Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

what we cling to

Expand Messages
  • Mary
    eduard, You are soundly in existential territory when talking about decision making, and psychology is currently studying scripts and other similar ideas
    Message 1 of 3 , Jan 17, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      eduard,

      You are soundly in existential territory when talking about decision making, and psychology is currently studying scripts and other similar ideas alongside the nature-nurture debate. According to Sartre, at least, a person chooses, but what is a responsible choice? He proposed that one chooses from their authenticity, but if you don't know or like who you are, your choices are incoherent. If you see yourself as isolated from others and your environment, your choices will be different than if you view yourself as part of a community, nation, or even the planet. The battle of ideas is waged not only in our brains but in the world as a consequence. Choosing better scripts seem like essence making.

      My interest in phenomenology and philosophy definitely intersects with existentialism not faith, but thinking one's brain can change itself requires a type of belief, a belief that what we presently understand about the brain is sufficient in solving all our problems. But as with the gun issue, the matter at hand is reducing problems, not the false hope of completely eradicating them. I think some people need to believe they can change how they think and feel and then do it; others will try and give up and perhaps try again; others will never think they need to change. I doubt philosophy and phenomenology offer any practical solutions, but I didn't know that was a requirement for participation here.

      Mary

      --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eduardathome wrote:

      but the basic point is that we actually think with our brains. However, as I said in the beginning, there is a huge reluctance in the general population to accept the fact. There is this feeling that we can't possibly think with our brains ... for everything such as our spirituality, our perception of the world, our behaviour, etc., etc.. I think that one of the reasons is because we don't want to own up to the realisation that our choices are our own making. It is better and more mentally comforting to say that our choices come from
      somewhere else.
    • William
      ... Often ones thought changing programs need security from others and as an individual we have the right to privacy in introspection. On the gun issue I
      Message 2 of 3 , Jan 17, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" wrote:
        >
        > eduard,
        >
        > You are soundly in existential territory when talking about decision making, and psychology is currently studying scripts and other similar ideas alongside the nature-nurture debate. According to Sartre, at least, a person chooses, but what is a responsible choice? He proposed that one chooses from their authenticity, but if you don't know or like who you are, your choices are incoherent. If you see yourself as isolated from others and your environment, your choices will be different than if you view yourself as part of a community, nation, or even the planet. The battle of ideas is waged not only in our brains but in the world as a consequence. Choosing better scripts seem like essence making.
        >
        > My interest in phenomenology and philosophy definitely intersects with existentialism not faith, but thinking one's brain can change itself requires a type of belief, a belief that what we presently understand about the brain is sufficient in solving all our problems. But as with the gun issue, the matter at hand is reducing problems, not the false hope of completely eradicating them. I think some people need to believe they can change how they think and feel and then do it; others will try and give up and perhaps try again; others will never think they need to change. I doubt philosophy and phenomenology offer any practical solutions, but I didn't know that was a requirement for participation here.
        >
        > Mary
        > Mary, I do not think changing ideas needs faith but it does need a method and a goal. The method is to change the things you do. Those actions are motovated by the goal . If the goal is laudable and you are sure of that no faith is necessary, you know you do not believe. Many times these changes are not completely apparent and it becomes like peeling an onion, layer by layer until a better way is found. New facts and discoveries may come into the situation but leaps of faith are rarely the way to go. Look at Bush, when I heard he was not thinking but making decisions from his gut I knew we were in for deep trouble.
        Often ones thought changing programs need security from others and as an individual we have the right to privacy in introspection. On the gun issue I have made a change in attitude and actions. Shooting is no longer a sport or hobby for me. Only weapons for self security are left out of the lock down and my association with the gun culture is going away. I did that because of a goal to move away from the gun culture the method was to lock down the guns.It was of consideration for some time but the child killings tipped the scales. Now the gun lobby stands id sharp relief and I see many of my fellow citizens changing attitudes toward the legitimacy of the gun lobbys stances.Romney`s campaign had the wheels come off and the nature of the conservative positions then came into focus. The process of decision and then change becomes easier when you have done it sucsusfully several times. I plan to keep looking for progressive change in my remaining years, it is a primary rational for continuing on. Bill
        > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eduardathome wrote:
        >
        > but the basic point is that we actually think with our brains. However, as I said in the beginning, there is a huge reluctance in the general population to accept the fact. There is this feeling that we can't possibly think with our brains ... for everything such as our spirituality, our perception of the world, our behaviour, etc., etc.. I think that one of the reasons is because we don't want to own up to the realisation that our choices are our own making. It is better and more mentally comforting to say that our choices come from
        > somewhere else.
        >
      • eduardathome
        Mary, I think that Sartre would be much better understood if he had spoken of mental scripts. Authenticity then becomes one s choice or behaviour that is in
        Message 3 of 3 , Jan 17, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          Mary,

          I think that Sartre would be much better understood if he had spoken of
          mental scripts. Authenticity then becomes one's choice or behaviour that is
          in line with your own scripts. You are not authentic if you behave in a
          fashion that is against your own script. One's Essence is then the complex
          of one's scripts that define "you" in your choices and behaviour [which is a
          kind of a choice ... you choose to act].

          We often speak of "winning hearts and minds" which can be reduced to
          "winning brains" since the "heart" is associated with emotion that is
          expressed by the brain and of course the
          "mind" is just another word for "brain" although we tend to use the term
          "mind" to relate to rational thinking.

          The gun issue is all about what people think. Obama wants to win the hearts
          and minds of that portion of the population which wants to arm itself to the
          teeth. The NRA is in there with their commercials to prevent this from
          happening. We used to say that we were in Vietnam to win the hearts and
          minds of the Vietnamese. Now of course we say it about the Iraqis and
          Afghans. It is no different in relation to the US gun totting public. The
          issue of guns in America ... even reduction of guns ... is a brain issue.

          eduard

          -----Original Message-----
          From: Mary
          Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2013 11:16 AM
          To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: [existlist] what we cling to

          eduard,

          You are soundly in existential territory when talking about decision making,
          and psychology is currently studying scripts and other similar ideas
          alongside the nature-nurture debate. According to Sartre, at least, a person
          chooses, but what is a responsible choice? He proposed that one chooses from
          their authenticity, but if you don't know or like who you are, your choices
          are incoherent. If you see yourself as isolated from others and your
          environment, your choices will be different than if you view yourself as
          part of a community, nation, or even the planet. The battle of ideas is
          waged not only in our brains but in the world as a consequence. Choosing
          better scripts seem like essence making.

          My interest in phenomenology and philosophy definitely intersects with
          existentialism not faith, but thinking one's brain can change itself
          requires a type of belief, a belief that what we presently understand about
          the brain is sufficient in solving all our problems. But as with the gun
          issue, the matter at hand is reducing problems, not the false hope of
          completely eradicating them. I think some people need to believe they can
          change how they think and feel and then do it; others will try and give up
          and perhaps try again; others will never think they need to change. I doubt
          philosophy and phenomenology offer any practical solutions, but I didn't
          know that was a requirement for participation here.

          Mary

          --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eduardathome wrote:

          but the basic point is that we actually think with our brains. However, as I
          said in the beginning, there is a huge reluctance in the general population
          to accept the fact. There is this feeling that we can't possibly think with
          our brains ... for everything such as our spirituality, our perception of
          the world, our behaviour, etc., etc.. I think that one of the reasons is
          because we don't want to own up to the realisation that our choices are our
          own making. It is better and more mentally comforting to say that our
          choices come from
          somewhere else.



          ------------------------------------

          Please support the Existential Primer... dedicated to explaining nothing!

          Home Page: http://www.tameri.com/csw/existYahoo! Groups Links
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.