Truth Discussion Time - Page 36

I had these lesbian neighbors. I don't know if it is relevant that they are lesbians but it was the closest I had ever gotten to interact with a real life lesbian couple so I think that fact is important to me. They seemed to really know how to spend their money. No child. They had a jeep, a convertible, and then a safe, smart sedan. They were always traveling to awesome places. They had an amazing garden. They spent a lot of time socializing with friends. They always seemed happy. Just really cool people probably in their 40s. Why not just continue on like that until at least 60s and really until the end?

Well, I have a lot of examples of lives with out children because that is my life and the life of most of my friends. The lesbian couple just stuck out as two people really doing it right. Spending their money and their time well. My friends that have children drop off the map because they can no longer socialize. Different priorities. I like the freedom to do 1 of 100 things, 1,000 things, etc. while parents don't have freedom. They are tethered to their children. It is certainly a responsibility that adds meaning to life but I want more than to be a good janitor. I want to go to Tokyo. I want to go back to Paris. I want to go to Brazil. I want to read what I want to read. I want to go down to the cafe at my leisure and on and on.


What is wrong with humanity ending?

JP will not even give this any thoughts. Condemning them as evil. I am not talking about dropping the atomic bomb as JP paints it all together. All post modernist SJWs want to drop the atomic bomb on culture! and these things are always one in the same. Being atheist, determinist, anti-natalist, vegan are all put into that same category as culture/humanity atomic bomb droppers. It is ridiculous. There is no doubt that bringing children into the world is creating suffering. If the highest goal is to reduce suffering one of the easiest paths would be birth control. What's the difference if our species survives or not?

50 years and all of these things will be more integrated into culture for the better. I don't know enough about PoMo. I agree that there are infinite ways to interpret something but I disagree that there aren't better ways to interpret something than others. I don't really know enough about SJWs either. I tend to agree with JP's suggestion to clean ones' house and get educated before grabbing placards and whining. Atheism, determinism, anti-natalism and veganism will all be more at the forefront of things in 50 years. It is already making waves. The rational people will find it. Some of these things are a matter of keeping the Earth livable.

"What's the difference if our species survives or not?"
"What is wrong with humanity ending?"

I know where you're coming from, and from a a cosmic frame of reference, it makes no difference. But I would argue that it's not the frame of reference to be using in the first place. The only possible way to truly eradicate all suffering voluntarily is if humans exist. We're the only ones with the power to reverse-engineer life, or end it completely if that project doesn't work. Only our species can improve upon nature's sloppiness. We can directly prevent wildlife suffering, whereas if we just peace out and leave the animals to their bloodbath, that's a hell of a lot of suffering for a hell of a long time. Part of the problem of course is that we're also a part of nature and very much driven by forces beyond our control, so there is a certain naiveté in thinking we could ever truly control nature and no doubt there is a lot to be said about the danger of holding such power. There's also of course no evidence to believe that humanity could ever become united and pursue a single noble goal such as this one.

There's some evidence JP has given some thought to these questions but his disposition, deeply held religious convictions and his social status simply stops him from entertaining it seriously enough. Same with Harris. Even if you grant them the best possible disposition for dispassionate discourse, people in the public sphere like that are limited in what subjects they can bring up and how much they can delve into them. They can't be too controversial. So JP can bring up Ivan Karamazov and say that he makes extremely powerful arguments for the negation of life, but he keeps his distance from the arguments by using an old fictional character and not going much deeper into it. He believes that he's solved it, even though he hasn't put his solution to the test & hasn't paid any attention to the more recent literature. He never will either because even if he abandoned his faith, antinatalism is just way too taboo.

Just wanted to get some questions out:

Clearly there are a lot of pre-determined genetics and conditioning at play in our lives. Is there a point in which we are released from the puppet strings and become autonomous heroes? Should we live our lives as if this were the case?

What is the value in making goals?

The question itself doesn't make much sense, who is the we that would be released? And released to do what? Random actions? The kind of free will you want is the kind of free will you already have. See Daniel Dennett's work on this.

The value in making goals is pretty self-evident. It's a way to actualize one's intent and measure progress, right? Human beings can't just stay in one place; we constantly move from one point to the other and we want things, and we want to see progress unfolding in our attempts at obtaining those things. Goals are what we use to help us structure our lives so that progress is evident and imminent. If we're not realistic and prudent enough they are also a major source of discontent.

Let me see if I can break down the question or at least summarize it into what I mean:

There seems to me to be this sentiment out there today that we have to become autonomous heroes. We have to travel into some dark caves and slay the dragon. Choose to be a hero now! Right now! This is the first day of the rest of your life! The determinist puppet is a loser mentality, a failure of Western civilization like there is any choice in the matter. It is almost like I am asking is it better for the human psyche to have a mindset of autonomous hero or accept the truths of determinist puppet. I agree with Peterson that it is better to take on incremental responsibility than take on the belief of nihilism. I want to take action and become a hero moving to the top of the dominance hierarchy living a great life of meaning and having sex with a lot of attractive women. I think that is one of the most important reasons why Peterson is so popular among say 16-40 year old men. We essentially can not be released from our genetics and our conditioning however. I think at this point I need to get into some Daniel Dennet to spring me up to speed on the pro free will arguments side.

On June 11 2017 15:24 RiKD wrote: Let me see if I can break down the question or at least summarize it into what I mean: There seems to me to be this sentiment out there today that we have to become autonomous heroes. We have to travel into some dark caves and slay the dragon. Choose to be a hero now! Right now! This is the first day of the rest of your life! The determinist puppet is a loser mentality, a failure of Western civilization like there is any choice in the matter. It is almost like I am asking is it better for the human psyche to have a mindset of autonomous hero or accept the truths of determinist puppet. I agree with Peterson that it is better to take on incremental responsibility than take on the belief of nihilism. I want to take action and become a hero moving to the top of the dominance hierarchy living a great life of meaning and having sex with a lot of attractive women. I think that is one of the most important reasons why Peterson is so popular among say 16-40 year old men. We essentially can not be released from our genetics and our conditioning however. I think at this point I need to get into some Daniel Dennet to spring me up to speed on the pro free will arguments side.

I think this idea of going into caves slaying dragons everyday is good for motivation and momentum. I need to read some Dennett because the idea of determinist puppet and free will is one I can not quite grasp just thinking about it. Relating to Peterson I am not sure I like this perpetuating idea that we can all just take on all this responsibility and climb the social dominance hierarchy and our lives will be full of QUALITY meaning. We may have meaning but I don't want to just have meaning for the sake of having meaning. I don't want to be stuck in a job I don't particularly like to squeak by on expenses on a big house and getting caught at a certain level of material goods. "Yeah! I got a raise now I can afford this interval of stuff!" I don't want to get stuck with the baby. I don't want to be in a bad marriage. That life has plenty of meaning in Peterson's definition but it is hardly a life I want to live.

I've noticed that your frequent ruminations are bipolar. You have periods where you talk a lot about Buddhism, determinism and nihilism and others where it's existentialism and archetypal heroism. It's like you can't make up your mind which one has the most evidence for it and you're waiting for someone to hand you out that critical piece of evidence that one or the other is the incontrovertible truth. I think the part that you're missing has to do with understanding these as narratives and why human beings need them so desperately. I've brought it up multiple times on LP already, but Ernest Becker's "The Denial of Death" is where this was illuminated for me, as well as Zapffe's "The Last Messiah". Without understanding these works I think you'll never get over this roadblock of yours.

If you want to climb dominance hierarchies because you want sex, recognition, etc. then go ahead and do that. See where it leads you. See if you can find some where you can be successful and in which you are satisfied. Follow Peterson or whoever else you think will help you be successful. What's the worst that can happen? Probably no worse than having frustrated desires or ruminating and hesitating which leads to the maladive inhibition of action. I personally don't do this because I don't think I'll be more satisfied than dissatisfied, and I think my salvation lies into my imagination, not in competing in dominance hierarchies. That's why I stopped playing competitive games completely.

well.. perhaps that might because he actually is biopolar lol

On June 11 2017 19:58 Loco wrote: I've noticed that your frequent ruminations are bipolar. You have periods where you talk a lot about Buddhism, determinism and nihilism and others where it's existentialism and archetypal heroism. It's like you can't make up your mind which one has the most evidence for it and you're waiting for someone to hand you out that critical piece of evidence that one or the other is the incontrovertible truth. I think the part that you're missing has to do with understanding these as narratives and why human beings need them so desperately. I've brought it up multiple times on LP already, but Ernest Becker's "The Denial of Death" is where this was illuminated for me, as well as Zapffe's "The Last Messiah". Without understanding these works I think you'll never get over this roadblock of yours.

I am sharing a hotel room with people watching hockey which distracts me and annoys me and I have a bit of a headache but I have nothing better to do so I will respond.

Am I in extremes? I might be in extremes. The existentialists saved my life after I went broke playing poker so it is like I will always be indebted to them. Since then I have spotted some flaws so it is like ok. I was a nihilist previous to that. I suppose I was a golden rule nihilist that eventually took a lot of the principles of poker ie lying, bluffing, callous as principles that can carry over into all sets of games as Peterson would say. Reading Kant's "Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals" and John Rawls "Theory of Justice" and Sartre and a ton of existential literature as I said saved my life at that time. It will always be there. Actually, I don't have to run down the whole history. I'll just read the books and get back to you.

If you want to climb dominance hierarchies because you want sex, recognition, etc. then go ahead and do that. See where it leads you. See if you can find some where you can be successful and in which you are satisfied. Follow Peterson or whoever else you think will help you be successful. What's the worst that can happen? Probably no worse than having frustrated desires or ruminating and hesitating which leads to the maladive inhibition of action. I personally don't do this because I don't think I'll be more satisfied than dissatisfied, and I think my salvation lies into my imagination, not in competing in dominance hierarchies. That's why I stopped playing competitive games completely.

See here is the thing. I see my salvation lying in imagination and climbing dominance hierarchies. I am in the process of continually taking on more responsibility. It is just not going to be a classic Christian Western dominance hierarchy. I do agree with a lot of Peterson's work on this. It is competition and cooperation. I move up the ladder by being a great guy or a heroic guy as Peterson would say. That is just about universal among social dominance hierarchies I would imagine. I was in good standing in a group of AA people in Pittsburgh and my life was better for it. That could be my extraversion too but my extraversion is not so high so it ebbs and flows just with my desire to get out their and climb a social dominance hierarchy. With my openness to experience I definitely need that imagination piece too. I will be taking painting lessons again when I get back in Charleston which always brings me transcendence, rausch, bliss. I am liberated when I paint. At the end of the day I don't really care about getting serious in making it a goal to climb social dominance hierarchies. I do want a satisfying occupation and a nice enough residence and some great friends and a cool girlfriend. So, if I wake up one morning and a thought strikes me that "hey, wow, I am up there on this particular social dominance hierarchy" that is ok but not the goal. I'd rather just have the life and not think about it. On the other hand, I need the imagination or I will shrivel up. I want to discuss humanities with people in cafes. I want to get lost in a beautiful painting. I want to put 500 paint strokes into a beautiful blue sky. I would be perfectly happy just going from creative experience to creative experience with out a job. Which means I either need to find a creative job or a job that doesn't suck. That is basically it. I need to find a job that doesn't suck and use my imagination a lot.

I believe climbing dominance hierarchies is following the Borg's agenda. It's what we've always done: attempt to dominate others and compete over resources or objects of gratification so that we can maximize our chances to pass down our genes. I also don't think you can consciously pursue it, it's what drives you before you can even have a thought about it. It's a brutish life, and it doesn't serve us well (or humanity) in the long run. My conscious purpose in life, if I have one, is to outsmart the Borg. Plain and simple. So, I've given up competitive endeavors -- I've given up everything I could give up really -- in order to focus on understanding myself better and maximize my chances to experience pleasure and avoid suffering. The results have been good, but there's much more to give up still. "It's not the daily increase but daily decrease. Hack away at the unessential." - Bruce Lee

I remember reaching that edge and trying to decide if I should jump into the non-ego and not playing the game anymore, it was scary as fuck just thinking about it, I couldnt envision myself how I would turn out besides in some weird hermit form, for the better or the worse I was actually quite content with my life at that point, so I didnt jump.

And even in retrospects seems like a reasonable choice given that I was in no pain at all and there very well might not be nothing in that abyss.

On June 14 2017 04:00 Loco wrote: I believe climbing dominance hierarchies is following the Borg's agenda. It's what we've always done: attempt to dominate others and compete over resources or objects of gratification so that we can maximize our chances to pass down our genes. I also don't think you can consciously pursue it, it's what drives you before you can even have a thought about it. It's a brutish life, and it doesn't serve us well (or humanity) in the long run. My conscious purpose in life, if I have one, is to outsmart the Borg. Plain and simple. So, I've given up competitive endeavors -- I've given up everything I could give up really -- in order to focus on understanding myself better and maximize my chances to experience pleasure and avoid suffering. The results have been good, but there's much more to give up still. "It's not the daily increase but daily decrease. Hack away at the unessential." - Bruce Lee

So, you are a "monk" in your own "religion." That is pretty cool and brave. I am kind of lost and actively fighting aspects of the borg but then assimilate and they can never quite convert me but sometimes I enjoy myself and wonder if full assimilation is the way to go. It is like taking the blue pill or the red pill except assimilating might actually be hell but not assimilating can be a lonely, painful place. It is doubtful I can assimilate and be ignorantly blissful but I can put on the yuppie costume for a night and have a good time. I can not assimilate and go get some pizza with a heroin addict punk kid, coke head felon, and an atheist, anarchist drunk and likely have a better time.

How does one get an occupation and not assimilate to some degree?

I agree with the minimalist sentiments. It is not in seeking god but removing the obstacles.

On June 14 2017 07:47 Baalim wrote: I remember reaching that edge and trying to decide if I should jump into the non-ego and not playing the game anymore, it was scary as fuck just thinking about it, I couldnt envision myself how I would turn out besides in some weird hermit form, for the better or the worse I was actually quite content with my life at that point, so I didnt jump. And even in retrospects seems like a reasonable choice given that I was in no pain at all and there very well might not be nothing in that abyss.

Yeah, a fear of mine is being some 40-60 year old hermit who eventually takes a shotgun blast to the heart. If I join the Borg maybe they will protect me from that happening. On the other side I have the fantasy of driving fast cars, traveling, and doing what I want at 40-60. Hell, I have that fantasy now. I am hoping for something in between. Finding the right social spheres and minimizing the bullshit has to be key to that.

On June 14 2017 07:47 Baalim wrote: I remember reaching that edge and trying to decide if I should jump into the non-ego and not playing the game anymore, it was scary as fuck just thinking about it, I couldnt envision myself how I would turn out besides in some weird hermit form, for the better or the worse I was actually quite content with my life at that point, so I didnt jump. And even in retrospects seems like a reasonable choice given that I was in no pain at all and there very well might not be nothing in that abyss.

You're always going to be playing some game on some level. Essentially, it's about knowing which ones are worth playing. If I zoom back far enough, the big game in town that's worth playing is the "beat the genes" game. In other words, it's Socrates' popular dictum "the unexamined life isn't worth living." Then it's just mini games in there, and I'm playing those because they are biologically advantageous and sustainable. It's definitely not pursuing some transcendental ego-death state. Maybe at some point it'll evolve into a more intense spiritual practice but for now it's just about enjoying things without being competitive. My competitive nature isn't gone, it's just that I've redirected it towards improving at certain solo activities which I have control over.

On June 14 2017 17:09 RiKD wrote: Show nested quote + On June 14 2017 07:47 Baalim wrote: I remember reaching that edge and trying to decide if I should jump into the non-ego and not playing the game anymore, it was scary as fuck just thinking about it, I couldnt envision myself how I would turn out besides in some weird hermit form, for the better or the worse I was actually quite content with my life at that point, so I didnt jump. And even in retrospects seems like a reasonable choice given that I was in no pain at all and there very well might not be nothing in that abyss. Yeah, a fear of mine is being some 40-60 year old hermit who eventually takes a shotgun blast to the heart. If I join the Borg maybe they will protect me from that happening. On the other side I have the fantasy of driving fast cars, traveling, and doing what I want at 40-60. Hell, I have that fantasy now. I am hoping for something in between. Finding the right social spheres and minimizing the bullshit has to be key to that.

That's a pretty useless fear to entertain. Your personality type is not suited for that type of isolated, deep spiritual life at all; you'd never pursue it for long. Hence why you think you'd commit suicide if you did.

Hermit was the wrong word. I just fear 40+ period. I have 3 friends that seem to be doing it ok mostly outside the clutches of the Borg but they are more or less in poverty. One is on disability and welfare and helps a lot of people through different avenues. One is on disability and works odd jobs and paints and plays the guitar. One works a lot of hours in construction and helps a lot of people and is quite social. The ladder two are actually likely achieving a living wage. There is nothing wrong with this I just have the bias that I don't want to live that way. I will because I have been and likely will continue to but it has its pitfalls. I have been in the $40k-70k that is deemed to be the money no longer buys happiness range yet so many other factors in my life were miserable. I have been above that with poker and one of the biggest annoyances was not having a desktop with nice monitors while traveling. There was always the what am I doing with my life in times of downswings and boredom. "Awe shucks, I'm not adding anything to the world. I am not using my gifts to contribute to humanity. wah wah wah." It is like I could never get it quite right. It is still like I can never get it quite right and I probably will never get it quite right. There is no happy ending. I am a trembling animal that will die and get eaten by worms. With that said I am also a self that wants. I do want a girlfriend so I want my own place to live so I want an avenue to make money. The means of making money and where I want to live and what kind of girlfriend I want may require assimilation. I fantasize about being an artist and living in a cool not yet quite gentrified part of town and dating Sarah Silverman. That is an oversimplification of things but there is a lot of truth there. If I am not on some spectrum of those things by the time I'm 35 it will only get worse at 40 which will only get worse at 50 and so on. The same could be said for loving family, close friends, and helping people. I suppose it will get worse at 40 and 50 and 60 regardless. So, in turn my suicidal ideations will likely get worse at 40 and 50 and 60 as well. Unless I can continue to educate myself on how to live life. On the bright side I haven't had any serious suicidal ideations for a while but I want more than just that. So, I don't drink, I'm not suicidal, I have my own bed. That's not a bad start but of course I want more. I will likely have to take on some assimilated responsibilities to make it happen. I just can't get caught up in that stuff even if the Borg's steak and red wine tastes good.

You are in a perfect age and stage in your life to try racing if you have that curiosity, many people get into it when they are too old when they arent busy with family and businesess anymore, but the heart is too weak by that age and they find it too scary, so do it now.

I always associated hedonism with some Dionysian character. That is how I wanted to live life. Red wine, good eats, social gatherings and parties, casual sex, marijuana, good music not in any particular order. Then I was high all day (which I enjoyed) then I was getting drug tested in steel mills, then I was drinking all the time. The alcohol was my solution to anything. It brought me pleasure until it didn't and that is where things went haywire. So, that led to a lot of pain. I swore off hedonism but I never had a god. I realize now that really the only reason for me to be an ethical person is to avoid pain. There is no heaven I am aiming for besides the pleasures and happiness and satisfactions on earth. There is no god I need to please. So, I am a hedonist. Just a hedonist that thinks about the long game a bit more. I used to lie and manipulate for short term pleasure, I used to drink and do drugs for short term pleasure, that is a clueless seeking short term hedonism. An inferior hedonism. The pain will always catch up. I suppose there will always be an unsure seeking of pleasure. There will always be pain. It's all I really have. I could be humble and give it all to god but there is nothing there. I don't want the easy fast food and cocaine pleasures. I want the smooth burning satisfactions the deep and effectual liberations. I want to put my personality and uniqueness into a work of art. I will take racing cars though. A beautiful blend of thrills and mastery.

What constitutes good moral education these days? Is religion still necessary? What role will it have in the future? Should we be moving laws more towards a determinist mindset or is the standing law and order part of healthy deterrence and conditioning?

The preponderance of evidence suggests that the hard determinism mindset is on the whole more negative to mental health, prosocial behavior and productivity. (The question of whether it is sound or not is another one.)


A compilation of the relevant studies:

+ Show Spoiler +

I know there is an argument to be made (à la Harris) that the lack of belief in free will leads to compassion because you understand that people couldn't have acted differently, but this seems to be predicated on the fact that there is mindfulness practice involved too (?). While that's intuitive to me I'm not aware of studies done on it. Anyway, compatibilism seems to solve a lot of these problems and only involves a fairly straight-forward reframing of the discussion around free will. The vast majority of philosophy professors/PhDs lean towards or accept this view. https://philpapers.org/surveys/results.pl

I think aristoteles still pretty much nailed everything, living life in adherence to most of his general principles would still have people consider you a virtuous, good man

religion is not still necessary but will continue to be important for people in all regions of the world for as long as any of us live. It is probably wise to just accept this - at least restrict combating religion to where it conflicts with the general direction of society or your own life in particular. If muslims don't want to eat pork, let them not eat pork. If they wanna pray 5 times a day, let them pray 5 times a day. Don't let either of these actions influence or provoke you. But if they start insisting that gays should not have the same rights as heterosexuals, or if christians start insisting that we shouldn't teach evolution in school, or if either group insists that abortions should be illegal, or whatever other stupid stuff members of either group insist on, then fight that. Then I guess it's possible to argue that societal influence in those dangerous areas coincides with prevalence of the non-dangerous stuff, but the pedagogue inside me insists that I've virtually never seen an atheist argue against religion in a way that to me looks particularly persuasive to religious people. Basically human thought evolves generationally, trying to force the issue is unlikely to work out.

Laws should definitely have a deterministic mindset - but that does not mean we need to ignore the deterring and conditioning effects of laws. If anything, those particular aspects should be highlighted. The side of the penal system that punishes people because they 'deserve punishment' however, is an abomination that we should work to rid society of asap. Sadly I think the logic from the previous paragraph applies there as well; while in Norway, we've largely made this switch already, in the US, your older population isn't even close to accepting of a non-punitive penal system, and I don't see it change until millennials end up being more in charge.