Limitations

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

simplicity
Posts: 750
Joined: Thu May 20, 2021 5:23 pm

Limitations

Post by simplicity »

I'm not sure too many folks out there would disagree that we live in a glutenous era...food, drugs and alcohol, sex, money, things of all sorts, but the king of all excess must be...thinking. People have used the [seemingly] logarithmic increases in information as a springboard once again diving into the deep end forgetting that there is very little water in the pool.

The bottom-line is that the human mind is simply incapable of accessing reality in any substantial manner, so no matter how much data is accumulated, [and although conclusions drawn might be a little more accurate], one might think that Einstein clones are popping-up like weeds after a gully-washer. It truly is amazing to listen/read what people believe they now know having become internet experts in every damn thing.

Until people learn the most important lesson [what their minuscule human intellect is capable of], they will continue to pontificate about this, that, and the other thing until others can no longer tolerate their mindless ramblings.

What can be known [of any significance] has been since the beginning. You are not going to be able to think your way out of it.
Last edited by simplicity on Tue Sep 14, 2021 7:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Vitruvius
Posts: 678
Joined: Mon May 10, 2021 9:46 am

Re: Limitations

Post by Vitruvius »

Re: Quote of the day
Post by Vitruvius » Tue Sep 14, 2021 3:22 pm

There are two kinds of philosophy: one seeks clarity, the other intends obscurity!
simplicity
Posts: 750
Joined: Thu May 20, 2021 5:23 pm

Re: Limitations

Post by simplicity »

Vitruvius wrote: Tue Sep 14, 2021 4:17 pm Re: Quote of the day
Post by Vitruvius » Tue Sep 14, 2021 3:22 pm

There are two kinds of philosophy: one seeks clarity, the other intends obscurity!
If it is clarity you seek, the road down philosophy avenue is a dead-end.

Clarity stands before you...accept it and free yourself from the ball and chain that is "understanding."
Vitruvius
Posts: 678
Joined: Mon May 10, 2021 9:46 am

Re: Limitations

Post by Vitruvius »

Vitruvius wrote: Tue Sep 14, 2021 4:17 pm Re: Quote of the day
Post by Vitruvius » Tue Sep 14, 2021 3:22 pm

There are two kinds of philosophy: one seeks clarity, the other intends obscurity!
simplicity wrote: Tue Sep 14, 2021 4:43 pmIf it is clarity you seek, the road down philosophy avenue is a dead-end.

Clarity stands before you...accept it and free yourself from the ball and chain that is "understanding."
I disagree. It's as if I were cast about the landscape of my understanding until I centralised a scientific understanding of reality and the evolutionary history of humankind. Now I find I can make good sense of difficult questions; like - why would someone pitch an argument in celebration of ignorance? To disclaim responsibility to what is known? So, tell me - what reality is it that you are unable to acknowledge, and why? What do you seek to justify through the denial of "understanding"?
User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 4704
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Limitations

Post by RCSaunders »

simplicity wrote: Tue Sep 14, 2021 4:07 pm I'm not sure too many folks out there would disagree that we live in a glutenous era...
We live in an elastic-protein-substance-like (glutenous) era? Who knew?
simplicity wrote: Tue Sep 14, 2021 4:07 pm The bottom-line is that the human mind is simply incapable of accessing reality in any substantial manner ...
It is generally not a good idea to judge others, or generalize, on the basis of your own intellectual limitations. Just because you cannot understand reality does not mean no one else can.
simplicity
Posts: 750
Joined: Thu May 20, 2021 5:23 pm

Re: Limitations

Post by simplicity »

Vitruvius wrote: Tue Sep 14, 2021 5:19 pm I disagree. It's as if I were cast about the landscape of my understanding until I centralised a scientific understanding of reality and the evolutionary history of humankind. Now I find I can make good sense of difficult questions; like - why would someone pitch an argument in celebration of ignorance? To disclaim responsibility to what is known? So, tell me - what reality is it that you are unable to acknowledge, and why? What do you seek to justify through the denial of "understanding"?
Go up to a mirror, look that guy straight in the eye and tell him what you truly understand.

I am not attempting to acknowledge nor justify anything. Acceptance of things as they are is the best we can do. This cannot take place through understanding. That's all.
simplicity
Posts: 750
Joined: Thu May 20, 2021 5:23 pm

Re: Limitations

Post by simplicity »

RCSaunders wrote: Tue Sep 14, 2021 6:16 pm
simplicity wrote: Tue Sep 14, 2021 4:07 pm I'm not sure too many folks out there would disagree that we live in a glutenous era...
RCSaunders wrote: Tue Sep 14, 2021 6:16 pmWe live in an elastic-protein-substance-like (glutenous) era? Who knew?
Thank you for the spelling correction.
simplicity wrote: Tue Sep 14, 2021 4:07 pm The bottom-line is that the human mind is simply incapable of accessing reality in any substantial manner ...
RCSaunders wrote: Tue Sep 14, 2021 6:16 pm It is generally not a good idea to judge others, or generalize, on the basis of your own intellectual limitations. Just because you cannot understand reality does not mean no one else can.
Who would you suggest can understand reality?
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 12357
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: Limitations

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

simplicity wrote: Tue Sep 14, 2021 4:07 pm I'm not sure too many folks out there would disagree that we live in a glutenous era...food, drugs and alcohol, sex, money, things of all sorts, but the king of all excess must be...thinking.
I disagrees.
There are pros and cons to 'thinking' and so far its pros are progressively outweighing the cons, thus the history of human 'progress' since 200K years ago to the present.

When we look into the anatomy of the human brain, it is embedded with parts [so-called reptilian] that are of living things that existed billion of years ago, parts that belong to various animals then to the evolved parts that are specific to higher primates and humans and the latest thinking brain of humans only.
If the parts of the thinking-brain were not adaptive [useless] it would have atrophized long ago.

As such the 'thinking brain' is most critical to human beings and an inactive or ineffective thinking brain would be that of a 'lesser' human.

So with the ability to think, what is significant is whether one's thinking is progressive and optimal to the existing conditions of the individuals.
At times even thinking about nonsense can be productive, i.e. Einstein's
“I am enough of the artist to draw freely upon my imagination. Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world.”

There are a small % of people where too much 'thinking' is not optimal within their specific conditions [e.g. hermits, ascetics, etc.], but the majority should progress with more and more optimal thinking.

So the optimality of thinking is critical and that one must ensure one is not thinking via ruminations as a psychosis and other unhealthy modes of thinking.
Ansiktsburk
Posts: 447
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2013 12:03 pm
Location: Central Scandinavia

Re: Limitations

Post by Ansiktsburk »

simplicity wrote: Tue Sep 14, 2021 4:43 pm
Vitruvius wrote: Tue Sep 14, 2021 4:17 pm Re: Quote of the day
Post by Vitruvius » Tue Sep 14, 2021 3:22 pm

There are two kinds of philosophy: one seeks clarity, the other intends obscurity!
If it is clarity you seek, the road down philosophy avenue is a dead-end.

Clarity stands before you...accept it and free yourself from the ball and chain that is "understanding."
Only if you’re …
User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 4704
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Limitations

Post by RCSaunders »

simplicity wrote: Wed Sep 15, 2021 3:33 am
RCSaunders wrote: Tue Sep 14, 2021 6:16 pm
simplicity wrote: Tue Sep 14, 2021 4:07 pm I'm not sure too many folks out there would disagree that we live in a glutenous era...
RCSaunders wrote: Tue Sep 14, 2021 6:16 pmWe live in an elastic-protein-substance-like (glutenous) era? Who knew?
Thank you for the spelling correction.
simplicity wrote: Tue Sep 14, 2021 4:07 pm The bottom-line is that the human mind is simply incapable of accessing reality in any substantial manner ...
RCSaunders wrote: Tue Sep 14, 2021 6:16 pm It is generally not a good idea to judge others, or generalize, on the basis of your own intellectual limitations. Just because you cannot understand reality does not mean no one else can.
Who would you suggest can understand reality?
Almost anyone who has not had their mind warped by, "education," or chooses to think for themselves rather than just accept what their mystic, academic, or philosophical authorities have taught them.
simplicity
Posts: 750
Joined: Thu May 20, 2021 5:23 pm

Re: Limitations

Post by simplicity »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed Sep 15, 2021 5:22 am
simplicity wrote: Tue Sep 14, 2021 4:07 pm I'm not sure too many folks out there would disagree that we live in a glutton-ous era...food, drugs and alcohol, sex, money, things of all sorts, but the king of all excess must be...thinking.
I disagree.
There are pros and cons to 'thinking' and so far its pros are progressively outweighing the cons, thus the history of human 'progress' since 200K years ago to the present.
Thinking [just like eating] is necessary for survival, but too much [of anything] leads to dys-equilibrium and dys-function. I don't believe it to be a stretch to consider the current plight of humanity as revealing characteristics of both.

Individual thinking can only create so much difficulty, but group thinking has repeatedly created Hell on Earth.
simplicity
Posts: 750
Joined: Thu May 20, 2021 5:23 pm

Re: Limitations

Post by simplicity »

RCSaunders wrote: Wed Sep 15, 2021 2:04 pm
simplicity wrote: Wed Sep 15, 2021 3:33 am Who would you suggest can understand reality?
Almost anyone who has not had their mind warped by, "education," or chooses to think for themselves rather than just accept what their mystic, academic, or philosophical authorities have taught them.
Are you suggesting that you have come of age as an intellectually pure being...never having been stained by the ideas of others?
User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 4704
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Limitations

Post by RCSaunders »

simplicity wrote: Wed Sep 15, 2021 4:07 pm
RCSaunders wrote: Wed Sep 15, 2021 2:04 pm
simplicity wrote: Wed Sep 15, 2021 3:33 am Who would you suggest can understand reality?
Almost anyone who has not had their mind warped by, "education," or chooses to think for themselves rather than just accept what their mystic, academic, or philosophical authorities have taught them.
Are you suggesting that you have come of age as an intellectually pure being...never having been stained by the ideas of others?
I thought this was a philosophical discussion. Why do you make it about personalities. What does my personal experience have to do with a principle. If I were the worst mathematician in the world but said two plus two equals four, is it untrue because I almost always get the wrong answer? If the worst gangster in the world say, "murder is wrong," is murder not wrong because a murderer said it?

The fact is there are innumerable individuals who think for themselves. Some have, like me, never accepted anything as true based on the word of another. Some, while influenced in early life by other's teachings, eventually began to think for themselves and threw off the superstitious nonsense they were taught along with all the deceitful lies of academics and ideologists.

I'm really surprised you have never run across a single individual who is not gullible, though they are rare, and more so today than ever. I'm sorry you haven't. Try reading some H.L. Mencken.
simplicity
Posts: 750
Joined: Thu May 20, 2021 5:23 pm

Re: Limitations

Post by simplicity »

RCSaunders wrote: Wed Sep 15, 2021 4:46 pm
simplicity wrote: Wed Sep 15, 2021 4:07 pm
RCSaunders wrote: Wed Sep 15, 2021 2:04 pm
Almost anyone who has not had their mind warped by, "education," or chooses to think for themselves rather than just accept what their mystic, academic, or philosophical authorities have taught them.
Are you suggesting that you have come of age as an intellectually pure being...never having been stained by the ideas of others?
I thought this was a philosophical discussion. Why do you make it about personalities. What does my personal experience have to do with a principle. If I were the worst mathematician in the world but said two plus two equals four, is it untrue because I almost always get the wrong answer? If the worst gangster in the world say, "murder is wrong," is murder not wrong because a murderer said it?

The fact is there are innumerable individuals who think for themselves. Some have, like me, never accepted anything as true based on the word of another. Some, while influenced in early life by other's teachings, eventually began to think for themselves and threw off the superstitious nonsense they were taught along with all the deceitful lies of academics and ideologists.

I'm really surprised you have never run across a single individual who is not gullible, though they are rare, and more so today than ever. I'm sorry you haven't. Try reading some H.L. Mencken.
So you actually believe you are a completely independent thinker? I hate to break to you, but 99.999...% of everything you have ever thought has already been thought by others [about 100 million times (+/-)].

You are really caught up in your own way [and that's fine], but nobody else cares what you think. We are all here to simply exchange views with other people who enjoy such [not to convince others that we have figured it out]. And believe me [although it's impossible], should "somebody "figure it out," everybody will know in five minutes!
User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 4704
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Limitations

Post by RCSaunders »

simplicity wrote: Wed Sep 15, 2021 5:56 pm So you actually believe you are a completely independent thinker? I hate to break to you, but 99.999...% of everything you have ever thought has already been thought by others [about 100 million times (+/-)].
How does the fact that others have also thought what I think or had those thoughts before I did, make my own thoughts not mine. Most of what I know I learned from others because there is just too much for one individual to discover for themselves and it would be foolish to reinvent everything when someone else has already done that work, but for me to have that knowledge I had study what others wrote, use my own judgement and reason to understand and determine whether what was being written was true or not. I had to use my own mind to learn from others. To just accept what others write or teach without understanding whether it is true or not is not learning, it's credulity and that kind of so-called knowledge is superstition.

Since you seem to be implying my thoughts are not my own, as though they were things everyone else thinks, why is it that almost everyone disagrees with my views, as you do. Since there are damn few others who think what I think, who are those one's you think I'm only emulating.
simplicity wrote: Wed Sep 15, 2021 5:56 pm You are really caught up in your own way ...
Whose way are you caught up in?
simplicity wrote: Wed Sep 15, 2021 5:56 pm ... nobody else cares what you think.
Well, I would have thought so. What difference does make what I think? So it does bewilder me a bit that so many people seem to feel compelled to tell my how wrong I am and try to prove it and ask me all sorts of inane personal questions.

Am I not supposed to discuss my views with those who have so little interest in what I say, they must comment on it? When I see something on a philosophy site that defies all reason and truth, am I not supposed to comment?
simplicity wrote: Wed Sep 15, 2021 5:56 pm We are all here to simply exchange views with other people who enjoy such [not to convince others that we have figured it out]. And believe me [although it's impossible], should "somebody "figure it out," everybody will know in five minutes.
That's doubtful! There is hardly a single discovery in history that wasn't resisted, and those making them persecuted and vilified. The last thing most people want is the truth and they will go to almost any length to evade it.

Look how long it took, "everybody," to accept the discoveries of Kepler and Galileo and the persecution Galileo endured. It took twenty years for William Harvey's discovery that blood pumped out from heart, returns to heart to be accepted.

In 1902, Rear-Admiral George Melville, chief engineer of the US Navy, wrote in the North American Review, that attempting to fly was 'absurd'. In 1903, Simon Newcomb, professor of mathematics and astronomy at Johns Hopkins University published an article which showed scientifically that powered human flight was 'utterly impossible,' and would require the discovery of a new force in nature. A few weeks later, Wilbur and Orville Wright did the scientifically impossible.

For five years after the Wright brother's first successful flight, most American scientists, science editors, and science writers in the NewYork Herald, the North American Review, and the Scientific American dismissed the many demonstrations of powered human flight as a hoax.

Humphry Davy's demonstrated nitrous oxide anesthesia in 1830, and by 1842 chloroform and ether were being used to perform painless surgeries, but academia, especially the religious versions, and the medical establishment resisted and repudiated the use of anesthesia which was not fully accepted until after 1850.

Every electronic device or machine we use which is powered by electricity from the power grid, as well as, the power grid itself is proof Michael Faraday was not the charlatan his contemporaries accused him of being when he announced he could generate an electric current simply by moving a magnet in a coil of wire. The truth and significance of his discoveries were not recognized until after his death.
Post Reply