Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Hot buttons, and Psych 101

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Hot buttons, and Psych 101

    Doug Anderson wrote:
    [email protected] (Robert Grumbine) writes:
    In article <[email protected]>, Seeker <[email protected]> wrote:
    "urf" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]>>> What I think is a belief. Same as everybody else. It has nothing to do> with the "way things really are". You believe one thing, I believe
    another.
    > It is just what you and I believe.> Ah, but do you believe there is a "way things really are"? -- which I
    will
    admit is just as much a belief as any. Speaking for myself, rather than urf, yes ... and no. I do think there's an objective reality, and that it is better if one's thoughts are based on things closer to that than farther away. (Yes, I do know about quantum mechanics, but I'm macroscopic as are most situations I deal with.) It is mostly a pragmatic choice. Gravity seems to affect people regardless of what they think about it, and the laws of gravity are pretty vigorously enforced. Reminding me of my favorite bathroom graffitto: c = 186,272 miles per second. It's not just a good idea, it's the law.
    We're not doing that anymore - you're way behind the times, Doug:
    c = 3 X 10^8 meters per second, or 3E+08 m/sec, if you prefer. Come and
    join us in this new 21st century already! Resistance (to change) is
    Futile.


    Comment


    • #92
      Hot buttons, and Psych 101

      urf wrote:
      "Robert Grumbine" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]
      In article <[email protected]>, Seeker <[email protected]> wrote:
      "urf" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]>>> What I think is a belief. Same as everybody else. It has nothing to do> with the "way things really are". You believe one thing, I believe
      another.
      > It is just what you and I believe.> Ah, but do you believe there is a "way things really are"? -- which I
      will
      admit is just as much a belief as any. Speaking for myself, rather than urf, yes ... and no. I do think there's an objective reality, and that it is better if one's thoughts are based on things closer to that than farther away. (Yes, I do know about quantum mechanics, but I'm macroscopic as are most situations I deal with.) It is mostly a pragmatic choice. Gravity seems to affect people regardless of what they think about it, and the laws of gravity are pretty vigorously enforced. Less reliable, but still pretty good, are things like 'If you hit someone with a 2x4, they probably won't be happy with you.' The 'no' part involves how well we know what that objective reality is, and the fact that our interpretations of it are quite important themselves. The former, well, humans just aren't enormously good at objectively observing things. Even if you're a witness to events, and even if they occur fairly slowly, you just miss a lot of what happened (and what you would agree happened if you saw the videotape that was shot over your shoulder). The interpretations are where things get very messy, as they involve our feelings and there's no good 'feeling thermometer' (that I know of) with which to find objective reality. Regarding the same event, what we express of our feelings can be different at different times. Same event, but different interpretation, different processing, or different emphasis as to what parts we consider. One thing I learned from my ex (by way of her bad example) was that it is a mistake to spend too much time arguing about what 'really' happened. Not that it's an easy lesson to carry out, but that's a different matter. The thing is, there comes a point where was 'really' happened no longer matters. What matters is what you're (both) feeling, and what you're going to do now. At that point, objective reality is not important, and the subjective is all. (Though if you find your spouse's version to be in violent conflict with objective reality, you do have a different matter to consider later.) Hey! You stole my answer! Now what am I going to say??? Could I say.... Objective reality can only be interpreted by the subjective mind???
      There is no reality. It's all an illusion.


      Comment


      • #93
        Hot buttons, and Psych 101


        "Bill in Co." <[email protected]> wrote in message
        news:b57Zc.3895$w%[email protected] ink.net...
        urf wrote:
        "Robert Grumbine" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]
        In article <[email protected]>, Seeker <[email protected]> wrote:> "urf" <[email protected]> wrote in message
        news:[email protected]
        >>>>>> What I think is a belief. Same as everybody else. It has nothing to
        do
        >> with the "way things really are". You believe one thing, I believe another.
        >> It is just what you and I believe.>>>> Ah, but do you believe there is a "way things really are"? -- which I
        will
        > admit is just as much a belief as any. Speaking for myself, rather than urf, yes ... and no. I do think there's an objective reality, and that it is better if one's thoughts are based on things closer to that than farther away. (Yes, I do know about quantum mechanics, but I'm macroscopic as are most situations I deal with.) It is mostly a pragmatic choice. Gravity seems to affect people regardless of what they think about it, and the laws of gravity are pretty vigorously enforced. Less reliable, but still pretty good, are things like 'If you hit someone with a 2x4, they probably won't be happy with you.' The 'no' part involves how well we know what that objective reality is, and the fact that our interpretations of it are quite important themselves. The former, well, humans just aren't enormously good at objectively observing things. Even if you're a witness to events, and even if they occur fairly slowly, you just miss a lot of what happened (and what you would agree happened if you saw the videotape that was shot over your shoulder). The interpretations are where things get very messy, as they involve our feelings and there's no good 'feeling thermometer' (that I know of) with which to find objective reality. Regarding the same event, what we express of our feelings can be different at different times. Same event, but different interpretation, different processing, or different emphasis as to what parts we consider. One thing I learned from my ex (by way of her bad example) was that it is a mistake to spend too much time arguing about what 'really' happened. Not that it's an easy lesson to carry out, but that's a different matter. The thing is, there comes a point where was 'really' happened no longer matters. What matters is what you're (both) feeling, and what you're going to do now. At that point, objective reality is not important, and the subjective is all. (Though if you find your spouse's version to be in violent conflict with objective reality, you do have a different matter to consider later.) Hey! You stole my answer! Now what am I going to say??? Could I say.... Objective reality can only be interpreted by the subjective mind???
        There is no reality. It's all an illusion.
        I'll buy that.

        Suppose reality was just 5 Billion individual illusions and that
        the scientists who think they know something just have different
        illusions.




        Comment


        • #94
          Hot buttons, and Psych 101

          In article <[email protected]>,
          Doug Anderson <[email protected]> wrote:
          [email protected] (Robert Grumbine) writes:
          In article <[email protected]>, Seeker <[email protected]> wrote:
          "urf" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]>>> What I think is a belief. Same as everybody else. It has nothing to do> with the "way things really are". You believe one thing, I believeanother.> It is just what you and I believe.>Ah, but do you believe there is a "way things really are"? -- which I willadmit is just as much a belief as any.
          Speaking for myself, rather than urf, yes ... and no. I do think there's an objective reality, and that it is better if one's thoughts are based on things closer to that than farther away. (Yes, I do know about quantum mechanics, but I'm macroscopic as are most situations I deal with.) It is mostly a pragmatic choice. Gravity seems to affect people regardless of what they think about it, and the laws of gravity are pretty vigorously enforced.
          Reminding me of my favorite bathroom graffitto:c = 186,272 miles per second. It's not just a good idea, it's thelaw.
          I once had a t-shirt that said that. Also had Einstein in a
          police uniform holding up his had ('stop'), with his badge reading
          E = mc^2. Good shirt.

          --
          Robert Grumbine http://www.radix.net/~bobg/ Science faqs and amateur activities notes and links.
          Sagredo (Galileo Galilei) "You present these recondite matters with too much
          evidence and ease; this great facility makes them less appreciated than they
          would be had they been presented in a more abstruse manner." Two New Sciences

          Comment


          • #95
            Hot buttons, and Psych 101

            In article <[email protected]>, urf <[email protected]> wrote:
            "Robert Grumbine" <[email protected]> wrote in messagenews:[email protected]
            [nature and existence of reality musings deleted]
            Hey! You stole my answer!
            But think how much typing I saved you!
            Now what am I going to say???Could I say....Objective reality can only be interpreted by the subjective mind???
            You could, but you'd be wrong. :-)

            At least I (subjectively) think that bricks still fall at the
            same rate even if we're not there to observe them.

            --
            Robert Grumbine http://www.radix.net/~bobg/ Science faqs and amateur activities notes and links.
            Sagredo (Galileo Galilei) "You present these recondite matters with too much
            evidence and ease; this great facility makes them less appreciated than they
            would be had they been presented in a more abstruse manner." Two New Sciences

            Comment


            • #96
              Hot buttons, and Psych 101


              "Robert Grumbine" <[email protected]> wrote in message
              news:[email protected]
              In article <[email protected]>, urf <[email protected]> wrote:
              "Robert Grumbine" <[email protected]> wrote in messagenews:[email protected]
              [nature and existence of reality musings deleted]
              Hey! You stole my answer!
              But think how much typing I saved you!
              Now what am I going to say???Could I say....Objective reality can only be interpreted by the subjective mind???
              You could, but you'd be wrong. :-) At least I (subjectively) think that bricks still fall at the same rate even if we're not there to observe them.
              relative to where the brick might be at the time the brick falls?


              Comment


              • #97
                Hot buttons, and Psych 101

                x-no-archive: yes

                Robert Grumbine wrote:
                . But a man's a man for a' that.
                Have you heard Five Hand Reel's version of that (as a song)? Just curious, rare
                enough.

                beeswing

                Comment

                Working...
                X