Truth Discussion Time - Page 59

On January 25 2018 02:51 Loco wrote: WALL OF TEXT TALLER THAN BLACK CASTLE

[/QUOTE]

boi...

you need to work on your brevity how the fuck do I reply to that.

So you made your case of you understanding communism more than the previous thinkers, so how do you implement it without having some millions starbing to death by mistake.

Also just to remind you we have more recent examples of socialist experiments than the USSR, I actually know people who have fled them, and I learned a few things, now that you mention lobsters, in Cuba if you eat a lobster you go to jail for 5 years, because they are for tourists only, such a paradise, Castro also doesnt understand communistm like you do I guess.

imo

On January 25 2018 08:12 Baalim wrote: boi... you need to work on your brevity how the fuck do I reply to that. So you made your case of you understanding communism more than the previous thinkers, so how do you implement it without having some millions starbing to death by mistake. Also just to remind you we have more recent examples of socialist experiments than the USSR, I actually know people who have fled them, and I learned a few things, now that you mention lobsters, in Cuba if you eat a lobster you go to jail for 5 years, because they are for tourists only, such a paradise, Castro also doesnt understand communistm like you do I guess.

just say: TLDR
it's preferable to replying as if you've read the whole thing, your last paragraph shows you didn't.
It was a good read, especially the criticism on Marx A+

On January 25 2018 20:23 lebowski wrote: Show nested quote + On January 25 2018 08:12 Baalim wrote: boi... you need to work on your brevity how the fuck do I reply to that. So you made your case of you understanding communism more than the previous thinkers, so how do you implement it without having some millions starbing to death by mistake. Also just to remind you we have more recent examples of socialist experiments than the USSR, I actually know people who have fled them, and I learned a few things, now that you mention lobsters, in Cuba if you eat a lobster you go to jail for 5 years, because they are for tourists only, such a paradise, Castro also doesnt understand communistm like you do I guess. just say: TLDR it's preferable to replying as if you've read the whole thing, your last paragraph shows you didn't. It was a good read, especially the criticism on Marx A+

Seems like it's all about "winning" for him, so prepackaged answers will do. Oh well, no point correcting him anymore, ain't nobody got time fo dat.

I mean, "how was one of the most important thinkers of the 19th century wrong?" and "what big picture is he missing" aren't questions you ask if you aren't interested in a proper response. What I wrote would literally fill only 4 pages in a normal paperback. It's brevity in my book. It's not like I was forcing him to read it all in a "dreadful" 15 minutes session, I separated the thing in 3 parts.

Actually I read every word of it, I dont think you need a whole book to criticize Marxism, unless it was a book dedicated to point out how narrosighted the idea is.

Marx is one of the most important thinkers of the 19th century in the same way Mussolini was of the 20th but at least the second collectivistic idea didn't turn out as deadly as the 1st one.

The central problem with our structures is that we haven’t found a way to hierarchically reward creative imagination. It’s easy to understand why that is. If creative imagination exercises itself in the domain of structures versus that of consumer goods, it constitutes a danger to the existing socio-economic hierarchical structures of dominance. They cannot be envisaged by them since their fundamental finality is to conserve themselves the way they are. But acting like this stops all evolution—all genuine innovation--and favors structural sclerosis while encouraging the production of consumer goods based on the current structures.

This quotes makes me think you are one of those people that think of the market as something that is controlled and socially engineered, you believe consumption is the market focing it into people and not people forcing the market, theres no man behind the curtain only chaos.

It's not black and white. Marketing and advertising are a real thing. There are definitely people behind the curtains manipulating and seducing.

On January 26 2018 01:50 RiKD wrote: It's not black and white. Marketing and advertising are a real thing. There are definitely people behind the curtains manipulating and seducing.

well ofcousre marketing is a thing, they make you buy Jeezes for 10x other shoes because we crave social hierarchy, but thats different than the conspiracy that "the market" manipulates people into mass consumption, it is our faults as humans that demand comsumption which the market provides.

The attack on gender I believe is because of the mystery schools. They are all pretty much Gnostic and believe all religions, pagans, atheists to be worshiping the Demiurge. The goal is for humanity to ascend to become more spiritual and androgynous because gender is part of the duality of the Demiurge and being hermaphrodite is part of the ascension to godhood they are somehow involving transhumanism in this machines need to be incorporated lel. Veganism too funnily enough if you eat animals you are basically a filthy savage eating duality and suffering while the plant kingdom is far more spiritual and androgynous. The nuclear family is representative of the Demiurge disgusting oppressiveness and must be abolished. At mecca they walk around a black cube this is representative of Saturn and Saturn is representative of the father time or the Demiurge. Jews have some weird cube on their foreheads when praying. The cross is an unfolded cube. I guess they like Jesus but call it a Christ consciousness and say that god is in everything and not seperate I guess thats why Christians are still demiurgers because they believe in the old testament god and the duality. The cube because the square is representative of the material world etc. A hexagon is a 3d cube how they could possibly know this is I don't know or is nasa fake FUCKING SPHERECUCKS! I mean I'm pretty sure all this cube business predates modern times, not sure.
+ Show Spoiler +

Wtf is going on in this thread

Baal #1

On January 25 2018 02:51 Loco wrote: For the individual, he fails to see how damaging the "heroic quest" he's imparting on his followers actually is. We are not lobsters and we should not be glorifying participation within dominance hierarchies because we have an alternative, granted to us by our neocortex and thalamus. That alternative is to find one’s pleasure in the realm of knowledge and the imagination, not seeking dominance over others. The latter is a self-defeating goal.

When he talks about the "clean your room" he is not advocating domination, but self ownership, to work on yourself before you try to fix the world unlike the idiots in the womens march and Antifa and nazis with tikitorches, you should emphatize with that more than the average joe.

And obviously we can trascend the hierarchy personally, the same way we can trascend infidelity or violence etc, but to build a socio-economic structure that depends on the collective ability of everybody to do so is suicidal, its a bet against human selfishness, and that is a bet that has been lost and has costed hundreds of millions of lives, because if humans didnt have those traits it really wouldnt matter much what socio economic system we have.

It's not really a bet that has been lost precisely because it has never been treated as a bet. It was acted out as a certainty. Acted out by people who did not understand that every action in a complex environment is uncertain, that we must always be mindful strategists and adapt as we're moving. They didn't have a complete enough understanding of the central nervous system which informs us that there is a fundamental need for dominance, that trying to revolutionize things and abolish hierarchies will not work in a top-down manner, they will always re-emerge. But it can change from the bottom up. The key part to understand here is that this need is not an instinct. This is a learned process. We grow up in an environment with a nervous system that teaches us what is rewarding and what isn't, and we are culturally imprinted which creates almost all of our value judgments and influences our aims for all our lives unless we become conscious of them. We are never free from culture, but this culture is precisely what grants us higher degrees of freedom as well, if we use its resources properly.

Jordan's "clean your room" stuff is shit that sounds nice on the surface but it's rotten, it has no vision at all. It stems from his obsession with order and conformity. I'm a deviant, why the hell would I want that? Chaos is at the center of everything worthwhile, of every genius in history. The kind of order that Jordan preaches leads to sclerosis, to a well-oiled machine. I'd rather be a Rimbaud: "I came to regard as sacred the disorder of my mind."

Of course it is an instinct, most mammals have hierarchical structures and primates are no exeption, but actually its not that important to agree on that because I say you CAN overcome that instinct, you say you can learn a different way, which in the end is the same result, however your system requires that pretty much everyone is beyond that, that humans no longer seek personal gain, that selfishness is a thing of the past and that is well naive to say the least if we humans werent selfish, it wouldnt matter if we were capitalistm or communist there would be no unnecesary suffering but we are selfish and we will at least for the foreseable future, and capitalism is the best system so far that works with human selfishness, because communism and selfishness quickly generates death in mass scale.

Just do jiu jitsu. It is the answer to the inhibition of action.

A quick google search is that Rimbaud was a pre-surrealist poet who ran away from home, wrote some amazing stuff, engaged in violently romantic relationships, and then travelled the world as a merchant. Nice. Sounds better than some tradition freak robot although there is something to waking up pre dawn, getting in a tough workout, watching the sun come up, taking a shower and GETTING AFTER IT. I think there are aspects that can be taken from both order and chaos that can benefit the individual and it is really an individual thing. Peterson is such a fucking tradition loving order robot that it can be a bit unbearable to people that like to surf in the chaos waves. I think I would be better off with a cleaner room but it never is. The only reason I have ever really cleaned my room is if there were prospects of sexual relations later. On the other hand I don't go parading around in protests either. I have my avenues I can help and maybe reduce suffering and I keep that pretty low key and local. Not everyone can be useful as a poet or a philosopher or an artist. Maybe that doesn't matter to be useful but we need to be useful enough in some way to pay for some level of living. Then we start getting back to the alluring climb of the dominance hierarchies. Then we get back to the inhibition of action. Then we get back to doing jiu jitsu. I think running into people/institutions/state coercing, dominating, surveilling is unavoidable. It is difficult to set up a life that is completely unaffected by these things. If I ever turn into a docile order robot someone please just kill me. Where is the flare? The je ne sais quoi? L'enfant sauvauge?

there's no evidence to suggest intelligent 'genius' type people must have either an ordered or chaotic lifestyle. It can be either. Immanuel Kant had a highly ordered lifestyle to such an extent that you could predict the exact second he was going to walk through a door. Other genius's have had chaotic lifestyle's and some inbetween. Some are very busy and need to schedule their workload years in advance because they work 18 hours a day. Successful students at MiT would often use a calendar to manage their workload. having a structured and organized life style has nothing to do with 'dominance heirachies'. by that you must mean social organization that has a an oppressive hierarchy, right?

As for baal's comments he won't accept my view points so there's no need to respond.

Oh my god, this has to be one of the most hilarious posts in a really really really long time :D

I think having a structured and organized life style can and many times does have something to do with "dominance hierarchies." Peterson likes to call them "competence hierarchies" and while I think that simplifies things a little bit I do agree with him on this point. Where I disagree is I think there are areas in which being useful or increasing shareholder price is not actually the right thing to do in a broader scope. One can be competent at increasing shareholder price at a large bank, an arms company, Tyson, McDonalds, the list goes on but they are only being useful to the shareholders and not the earth and the sentient beings of earth.

I do mean social organization. There are levels of oppression. My boss watching me prepare food is on some level oppression. A very minor level but it is still there. The surveillance cameras are the same. Taxes are coercion. That is a little more serious level.

I think there are other examples of "dominance hierarchies." Another name could be "social spheres." Whoever is the "coolest" will be at the top. The social sphere in a way chooses the "coolest." In a lot of circles for males that could simply be who makes the most money, who has the best job, who has the coolest life, who is the most attractive, who is the funniest... Being honest and ethical I think rings true in a lot of spheres. In a lot of circles there are signifiers of these attributes. Having a great apartment, having a certain car, having a certain watch, etc. etc. etc. There are steps. There is a certain amount one can buy on $70k. If you go up a step you really need to improve your consumption all around. It is "weird" to have a $200k/yr sphere car but not the watch, the clothes and the shoes to go with it. There are obviously many spheres though. Counter culture spheres. Deviant spheres where what is valued is a lot different.

There was a scene in Mad Men where Roger Sterling (big time executive conservative traditional type) is at this hippie community with his daughter and she is saying how great everything is and there aren't any hierarchies and he simply says "there are always hierarchies." I thought it was brilliant because of course he would say that and maybe he is right. I think the only way Loco has found a way around it is to truly immerse oneself in poetry or philosophy or other art. I also think one has to be open to being a bit of a recluse. It is hard to avoid hierarchies going out into much of the world and I don't see how hierarchies to some extent would form even in "utopian" communities.

Is this the rofl thread or the truth thread ? Cuz im rofling ^^

Thank you Liquidpoker

On January 27 2018 02:41 Stroggoz wrote: there's no evidence to suggest intelligent 'genius' type people must have either an ordered or chaotic lifestyle. It can be either. Immanuel Kant had a highly ordered lifestyle to such an extent that you could predict the exact second he was going to walk through a door. Other genius's have had chaotic lifestyle's and some inbetween. Some are very busy and need to schedule their workload years in advance because they work 18 hours a day. Successful students at MiT would often use a calendar to manage their workload. As for baal's comments he won't accept my view points so there's no need to respond.

I partly agree with you, I mean, we can go back to Flaubert's phrase, "Be regular and orderly in your life, so that you may be violent and original in your work." That sums up Kant nicely. I just don't believe that's what Peterson is arguing for/helping to create. It's not just the clean your room thing, it's the idea to chase chaos out of your life and out of your mind as much as possible. He's saying "traditional values are still here for a reason, here's a new way of looking at them: [insert mythological and theological repackaging of other people's work + a Cultural Marxist conspiracy]". Its ultimate goal is to maintain a society that is structured hierarchically and destroys its environment -- its deranged individualism doesn't understand our reliance on our environment and others. If you have a look at Peterson's parenting advice, you'll see that he really believes this -- he finds deviance unacceptable: your children should basically be a copy of who you are and you should make damn sure they are so, even if that means you have to be aggressive towards them.

There is plenty of evidence that most of creative geniuses were outsiders in some important way. There's chaos because their views are at odds with the socio-cultural norms at that point in time, and this happens regardless of how conscientious they are/were. It's that clash in values and the belief in their own vision that fuels them. It's a big theme in Hesse's work. I am making a clear distinction between two forms of creativity though, some people are creative because the fruits of that creativity serves them to dominate others. Others have a creativity that is more properly revolutionary and either avoids or threatens those hierarchical structures.

having a structured and organized life style has nothing to do with 'dominance heirachies'. by that you must mean social organization that has a an oppressive hierarchy, right?

Yes. For Peterson, it has everything to do with it. The purpose of life (if you are man) is basically to climb as many dominance hierarchies as you can, but they are never oppressive, they are competence-based. You become more dominant/competent by "sorting yourself out", by becoming as orderly as possible.