freedom through chaos
freedom through chaos
Authoritarianism is not superior to chaos. At least in chaos freedom, the final purpose of safety, is possible. With authoritarianism there is not necessarily a possibility of meaningful freedom.
Re: freedom through chaos
Words, empty words. The two ideas are not in conflict.
Authoritarianism is just part of the chaos.
While aggrandising in grand narratives one fools oneself in thinking that a mutually-exclusive choice exists on the matter, and that the choices need to be ranked against each other. That's the illusion of control.
No individual is in control to choose such things. The chaos is in control. Authoritarianism is an attempt to control the chaos.
Authoritarianism is just part of the chaos.
While aggrandising in grand narratives one fools oneself in thinking that a mutually-exclusive choice exists on the matter, and that the choices need to be ranked against each other. That's the illusion of control.
No individual is in control to choose such things. The chaos is in control. Authoritarianism is an attempt to control the chaos.
Re: freedom through chaos
[quote=Skepdick post_id=495251 time=1612854232 user_id=17350]
Words, empty words. The two ideas are not in conflict.
<three moments later>
Authoritarianism is an attempt to control the chaos.
[/quote]
Words, empty words. The two ideas are not in conflict.
<three moments later>
Authoritarianism is an attempt to control the chaos.
[/quote]
- henry quirk
- Posts: 14706
- Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
- Location: Right here, a little less busy.
Re: freedom through chaos
[quote=Impenitent post_id=495356 time=1612912711 user_id=3944]
[img]https://tse4.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.mRvc ... =235&h=175[/img]
-Imp
[/quote]
I want the five seconds it took to blow up the picture to read it of my life back.
[img]https://tse4.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.mRvc ... =235&h=175[/img]
-Imp
[/quote]
I want the five seconds it took to blow up the picture to read it of my life back.
-
- Posts: 4331
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm
Re: freedom through chaos
a more productive waste of time would be watching a few episodes ... Don was funny
-Imp
-Imp
Re: freedom through chaos
And it confuses you why?
Authoritarianism is "not superior to chaos" because authoritarianism is part of the chaos. It's not a dichotomy.
To frame it as a dichotomy is a mistake in understanding.
Re: freedom through chaos
[quote=Skepdick post_id=495424 time=1612955430 user_id=17350]
[quote=Advocate post_id=495282 time=1612881203 user_id=15238]
[quote=Skepdick post_id=495251 time=1612854232 user_id=17350]
Words, empty words. The two ideas are not in conflict.
<three moments later>
Authoritarianism is an attempt to control the chaos.
[/quote]
[/quote]
And it confuses you why?
Authoritarianism is "not superior to chaos" because authoritarianism is part of the chaos. It's not a dichotomy.
To frame it as a dichotomy is a mistake in understanding.
[/quote]
An attempt to control chaos is clearly a conflict.
[quote=Advocate post_id=495282 time=1612881203 user_id=15238]
[quote=Skepdick post_id=495251 time=1612854232 user_id=17350]
Words, empty words. The two ideas are not in conflict.
<three moments later>
Authoritarianism is an attempt to control the chaos.
[/quote]
[/quote]
And it confuses you why?
Authoritarianism is "not superior to chaos" because authoritarianism is part of the chaos. It's not a dichotomy.
To frame it as a dichotomy is a mistake in understanding.
[/quote]
An attempt to control chaos is clearly a conflict.
Re: freedom through chaos
No, it isn't. Why do you say that?
Giving us control over nature is precisely what science allows us to do and it's not entirely useless at it as evidenced by ever-increasing human longevity. It doubled in the last 200 years.
Re: freedom through chaos
[quote=Skepdick post_id=495488 time=1612969492 user_id=17350]
[quote=Advocate post_id=495480 time=1612967195 user_id=15238]
An attempt to control chaos is clearly a conflict.
[/quote]
No, it isn't. Why do you say that?
Giving us control over nature is precisely what science allows us to do and it's not entirely useless at it as evidenced by ever-increasing human longevity. It doubled in the last 200 years.
[/quote]
If working toward opposing ends doesn't create conflict in your definition, i simply don't know what language you're speaking. ...unless you're trying to say intentionality is a necessary attribute of conflict?
[quote=Advocate post_id=495480 time=1612967195 user_id=15238]
An attempt to control chaos is clearly a conflict.
[/quote]
No, it isn't. Why do you say that?
Giving us control over nature is precisely what science allows us to do and it's not entirely useless at it as evidenced by ever-increasing human longevity. It doubled in the last 200 years.
[/quote]
If working toward opposing ends doesn't create conflict in your definition, i simply don't know what language you're speaking. ...unless you're trying to say intentionality is a necessary attribute of conflict?
Last edited by Advocate on Wed Feb 10, 2021 4:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: freedom through chaos
There's no opposition - you've manufactured it.
Science is working towards freedom FROM chaos. Freedom FROM entropy.
This is perfectly in line with your "actionable certainty" world-view. The world is uncertain. We make it less uncertain - less chaotic.
Re: freedom through chaos
[quote=Skepdick post_id=495490 time=1612970167 user_id=17350]
[quote=Advocate post_id=495489 time=1612970109 user_id=15238]
If working toward opposing ends doesn't create conflict in your definition, i simply don't know what language you're speaking.
[/quote]
There's no opposition - you've manufactured it.
Science is working towards freedom FROM chaos.
[/quote]
Of these common definitions (Google default)...:
a serious disagreement or argument, typically a protracted one.
a prolonged armed struggle.
be incompatible or at variance; clash.
...two of them are compatible with my contention and one for yours. You've used the entire set of definitions as though only the one that requires personal dispute is appropriate. Care to explain?
[quote=Advocate post_id=495489 time=1612970109 user_id=15238]
If working toward opposing ends doesn't create conflict in your definition, i simply don't know what language you're speaking.
[/quote]
There's no opposition - you've manufactured it.
Science is working towards freedom FROM chaos.
[/quote]
Of these common definitions (Google default)...:
a serious disagreement or argument, typically a protracted one.
a prolonged armed struggle.
be incompatible or at variance; clash.
...two of them are compatible with my contention and one for yours. You've used the entire set of definitions as though only the one that requires personal dispute is appropriate. Care to explain?
Re: freedom through chaos
What is it that you don't understand?Advocate wrote: ↑Wed Feb 10, 2021 4:19 pm Of these common definitions (Google default)...:
a serious disagreement or argument, typically a protracted one.
a prolonged armed struggle.
be incompatible or at variance; clash.
...two of them are compatible with my contention and one for yours. You've used the entire set of definitions as though only the one that requires personal dispute is appropriate. Care to explain?
The source of "incompatibility" is your very reference frame - abandon it.
You are talking about freedom THROUGH chaos, when I am talking about freedom FROM chaos. Reducing entropy/uncertainty/risk.
We make systems built on rules (Mathematics, Logic) and we use those rules to understand and navigate the chaos/entropy/uncertainty.
We invent authorities (systems of rules) and we CHOOSE to voluntarily follow our own rules in order to navigate the chaos.
That's "authoritarianism". That is literally how control (reduction of uncertainty) works in practice. We follow rules/heuristics to avoid harm.
Re: freedom through chaos
>The source of "incompatibility" is your very reference frame - abandon it.
My reference frame is our position in the universe and society. I don't think i shall.
My reference frame is our position in the universe and society. I don't think i shall.