make any sense we have to run it through again.  As many times as it takes to reach a conclusion.  Otherwise we’re all just looking at a bunch of burning sticks.  You wanna see the shoe on the other foot?  Switch out that cross for a confederate flag and you get an about face modern day Bonfire of the Vanities.

It would take a strong narrative ability to keep a bridge up while Hippo is freaking out. Standard procedure is to disable it because the threat may call for a shorter response time than it takes to narrate. If Hippo is afraid he has less than twenty milliseconds to live, there will be no cinematic perception either, leaving us very much ‘in the moment’.

Cultivating this ability is unavoidable when your Hippo’s crying wolf.  You’re forced to adapt to the distraction of a freaking out hippo that rarely ever sleeps.  Managing anxiety is one thing.  A neurological disruption in overdrive is quite another.  Where it reads as high alert and never wants to disengage.  Like when the sleep paralysis doesn’t take effect and you dream your way to the drive through in yer jammies with no memory of the event.  It’s far from ideal but things still have to get done.  In general, when I imagine Mr. Hippo living in the moment I look no further than my dog.  That right there is bioon personified.  When you’re living in the moment there’s no way to hold a grudge.  We humans can communicate through text and without cinema perception there’d be no such thing as next.  Three levels of perception seems to show the way.  But without Mr. Hippo…nobody is going anywhere. 

Many aspects of lives demand rationing our attention. Many educated capable narrators build lives where they are ‘so busy’ they never have to face the scary truth that they are rubbish at it and have no real capacity to listen to anyone. They can hide out in their busy-ness.

I’ve noticed this among academics who spend the majority of their time referencing things other people have written.  Which could itself be considered a talent, I suppose.  Although the chick at my local library does the same thing.  And with far more humility.

Hmmm. I cannot endorse those as official trioon metaphors. The steps are chunk-limited to four. The thing is to elongate the continuity of our reasoning. You get the rest.
I cannot endorse those extra Canadian E’s. To Americans, it looks like bio-1.

I am happy to abide by the spelling out of respect.  Certainly not because it looks or feels better.

Metaphorically, I was focusing more on malarkey than chunk.  And our ability to arrange the chunks we’re working with.  I want to sharpen the skill of efficiently holding the weightiest pieces I can carry and attach them to the next ones as they bubble to the surface.  Which means figuring out which ones to throw away in order to make room for the ones that count.  And not in a way that tells the self serving story I want to hear.  In an objective way that reveals the facts.

 
 
EN
 
Avatar
 
 
EN
Total Posts:  21959
Joined  11-03-2007
 
 
 
24 April 2019 06:48
 
Nhoj Morley - 23 April 2019 01:56 PM
EN - 23 April 2019 05:43 AM

Nhoj,  was just walking down the street.  I saw a group out of the corner of my eye, and the next thing I heard was “gringo go home.” That struck me, since they were black, not Hispanic.  I doubt they saw hate in me - maybe wariness.  I just kept walking, and heard the leader saying something about “we were doing just fine without you.”  So, I don’t think I was the one prejudging here, but who knows.  I realize our perceptions are all subjective.  I’m giving you my assessment of a 10 second encounter.

Yes, I know. I’m just riffing on your story, not theorizing about your character. It is a normal thing.

For example, the fully restored Burton/Taylor Cleopatra runs longer than the queen’s actual reign.

Yes.  I’ve heard that all the Western movies together run longer than “the Wild West” actually existed.

 
unsmoked
 
Avatar
 
 
unsmoked
Total Posts:  9024
Joined  20-02-2006
 
 
 
24 April 2019 10:32
 
EN - 24 April 2019 06:48 AM
Nhoj Morley - 23 April 2019 01:56 PM
EN - 23 April 2019 05:43 AM

Nhoj,  was just walking down the street.  I saw a group out of the corner of my eye, and the next thing I heard was “gringo go home.” That struck me, since they were black, not Hispanic.  I doubt they saw hate in me - maybe wariness.  I just kept walking, and heard the leader saying something about “we were doing just fine without you.”  So, I don’t think I was the one prejudging here, but who knows.  I realize our perceptions are all subjective.  I’m giving you my assessment of a 10 second encounter.

Yes, I know. I’m just riffing on your story, not theorizing about your character. It is a normal thing.

For example, the fully restored Burton/Taylor Cleopatra runs longer than the queen’s actual reign.

Yes.  I’ve heard that all the Western movies together run longer than “the Wild West” actually existed.

The Pony Express was in operation for 18 months - April 1860 - Oct. ‘61.

 
 
Nhoj Morley
 
Avatar
 
 
Nhoj Morley
Total Posts:  6538
Joined  22-02-2005
 
 
 
25 April 2019 13:06
 
Jan_CAN - 21 April 2019 12:58 PM

I agree that it cannot be reason alone that guides us as all kinds of horrible things can and have been done using cold-hearted and distorted logic.  It must be the calm of reason AND goodwill, conscience, kindness, or whatever we choose to call it.

You said that “Hate as an emotional experience is optional but not necessary to that kind of hating”.  The opposite should also be true.  We could show love (as best we can) to each other even when it is not felt, which can lead to the real thing (or something akin to it) when this very act can serve to remove barriers and bring out the best in each other.

I would say in a steady and non-scolding tone, that this positive vernacular, while more optimistic, is about equally disabling. I can see why this seems to be an arena of emotions battling over our reasoning. It looks like a reasonable model of what is going on but it does not stand up to a sustained examination. The contrary evidence is how we view ourselves as the exemption.

You use the right word- ‘calm’. That allows for sustained reasoning which is a do thing that takes time. We can take our feelings as they are known to us into consideration. We watch ourselves reason. If our reasoning is coldhearted, why can’t we see ourselves doing it that way? We use terms like ‘cognitive bias’, which works well but still tends to point to an internal emotional villainy. In other people, at least.

The real villain is the mechanics of reasoning in action. There is sufficient means of dysfunction in the operation itself. A variation in the talent for shepherding one’s thinking is sufficient to produce our variety of opinions and capacity for horrible acts. Our reasoning process already has the means of applying distortions or cognitive biases and blindness. Emotions as actual feelings are a different format of experience. We consider our feelings. We react to our thinking.

We can act with compassion and one such compassionate act is to stop comparing folks who get it wrong to lizards or making claims of reasoning being driven by a feeling of hate.

Consider how much of our day involves actions driven neither by reason nor emotion. There is still something going on. The machinery that reasons is still flowing along with now un-steered and random thoughts that trigger other thoughts. We can step into that flow and steer ourselves (as an inner perception) along with it. We all enjoy exploring the final product of our capacity for sight. The picture does not make itself. We do and our physical reactions occur during its making and not as a result of the picture unless we steer our attention to react to something that we can see only because there is a picture. Now stop steering in the flow, step out of and stand next to the flow and shepherd it through a ‘train of thought’. That is self-narrating and our ability to reason. How long can you sustain a single and continuous train of thought? That will indicate how reasonable you can expect yourself to be. Or other people.

I am with you. If we all calmly took more things into consideration, we would find more commonality in how we feel about things. Our reasoning is flabby and needs exercise. There is a mental muscularity to shepherding our thoughts into reasoning. Like Mr. GAD’s muscle’s, pushing our minds to the point of exhaustion builds strength and endurance.

 
 
proximacentauri
 
Avatar
 
 
proximacentauri
Total Posts:  353
Joined  07-02-2017
 
 
 
25 April 2019 21:45
 
Nhoj Morley - 25 April 2019 01:06 PM
Jan_CAN - 21 April 2019 12:58 PM

I agree that it cannot be reason alone that guides us as all kinds of horrible things can and have been done using cold-hearted and distorted logic.  It must be the calm of reason AND goodwill, conscience, kindness, or whatever we choose to call it.

You said that “Hate as an emotional experience is optional but not necessary to that kind of hating”.  The opposite should also be true.  We could show love (as best we can) to each other even when it is not felt, which can lead to the real thing (or something akin to it) when this very act can serve to remove barriers and bring out the best in each other.

I would say in a steady and non-scolding tone, that this positive vernacular, while more optimistic, is about equally disabling. I can see why this seems to be an arena of emotions battling over our reasoning. It looks like a reasonable model of what is going on but it does not stand up to a sustained examination. The contrary evidence is how we view ourselves as the exemption.

You use the right word- ‘calm’. That allows for sustained reasoning which is a do thing that takes time. We can take our feelings as they are known to us into consideration. We watch ourselves reason. If our reasoning is coldhearted, why can’t we see ourselves doing it that way? We use terms like ‘cognitive bias’, which works well but still tends to point to an internal emotional villainy. In other people, at least.

The real villain is the mechanics of reasoning in action. There is sufficient means of dysfunction in the operation itself. A variation in the talent for shepherding one’s thinking is sufficient to produce our variety of opinions and capacity for horrible acts. Our reasoning process already has the means of applying distortions or cognitive biases and blindness. Emotions as actual feelings are a different format of experience. We consider our feelings. We react to our thinking.

We can act with compassion and one such compassionate act is to stop comparing folks who get it wrong to lizards or making claims of reasoning being driven by a feeling of hate.

Consider how much of our day involves actions driven neither by reason nor emotion. There is still something going on. The machinery that reasons is still flowing along with now un-steered and random thoughts that trigger other thoughts. We can step into that flow and steer ourselves (as an inner perception) along with it. We all enjoy exploring the final product of our capacity for sight. The picture does not make itself. We do and our physical reactions occur during its making and not as a result of the picture unless we steer our attention to react to something that we can see only because there is a picture. Now stop steering in the flow, step out of and stand next to the flow and shepherd it through a ‘train of thought’. That is self-narrating and our ability to reason. How long can you sustain a single and continuous train of thought? That will indicate how reasonable you can expect yourself to be. Or other people.

I am with you. If we all calmly took more things into consideration, we would find more commonality in how we feel about things. Our reasoning is flabby and needs exercise. There is a mental muscularity to shepherding our thoughts into reasoning. Like Mr. GAD’s muscle’s, pushing our minds to the point of exhaustion builds strength and endurance.

The bolded is the crux for me personally, and I suspect for most everyone else. Of course, we all think our reasoning is unbiased, rational, and logical. It’s the rare bird who is continually on their cognitive guard against all the trappings and pitfalls of the reasoning process. I know I need to do better and I suppose recognition of one’s limitations is at least a start. This topic reminds me of the phrase…“use your brain, don’t let your brain use you.”

In my judgement, if by nature, by nurture (or both), your cognitive processes tend to be analytical vs intuitive, you have a leg up. Intuition has its place, but it shouldn’t override critical reasoning.

 
Nhoj Morley
 
Avatar
 
 
Nhoj Morley
Total Posts:  6538
Joined  22-02-2005
 
 
 
26 April 2019 00:27
 
proximacentauri - 25 April 2019 09:45 PM

  It’s the rare bird who is continually on their cognitive guard against all the trappings and pitfalls of the reasoning process. I know I need to do better and I suppose recognition of one’s limitations is at least a start. This topic reminds me of the phrase…“use your brain, don’t let your brain use you.”

In my judgement, if by nature, by nurture (or both), your cognitive processes tend to be analytical vs intuitive, you have a leg up. Intuition has its place, but it shouldn’t override critical reasoning.

I must seize your handy metaphors while they are still warm. I assume you mean intuition of the learning type versus fully cognitive reasoning. What if both kinds were carried out or performed by the same means? Self-shepherding is our means of being analytical. When the same function plays without any cognitive shepherding or self-possession, that is our means of being intuitive. They are both a product of narrative ability. Intuition comes naturally but is irresponsible and establishes authorities. Being analytical is achieved by taking possession of the process. To do it requires possession and we struggle to accomplish the training.

We can be comfortably held responsible for our analysis. It is rare to find a continuously agreeable act of analysis that convinces everyone. Others spot the bits of the process that have steps of a folksier intuitive knowledge. Those would be the bits you didn’t know you would be responsible for because they were not self-possessed. They are gaps or gaffs in our reasoning. We only remember being analytical and responsible. We were there. We don’t remember being intuitive. We weren’t there. Then the examinee notices the intuitive gaffs in the reviewers and off we go.

 
 
Nhoj Morley
 
Avatar
 
 
Nhoj Morley
Total Posts:  6538
Joined  22-02-2005
 
 
 
26 April 2019 02:36
 
LadyJane - 23 April 2019 03:30 PM

I think we were always in possession of the equipment we just didn’t tap into it for one reason or another.  I imagine we suspected something was there to tap into er else we wouldn’t have created things like gods til we figured it out.  …And other folks rarely use it but have the luxury of knowing that it’s there…

That is a lot of eyebrow raisers. I assume the human brain is unchanged since its recent arrival. There is no function or facility we have that our human ancestors didn’t have as well. That’s why we accuse them of fear and ignorance and plain stupidity that led us to muck about for over a hundred thousand years before getting on with it. I think we give stupidity way too much credit.

It is an impossible point of perspective to know it is there. Like Uncle Jaynes says, our brains held god-like powers over us. We could not deny that there was something in our heads out-thinking us. If we listened to it, we could get ahead.

If we presume our extensively trained attention abilities on ancient humans, they seem like trembling idiots inventing sky-daddies to help them sleep in deluded security. We had visitations of reasoning. Possession came much later.

The inherited teachings of peace and love are often outshouted by violence and hate.  The Type A societies of today have punishing incentives to keep the knees of its citizens in check.  The rules we’re meant to follow won’t stop the flow of ideas.  It only mutes them temporarily in the countries they exist.  They can’t control the ideas in the heads of their inhabitants.  And when those living in Type B societies are under the impression they are free they’d better look around coz better angels will deceive.  Preventing the jerks from controlling the knees in the first place makes for a better legacy.

Inherited teachings of things that need teaching to be known need not be out-shouted, just pre-empted. They become out of reach. Philosophies of universal brotherhood and oneness come from long tasks of reasoning that must be consumed fully before the world will look that way. Once seen, one aspires to a Type B society where everyone has done the task and sees the world of oneness. The USA has not gotten there yet. Many do not see a world of oneness nor do they have any desire to see one. They have not accomplished the task. Type A looks appealing. At least you know where to put your knees if you never want to be tasked about anything.

If we collectively shorten our reasoning and reduce our mean average on The Malarkey Scale, we will ‘crash-out’ into a Type A society while Type B oneness and all that cool stuff vanishes from our sight like a receding galaxy.

We use institutions to prevent and check the jerks but they must be manned by folks capable of the long-reasoning tasks inherent in using them. We demand a satisfying justice before our attention span runs out.

I should’ve said sensation instead of feeling.  I’m thinking in terms of, say, encountering a spider.  The first time your skin crawls you might be wondering what the hell that creepy thing is with way too many legs.  After a certain amount of exposure, enough to realize they’re relatively harmless, you adapt to their presence and it tames the agitated hippo.  Your skin still crawls at the startling sight of them.  You’ve simply learned to let it settle.  In shorter and shorter order.  If the single or plain perception raising your hackles is the sight of a black person there’s clearly a lack of understanding and more exposure is required.  Like anything that isn’t a natural response and takes us by surprise.  After looking at it directly and examining where it comes from we’re able to begin the process of unlearning what we’ve learned.  Whatever awfulness managed to burrow into our mental catalogue and set up shop.  It’s the reason to be skeptical and why we shouldn’t lie to children.  It’s someone else’s story.

Exactly! Someone else’s awfulness becomes an auto-narrator and shepherds our intuitive-style thinking. Hippo’s cautionary hackles might be raised by any significantly different looking person. Mike Pence can startle white people. That is a pre-human characteristic, right? Acclimation is easy when there is no installed preamble of awfulness.

Sometimes us white lads have to overcome another preamble of lesser awfulness with our non-white co-workers and neighbors. I hate (whoops) getting that boss-man jive or having my superiority acknowledged in sarcasm. If so provoked, I like to whip them with comedy until they are laughing so hard they fall to their knees and can’t breathe. This is the real reason I’m in charge. Then all is fine.

Intangible prejudice, eh?  What would be a tangible prejudice?  A burning cross?  You would first have to know what a cross represents and what it means to the ones holding the torches.  And the associations of the elements introduced throughout the ritual.  Like, why the hooded linen?  You have to push past your own hippo to understand the other hippos then pay attention to the frames in the order they appear.  We rearrange the order tailored to our individual ability to reason long enough to see what happens next.  Then hippo reacts to that.  Then we do it again.  And hippo reacts to that.  If ushering the frames forward in this fashion doesn’t present results that make any sense we have to run it through again.  As many times as it takes to reach a conclusion.  Otherwise we’re all just looking at a bunch of burning sticks.  You wanna see the shoe on the other foot?  Switch out that cross for a confederate flag and you get an about face modern day Bonfire of the Vanities.

I was evoking something like a cognitive bias. I can endorse this colorful telling.

In general, when I imagine Mr. Hippo living in the moment I look no further than my dog.  That right there is bioon personified.  When you’re living in the moment there’s no way to hold a grudge.  We humans can communicate through text and without cinema perception there’d be no such thing as next.  Three levels of perception seems to show the way.  But without Mr. Hippo…nobody is going anywhere…

That is a phrase the Zeroists like to use. Dogs know how to relax and give Hippo nothing to be next-cued about. There is plenty in life to respond to in less than twenty milliseconds and our primary perception is a quick straight path from now to an anticipated or expected next. For fight or flight’s sake, it has to be there. A perception of security leads to an anticipation of napping.

…Metaphorically, I was focusing more on malarkey than chunk.  And our ability to arrange the chunks we’re working with.  I want to sharpen the skill of efficiently holding the weightiest pieces I can carry and attach them to the next ones as they bubble to the surface.  Which means figuring out which ones to throw away in order to make room for the ones that count.  And not in a way that tells the self serving story I want to hear. In an objective way that reveals the facts.

That is agreeable. Being repeatable and passing review demonstrates that we can operate objectively or in a sciencie fashion. Objectivity must be seen by more than one person.

 

 
 
Nhoj Morley
 
Avatar
 
 
Nhoj Morley
Total Posts:  6538
Joined  22-02-2005
 
 
 
26 April 2019 02:48
 

I can entertain your contextual deviation.

All my role models insisted that the best way to know one’s core self is to wear a hundred personas and treat each day as an unfolding series of vaudeville routines. When in doubt, hilarity. That’s my motto.

 
 
Jan_CAN
 
Avatar
 
 
Jan_CAN
Total Posts:  3494
Joined  21-10-2016
 
 
 
26 April 2019 07:50
 
Nhoj Morley - 26 April 2019 02:48 AM

...
All my role models insisted that the best way to know one’s core self is to wear a hundred personas and treat each day as an unfolding series of vaudeville routines. When in doubt, hilarity. That’s my motto.

Excellent motto.  While the hateful stuff is most decidedly unfunny, it is difficult for it to fester in ourselves when we are able to recognize and laugh at our own foibles.

 
 
proximacentauri
 
Avatar
 
 
proximacentauri
Total Posts:  353
Joined  07-02-2017
 
 
 
26 April 2019 10:29
 
Nhoj Morley - 26 April 2019 12:27 AM
proximacentauri - 25 April 2019 09:45 PM

  It’s the rare bird who is continually on their cognitive guard against all the trappings and pitfalls of the reasoning process. I know I need to do better and I suppose recognition of one’s limitations is at least a start. This topic reminds me of the phrase…“use your brain, don’t let your brain use you.”

In my judgement, if by nature, by nurture (or both), your cognitive processes tend to be analytical vs intuitive, you have a leg up. Intuition has its place, but it shouldn’t override critical reasoning.

I must seize your handy metaphors while they are still warm. I assume you mean intuition of the learning type versus fully cognitive reasoning. What if both kinds were carried out or performed by the same means? Self-shepherding is our means of being analytical. When the same function plays without any cognitive shepherding or self-possession, that is our means of being intuitive. They are both a product of narrative ability. Intuition comes naturally but is irresponsible and establishes authorities. Being analytical is achieved by taking possession of the process. To do it requires possession and we struggle to accomplish the training.

We can be comfortably held responsible for our analysis. It is rare to find a continuously agreeable act of analysis that convinces everyone. Others spot the bits of the process that have steps of a folksier intuitive knowledge. Those would be the bits you didn’t know you would be responsible for because they were not self-possessed. They are gaps or gaffs in our reasoning. We only remember being analytical and responsible. We were there. We don’t remember being intuitive. We weren’t there. Then the examinee notices the intuitive gaffs in the reviewers and off we go.

Nhoj - thanks for your reply. I like your phasing in the bolded above, understand it, and agree with it. I’ve not familiarized myself with your Trioon theory so it can be challenging for me to follow some of the conversation in threads like this one. Is there a condensed version of your theory in language that I can understand… like a ‘TRIOON for Dummies’?

 
unsmoked
 
Avatar
 
 
unsmoked
Total Posts:  9024
Joined  20-02-2006
 
 
 
26 April 2019 12:20
 
proximacentauri - 26 April 2019 10:29 AM
Nhoj Morley - 26 April 2019 12:27 AM
proximacentauri - 25 April 2019 09:45 PM

  It’s the rare bird who is continually on their cognitive guard against all the trappings and pitfalls of the reasoning process. I know I need to do better and I suppose recognition of one’s limitations is at least a start. This topic reminds me of the phrase…“use your brain, don’t let your brain use you.”

In my judgement, if by nature, by nurture (or both), your cognitive processes tend to be analytical vs intuitive, you have a leg up. Intuition has its place, but it shouldn’t override critical reasoning.

I must seize your handy metaphors while they are still warm. I assume you mean intuition of the learning type versus fully cognitive reasoning. What if both kinds were carried out or performed by the same means? Self-shepherding is our means of being analytical. When the same function plays without any cognitive shepherding or self-possession, that is our means of being intuitive. They are both a product of narrative ability. Intuition comes naturally but is irresponsible and establishes authorities. Being analytical is achieved by taking possession of the process. To do it requires possession and we struggle to accomplish the training.

We can be comfortably held responsible for our analysis. It is rare to find a continuously agreeable act of analysis that convinces everyone. Others spot the bits of the process that have steps of a folksier intuitive knowledge. Those would be the bits you didn’t know you would be responsible for because they were not self-possessed. They are gaps or gaffs in our reasoning. We only remember being analytical and responsible. We were there. We don’t remember being intuitive. We weren’t there. Then the examinee notices the intuitive gaffs in the reviewers and off we go.

Nhoj - thanks for your reply. I like your phasing in the bolded above, understand it, and agree with it. I’ve not familiarized myself with your Trioon theory so it can be challenging for me to follow some of the conversation in threads like this one. Is there a condensed version of your theory in language that I can understand… like a ‘TRIOON for Dummies’?

TRIOON for Dummies -  https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-true-meaning-of-bs/

“Babble, bafflegab, balderdash, bilge, blabber, blarney, blather, bollocks, bosh, bunkum. These are a few of the synonyms (from just the b’s) for the demotic descriptor BS (as commonly abbreviated). The Oxford English Dictionary equates it with “nonsense.” In his best-selling 2005 book on the subject, Princeton University philosopher Harry Frankfurt famously distinguished BS from lying: “It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction.” BS may or may not be true, but its “truthiness” (in comedian Stephen Colbert’s famous neologism) is meant to impress through obfuscation—that is, by saying something that sounds profound but may be nonsense.

Example: “Attention and intention are the mechanics of manifestation.” This is an actual tweet composed by Deepak Chopra, as quoted by University of Waterloo psychologist Gordon Pennycook . . .”

Read more in this Scientific American article by Skeptic Magazine’s Michael Schermer - https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-true-meaning-of-bs/

For more on this subject you could try googling - ‘most baffling passages in the Bible, or something like that.

[ Edited: 26 April 2019 13:14 by unsmoked]
 
 
Nhoj Morley
 
Avatar
 
 
Nhoj Morley
Total Posts:  6538
Joined  22-02-2005
 
 
 
26 April 2019 15:49
 
proximacentauri - 26 April 2019 10:29 AM

I’ve not familiarized myself with your Trioon theory so it can be challenging for me to follow some of the conversation in threads like this one. Is there a condensed version of your theory in language that I can understand… like a ‘TRIOON for Dummies’?

No, there isn’t. Simple is not something I do well. My first choice would be to pass the notion on to someone who can. Obviously, I rub some people the wrong way. I had competent help with the Principia pieces. There is another primer under way. It is sincere and I realize the absurdity of my position in casting it.

[ Edited: 17 May 2019 10:29 by Nhoj Morley]
 
 
LadyJane
 
Avatar
 
 
LadyJane
Total Posts:  3520
Joined  26-03-2013
 
 
 
26 April 2019 17:26
 
Nhoj Morley - 26 April 2019 02:36 AM

I assume the human brain is unchanged since its recent arrival. There is no function or facility we have that our human ancestors didn’t have as well. That’s why we accuse them of fear and ignorance and plain stupidity that led us to muck about for over a hundred thousand years before getting on with it. I think we give stupidity way too much credit.

I vaguely remember a story that illustrates this.  In order to preserve their presence in the North after WWII the Canadian Government encouraged exploration and contact with the Inuit.  These peoples had very limited exposure to Westerners and were Pre-Agricultural Stone Age Hunter Gatherers.  While a man born in the early half of the twentieth century was still making fish hooks out of bone, his son was returning from the South piloting a helicopter.  Travelling a hundred thousand years in a single generation.

If we presume our extensively trained attention abilities on ancient humans, they seem like trembling idiots inventing sky-daddies to help them sleep in deluded security. We had visitations of reasoning. Possession came much later. 

It is an impossible point of perspective to know it is there. Like Uncle Jaynes says, our brains held god-like powers over us. We could not deny that there was something in our heads out-thinking us. If we listened to it, we could get ahead.

We were in possession of the equipment…we just didn’t utilize what we had in our possession.  There’s nothing that makes me think negatively upon our human ancestors as though they were any less intelligent or frightened or religious.  We can pinpoint what we were doing where and when and how on a chart of human history.  Which makes it easier when we’re splitting heirs.  If it was an impossible point of perspective to know is there…we wouldn’t know it was there.

Inherited teachings of things that need teaching to be known need not be out-shouted, just pre-empted. They become out of reach. Philosophies of universal brotherhood and oneness come from long tasks of reasoning that must be consumed fully before the world will look that way. Once seen, one aspires to a Type B society where everyone has done the task and sees the world of oneness. The USA has not gotten there yet. Many do not see a world of oneness nor do they have any desire to see one. They have not accomplished the task. Type A looks appealing. At least you know where to put your knees if you never want to be tasked about anything.

If we collectively shorten our reasoning and reduce our mean average on The Malarkey Scale, we will ‘crash-out’ into a Type A society while Type B oneness and all that cool stuff vanishes from our sight like a receding galaxy.

We use institutions to prevent and check the jerks but they must be manned by folks capable of the long-reasoning tasks inherent in using them. We demand a satisfying justice before our attention span runs out.

This was always the progression and now we’re flaming out.  We’ve exploited democracy, the justice system, the environment, other living creatures and each other.  And we find ourselves utterly dissatisfied.  There is nothing particularly surprising about the state of things.  What is surprising is watching people do nothing to change the dissatisfying positions that they’re in.  That’s when the claws come out.  And when enough people are convinced that the institutions are to blame they have a target.  And tear the place apart.

 
 
proximacentauri
 
Avatar
 
 
proximacentauri
Total Posts:  353
Joined  07-02-2017
 
 
 
26 April 2019 19:38
 
Nhoj Morley - 26 April 2019 03:49 PM
proximacentauri - 26 April 2019 10:29 AM

I’ve not familiarized myself with your Trioon theory so it can be challenging for me to follow some of the conversation in threads like this one. Is there a condensed version of your theory in language that I can understand… like a ‘TRIOON for Dummies’?

No, there isn’t. Simple is not something I do well. My first choice would be to pass the notion on to someone who can. Obviously, I rub some people the wrong way. I had competent help with the Principia pieces. There is another primer under way. It is sincere and I realize the absurdity of my position in casting it.

Yes I’ve sensed that about you. A little absurdity can be a good thing though. Makes it more memorable.

 
‹ First  < 3 4 5 6 7 >  Last ›