From: Kalkor (kalkor@kalkor.com)
Date: Wed Feb 27 2002 - 17:54:48 MST
[Hermit] There are several prerequisites to interrelating successfully
with others. The ability to communicate effectively, the ability to
think rationally and act ethically, the characteristics of
dependability and predictability, an understanding of where we come
from to determine a context for words and actions, and above all,
seeing that men tend to react to one another depending on how they are
treated, the anticipation that you will find the company and pleasures
of others to be pleasant and pleasing to yourself. That way, you will
sometimes be disappointed, but I would suggest, not nearly so much as
those that do not engage in hopeful dialog (who, fortunately for
themselves, seldom realize how much they are missing).
[nng]So this forum should be for the discussion of memes to facilitate the
development of those
abilities/characteristics/understandings/anticipations?
[Kalkor 1]The discussion of, creation of, practice of, and whatever you want
it to be. Development of those
abilities/characteristics/understandings/anticipations will not just happen
through discussion of them, but rather by putting them into practice in this
forum for rational discourse, and in all other RL interaction. Which I think
is what both you and Hermit are trying to say above ;-}
[Hermit] This seems to be a natural progression for a Virian, and I
think that Kalkor put it rather nicely in
[url=http://forum.javien.com/XMLmessage.php?id=id::W1YUWjMz-IXR_-dRp0-X0N1-J
hduLUwfUQUI]
"virus: Coping and self-reliance (was RE: faith not moribund)", Kalkor,
Wed Feb 27, 2002 03:05 pm[/url]
[nng]Yes, I concur that the definition of self-reliance, as provided there,
is well argued. But it seems about as useful to achieving self-reliance
as the peano postulates are to proving Fermat's last theorem - there's a
lot more to go before one can take those words and turn them into
reality and "cope" with that reality. Which leads me to the coping
aspect....
[Kalkor 1]If you're looking for a checklist, you've come to the wrong place.
Catch-22, you have to be self-reliant enough to put those ideas into action
to achieve self-reliance. Or, to simplify, try examining the memes behind
your actions, and discard or alter the meme or the action if you suspect
you're practicing hypocrisy. Something that must be DONE rather than
discussed, and I am merely an amateur at it.
[nng]Kalkor states that coping is best achieved via acceptance of those two
points:
[Kalkor]
1)The past cannot be changed
2)Doing only things that benefit me, immediately and in the long term,
is the surest way to cope with
having done badly or been done wrong.
[nng]I claim that (1) is a belief that could quite possibly be overturned
with the advent of time-travel, and so therefore is not acceptable to a
person with the virtue of "vision".
I also claim that (2) begs the question - it is too shrouded in notions
of "benefit", "badly", and "wrong" to be immediately obviously
applicable.
A more thorough discussion of those terms is relevant before (2) can
have any meaning.
[Kalkor 1]Along this same line of reasoning, the entire question SHOULD be
begged. What is "coping"? Who's coping? With what? The implication is of
some emotional or physical difficulty to be surmounted. The person doing the
coping will usually be aware of, in context, what is meant by "benefit",
"badly" and "wrong". Or should be, lest the interpretation and action which
result are NOT beneficial. Oh, wait, unfortunately we as humans do this
already. Which brings us back to religion again ;-}
[Kalkor 1]I claim that the statement [quote](1) is a belief that could quite
possibly be overturned with the advent of time-travel, and so therefore is
not acceptable to a person with the virtue of "vision".[/quote] suggests a
postulate which is not currently falsifiable, that time-travel could or may
become possible. Vision, to me, is the ability to conceptualize falsifiable
postulates outside of the currently accepted model. Part of "reason" is then
attempting to falsify them through experimentation. Conceptualizing
non-falsifiable postulates is, imho, to have a "pipe dream". Which brings us
back to religion again ;-} And don't worry, I've tossed a few pipe dreams
into this forum myself, and the other members are doing a good job of
keeping me in check.
Kalkor
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 25 2002 - 13:28:44 MDT