quote
follow
|
09-07-2012 Ok, I made the effort. If you don't want to engage that's your prerogative, but I have to wonder why you even bothered to ask. Nevertheless, I'm happy that I tried, and it's unfortunate that you content yourself with simple gainsaying.Nobody owes you an explanation, Francois, and you get out only what you're prepared to put in. |
|
09-07-2012 I do want to engage, but there's really nothing to say to someone who believes he's better than everyone else. Good job, you get a gold star. What else do you want me to say? |
|
09-07-2012 What do I want you to say? Man, you can say whatever you want. But if you accuse me of having a superiority complex then the least you could do when I contest it is to point out an instance that you believe illustrates it.You just copied a portion of my post in which the word 'I' only appears twice: once as part of a question, and once as part of a statement. Neither sentence refers to any perception of myself whatsoever. All I ask, and I don't think it's unfair or unreasonable, is for you to present your evidence. So far you've accused me of being redundant ("We already know all of this."), Time-wasting ("Get to the point already..."), an empty talker ("You just seem to be the kind of person who talks at length without really saying anything."), silly, superior, lacking compassion, grandstanding and boorish. All that in just 4 comments! And you have yet to tell me why. Yet when I try and defend myself you just make more un-clarified statements along the same lines. I'm beginning to believe that you may be a troll, only out to waste my time and throw insults around for the sake of it. Notice that that is not an accusation, but a qualified conjecture. I give you the benefit of the doubt to prove me wrong. But if you do want to engage, as you say, and believe you have me pinned down, can I ask you the courtesy of doing more than just repeating your accusations? |
|
09-07-2012 I love how there's very educated bitch slapping around here. You, sir, are daft. Nay, I shall make a qualified conjecture that nary was a person dafter! And that is an irrefutable insult, because it is based on observable truth. |
|
09-07-2012 Now you're just being disingenuous. Honestly, you and I both know that when you say "most people," you're excluding yourself. Don't deny it. If you are not, then I apologize. |
|
09-07-2012 This is like drawing blood from a stone! So now you give me two words to work with. Yay! How do I tease out your thoughts on such meagre grounds?So, am I correct in thinking that you take this line from my post: "I don't think it is that way for most people." and from that you decide that I'm implying that 'most people' are idiots and I'm super-intelligent? Let me see if I can show you that that is not what I intended. I was addressing the original post by the owner of this blog. In that post Irina talks about 'people' not acknowledging the brutal reality of life and preferring instead to live in a delusion that 'life is good'. 'They' refuse to admit that 'this world is a dangerous, brutal place where no one is safe'. This is made easier for them when 'virtually everyone around is re-enforcing religious and quasi-religious outlook on life'. If an individual tries to go against this 'widely supported wonderful world delusion' they 'won't find much support from others on this road.' She then finishes the post with: 'Not many people have such intellectual integrity, such inner will to truth, that they choose to rebel and oppose the majority at the time of their personal tragedy. In most the will to survive overpowers the will to be true to oneself. A committment to truth is thus a maladaptation. In order to celebrate life one has to learn to lie.' Now, the gist of this argument seems to be that 'most people' are living a lie, happy to carry on in a delusional state believing that no matter what bad shit happens that it will all turn out right in the end. And among them must survive those who have the 'intellectual integrity' to confront this reality. They are, however, a rebellious minority. They, and they alone, are committed to the 'truth', which from a wider angle would seem to be a maladapted trait, and to make it in society they must learn to lie just to go unnoticed. Now, Francois, if I were you I would have harped on Irina for being elitist and superior. For viewing 'most people' as happy idiots with blinkers welded to their eys. If I were you I would accuse her of thinking that she was better than 'most people'. Thankfully, I am not you. I'm glad to say that I agree with much of what she wrote in that post. I am an atheist who sees the delusional notions of those around him as just that. Comforting they may be, but delusions still. As someone who has attempted suicide I am all too familiar with the meaningless, hollow platitudes that 'most people' wrap themselves in just to make it through the day. I am someone who does not look at the life I have had since as a bountiful gift, every cumbersome second of which is to be savoured with gay abandon. The only gift I now have is the knowledge that death holds no fear for me. What joys there are to be had in life must be snatched from it, not granted by it. When I responded to her, I had perhaps a slightly different angle than I had read in her post. It was suggested by the article she linked, which in turn had reminded me of interviews I had seen with those who carried out the research. I too have wondered how people manage to maintain this beautiful world delusion. That research offers a potential explanation. A testable and repeatable one. It resides in the architecture of our brains, in the chemical pathways between our neurons; in the very centre of whatever it is that produces our sense of self and that fits that perception into the world around us. That research suggests that this is not a conscious decision. It is not something that we voluntarily submit to. It happens unconsciously for 'most people'. As in: "I don't think it is that way for most people." I have to leave it there for now. If you want to continue criticising me, then I hope that you restrict it to those elements of my position that do not overlap with Irina's. And if I am to be criticised for considering myself in any way 'better' than other people, please be sure to include Irina in your criticisms, because if I am guilty of that then so is she. @John Perhaps Twitter would suit you better. (here we go again..) :В¬) Kind regards to all, Daithi |
|
09-07-2012 Ye gods. Who said anything about Irina? We're talking about you. Why are you trying to divert attention?I'm done with this very silly conversation. |
|
09-07-2012 That is an absolutely ridiculous thing to say. Ridiculous or juvenile, I can't be sure which. Are you a particularly young person Francois? Can that be it? You might as well ask: "Who said anything about the Sun? We're talking about light."Divert attention, much? I'm pretty disappointed, to be honest. I didn't find here what I thought this blog promised. I leave it to your adolescent whims. |
|
10-07-2012 Why do people keep celebrating life even after it took away their loved ones?1) Survival Instinct Bias (self-explanatory) 2) They don't like the prospect of having limited opportunities of joy (from a temporal perspective). |
|
21-07-2012 You have no other choice, but to have free Will.And this is true for everything (to an extent), besides coming into existence in the first place. It is also not true (I'll call it a delusion or not to insult your outstanding intelligence, better said a bias on your side, girls and guys) that all parents teach their children the "do good-be good-life 's good" lie. The truth is, life is neither, but can be perceived as either. I've lost a parent (and I was present when that actually happened), but that didn't affect me negatively. Not that I think life is better/worse. It's JUST THE SAME. Because the only people affected by this change in reality were me and my closest family. That's it. Really? No. The person who was affected the most is the person who died. Mind you, it will be hard to get a satisfying answer as to how it turned out. If Nonexistence is the new cool thing or if being alive was actually better. So what do we learn from this? NOTHING. And how could we. We learn things being alive. And we filter things we don't want to learn, even if we might think they are true. This bias is sprayed in every of Madame's posts and videos (I have seen a couple) like a bad ghetto graffiti. You know what happens with graffiti? Someone comes along and sprays a better one on top. And that's the thing. Thinking is all well and nice, but when it's ALWAYS leading to the same conclusion ("life sucks", "everything is bad", "my breath stinks", "I can't dance", etc...) then it's not thinking: it's creating a mantra out of a biased, cemented view. Why should I keep on thinking life is good, despite losing a parent during the most important part of my life? Because it's my life. It's been good before, it was bad before. It was good so far after, it was bad so far after it happened. What changed? Me. What didn't change? The past and the decision I have made. So maybe, just maybe, the problem with your logical conclusion guys is not that they are wrong, but that they are built upon the wrong premises? Logic is a set of tools designed to experiment with thoughts. Not to project thoughts on reality, because we logically concluded reality to be exactly as our thoughts seem to be. Where does that lead in the end? To delusion, biases, imbalance and depression. You know, it's like people who hate garlic when they can see it in the dish, but love the taste when it's minced and mixed in the sauce. The moment you tell them, there's garlic in the sauce, they start to act as if the dish is disgusting, even though they couldn't get enough just a second ago. I guess you guys hate garlic, huh? |
|
21-07-2012 "You have no other choice, but to have free Will."Nope. Sorry, but you fail. You are a wishful thinker. No wonder you won't confront life honestly... |
|
21-07-2012 There will come a day, my mortal friend, when you too will perceive this beautiful invention of the human psyche called "humor".Maybe then you will understand the first line of my post (or maybe even that which lies beyond that). Or so I hope. (See what I did there) For now, be assured, there is no garlic in the sauce. |
Comments to Why do people keep celebrating life even after it took away their loved ones