The Belief in Personal Experience

[Victor]

Just as for some denominations, the Bible is the last word, personal experience is the last word here.

Ideas can be accepted or rejected, even opinions can be accepted or rejected - unless of course they are based on personal experience - and then they are sacrosanct.

So here it is bad manners to question personal experience.

And I admit I find this as annoying as someone quoting the Bible to me as the last word.

But at the same time I can see that personal experience is the last redoubt. And when personal experience goes, there is nothing left.

So it would be cruel to cast doubt on personal experience.

But my annoyance with you allows me to be a little cruel.

For instance, personal experience is no more than anecdotal.

And the anecdotal can't be used to establish any broader principles.

But worse if you rely ultimately on personal experience, you end up as isolated individuals.

There is no possibility to join together for larger social ends.

Indeed the extreme individualists raise their hands in horror and call it, "Socialism".

But the tragedy is that if you are atomised individuals, you are in fact at the mercy of larger social forces.

And you have no way of understanding these larger social forces, and so they seem mysterious to you. And in response you are attracted to conspiracy theories and paranoia.

When you rely on personal experience and have no understanding of society, you become prey to any scamsters that come along - like Mrs Myers and her daughter Mrs Briggs.

But the faith in personal experience is deep and profound. And can only be described as a religious belief.

And this is a religious belief held by one whole nation.

And this belief is de rigueur here.

[marmalade.sunrise]

I happen to like socialism. Ice cream for everybody!:party:

[Victor]

I happen to like socialism. Ice cream for everybody!:party:

Well, I don't like Socialism and nor does my country. We are democratic capitalists and have been from the very beginning.

However my country does not give the last word to the Bible nor to personal experience.

In fact the larger social forces are openly and traditionally expressed in our political parties.

Our Labor Party is the oldest social democratic party in the world and represents the Unions.

While our Liberal Party represents business.

And both parties have different ideologies and different ethos.

Whereas over there they have two parties of business.

And naturally business believes in the individual and personal experience, simply because they can manipulate and use the individual for their own profit.

In, "The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism", Max Weber show how business and religion work hand in hand.

Over there the politicians regularly and often call upon God, but if they did so here, they would be laughed at.

So over there the belief in personal experience has been nurtured and cultivated by both business and religion until it has been set in stone.

And it seems to me that those who rely on personal experience as the last word are kinda stoney.

Their hearts are shallow and cold and they live in a stoned world of one dimension.

[marmalade.sunrise]

However my country does not give the last word to the Bible nor to personal experience.

Well, obviously we could use some improvements in our educational system in the U.S.

[Victor]

Well, obviously we could use some improvements in our educational system in the U.S.

It's far too late for that.

For Protestantism and Business have had a long and successful marriage over there and you are their children.

[jenocyde]

I don't think anyone thinks it's bad manners to question beliefs or personal experiences. But I think it's bad manners to tell someone that there personal experience or belief is wrong. There is a difference.

I also don't understand how relying on personal experience leaves you isolated. Maybe you can define "rely" for me?

[Victor]

I don't think anyone thinks it's bad manners to question beliefs or personal experiences. But I think it's bad manners to tell someone that there personal experience or belief is wrong. There is a difference.

I also don't understand how relying on personal experience leaves you isolated. Maybe you can define "rely" for me?

Look around you here.

When we get into an argument, we all try to have the last word.

We all try to be the last authority.

And the last fall back is to say, "Well, this is my own personal experience, and you have your own personal experience, and that's that".

Of course if we did question that, the whole edifice of your society would come crashing down.

So of those things of which we cannot speak, we remain silent.

[jenocyde]

So how should arguments of a personal nature end, then? I think there is no system on the planet that wasn't grounded in a personal experience.

[marmalade.sunrise]

It's far too late for that.

For Protestantism and Business have had a long and successful marriage over there and you are their children.

Oh please. You're exaggerating. America isn't always as bad as it looks on T.V.

[Victor]

I think there is no system on the planet that wasn't grounded in a personal experience.

This is an entirely religious belief.

Your mind has been entirely captured by Protestantism.

You are perfectly adapted to your environment.

You fully believe that that there is no system on the planet that isn't grounded in personal experience.

Well, I can tell you I am living in one right now.

And of course to believe there there is no other system on the planet, other than yours, is grotesquely imperial.

[Dwigie]

Look around you here.

When we get into an argument, we all try to have the last word.

We all try to be the last authority.

And the last fall back is to say, "Well, this is my own personal experience, and you have your own personal experience, and that's that".

Of course if we did question that, the whole edifice of your society would come crashing down.

So of those things of which we cannot speak, we remain silent.

You have a good point Victor. You made me think because out of over emotionalism I did something similar by invalidating someone's opinion due to the fact that she had not experienced "it".

Now that I think about it, it is wrong. I think that having a different perspective from your own can help us gain insight.
However, we do live some things differently and at times it really is "just that" I feel. Also, I disagree with you when you say that people always try to be the last authority.
Have you never had your mind changed about anything by someone?

[jenocyde]

How is that a religious belief or imperial? It seems like you are judging me based on your own personal experience.

[marmalade.sunrise]

But allowing everyone to have their own opinion is the opposite of Imperialism, which is why we like it. It's valuing others rather than valuing The One Way of being that was established through previous types of government. Actually, thinking only ONE WAY was right is actually kinda what caused Imperialism in the first place - ya know, England and other Western European countries thinking they knew "better" than the native peoples of the lands they dominated.

[Athenian200]

I've actually been looking for an alternative to personal experience. I feel it's unreliable and anecdotal, but I haven't been been shown a lot of good alternatives. Religion is one, and it seems arbitrary. Logic is another, but it's too limited to deal with some aspects of reality.

What are the alternatives, Victor? I want to know...

[Victor]

Oh please. You're exaggerating. America isn't always as bad as it looks on T.V.

C'mon, we believe America is a force for good in the world, that is why we have been allies since 1904.

What I am trying to say is beyond good and evil.

I am very interested in comparative history. And particularly comparing the histories of North and South America with the history of Oz.

And the comparison reveals vast similarities which only serve to highlight the differences.

So we can learn to understand ourselves better by understanding one another.

But a moralism doesn't take us very far in the direction of understanding.

[Victor]

I've actually been looking for an alternative to personal experience. I feel it's unreliable and anecdotal, but I haven't been been shown a lot of good alternatives. Religion is one, and it seems arbitrary. Logic is another, but it's too limited to deal with some aspects of reality.

What are the alternatives, Victor? I want to know...

Well, my dear Athenian, the big historical alternatives are Protestantism and Catholicism.

[A Schnitzel]

By definition a person can't believe in anything that doesn't come from personal experience.

[Athenian200]

Well, my dear Athenian, the big historical alternatives are Protestantism and Catholicism.

Do you mean that literally, or as a metaphor for individual interpretation versus centralized interpretation?

[Victor]

It seems like you are judging me based on your own personal experience.

Hoist on my own petard.

[Victor]

By definition a person can't believe in anything that doesn't come from personal experience.

This is simply a dogma.

[Victor]

Do you mean that literally, or as a metaphor for individual interpretation versus centralized interpretation?

Both.

For there are literal Protestant Churches and a literal Catholic Church.

However they have been around for a very long time so a Protestant sensibility has developed as well as a Catholic sensibility.

[Victor]

Do you mean that literally, or as a metaphor for individual interpretation versus centralized interpretation?

A metaphor is a comparison of relationships.

And so in comparing the history of your fine country with mine, metaphors come into their own.

[jenocyde]

Hoist on my own petard.

...and blow us both to the moon. :hug:

[Victor]

But allowing everyone to have their own opinion is the opposite of Imperialism, which is why we like it.

All empires are different.

And the empire you betrayed in your eight year war of treachery in the 18th Century, was the British Empire.

And the British Empire was a territorial empire, while your empire is an economic empire.

But I admire your chutzpah by being spectacularly disingenuous in denying you are an empire.

[marmalade.sunrise]

C'mon, we believe America is a force for good in the world, that is why we have been allies since 1904.

What I am trying to say is beyond good and evil.

I am very interested in comparative history. And particularly comparing the histories of North and South America with the history of Oz.

And the comparison reveals vast similarities which only serve to highlight the differences.

So we can learn to understand ourselves better by understanding one another.

But a moralism doesn't take us very far in the direction of understanding.

I agree with everything you're saying. That's why I'm telling you that America isn't as bad as it seems - there are plenty of us here who are interested in comparitive history and other cultures. We're just not the ones who get the most air play.

[marmalade.sunrise]

All empires are different.

And the empire you betrayed in your eight year war of treachery in the 18th Century, was the British Empire.

And the British Empire was a territorial empire, while your empire is an economic empire.

But I admire your chutzpah by being spectacularly disingenuous in denying you are an empire.

I don't deny that the United States is an economic empire. I never said that it wasn't. It's part of the reason I'm so sympathetic to democratic socialism.

But I don't see what that has to do with people being allowed to decide certain arguments (but of course not all issues) upon personal experience.

[Victor]

...and blow us both to the moon. :hug:

And once again we find ourselves in space without a parachute between us.

The outlines of your face are starting to become familiar as we fall towards the Earth.

I don't know why you hang on to me so tightly - it is almost as though I have a parachute.

And equally I don't know why I hang onto you so tightly - as I know you don't have a parachute.

Call it a folie à deux if you like but here we are, once again, tête-à-tête.

[A Schnitzel]

This is simply a dogma.

So you believe there are innate ideas?

Victor, I never took you for the type.
It's usually the religious that hang onto Rationalism.
But don't mind me, I couldn't understand a lick of what Leibniz was saying.

[Victor]

It's part of the reason I'm so sympathetic to democratic socialism.


Just so that it is crystal clear - I don't support democratic socialism.

Perhaps we have a confusion of terms.

Our Labor Party is a social democratic party, it is not a democratic socialist party.

Our Labor Party does not support socialism however it does support social democracy.

I support liberal democracy as the least evil of the political systems. So I support both our Liberal Party and our Labor Party, as both our main parties are liberal democratic parties.

However, as you know, Australia invented the Secret Ballot. And throughout the world, the Secret Ballot is known as the Australian Ballot.

So, alas, I am not going to tell you who I vote for.

[Victor]

But I don't see what that has to do with people being allowed to decide certain arguments (but of course not all issues) upon personal experience.

It is because you were founded by Protestants who believed in the personal interpretation of the Bible.

Of course you have now democratised and secularised Protestantism, but still you deeply and profoundly believe in personal interpretation and personal experience.

And because you have forgotten the origins of your reliance on personal experience, it is all the more powerful.

I mean, let's face it - an American is never more American than when they are alone.

[marmalade.sunrise]

It is because you were founded by Protestants who believed in the personal interpretation of the Bible.

Of course you have now democratised and secularised Protestantism, but still you deeply and profoundly believe in personal interpretation and personal experience.

And because you have forgotten the origins of your reliance on personal experience, it is all the more powerful.

I mean, let's face it - an American is never more American than when they are alone.

Or could it actually be because we live in such a pluralistic society? The United States is made up not only of Protestants, but of Catholics, Jews, Buddhists, Muslims, Witches, and atheists. Our collective heritage came here from literally all over the world. Very few people in this country are one "pure" race or culture. We have all had to learn to live together, especially in the last few decades as issues like racism and other forms of intolerance have come to the forefront to be dealt with.

Therefore we have learned to respect the experiences of others as not being like ours, because in this country (unless you live down in a holler) it's highly likely that one meets people very different from him or herself on a regular basis.

It's important to take the personal experiences of others into serious consideration, otherwise we would be limited by our own experience.

[Victor]

Or could it actually be because we live in such a pluralistic society? The United States is made up not only of Protestants, but of Catholics, Jews, Buddhists, Muslims, Witches, and atheists. Our collective heritage came here from literally all over the world. Very few people in this country are one "pure" race or culture. We have all had to learn to live together, especially in the last few decades as issues like racism and other forms of intolerance have come to the forefront to be dealt with.

Therefore we have learned to respect the experiences of others as not being like ours, because in this country (unless you live down in a holler) it's highly likely that one meets people very different from him or herself on a regular basis.

It's important to take the personal experiences of others into serious consideration, otherwise we would be limited by our own experience.

My country is even more multicultural than yours. And in fact our official policy is Multiculturalism. And yet we don't rely on personal experience in the same way you do.

So we need to go back to our origins to discover our differences.

You were founded by Protestants as well as a bourgeois, that is a business, revolution. And both reinforced one another and both strongly believed in personal experience.

Whereas we were founded by the Scottish and English Enlightenment and have had no revolution, neither bourgeois nor proletarian.

So we remain the children of the Aristocratic Enlightenment.

While you are the children of the Protestant Bourgeoise.

[marmalade.sunrise]

My country is even more multicultural than yours. And in fact our official policy is Multiculturalism. And yet we don't rely on personal experience in the same way you do.

So we need to go back to our origins to discover our differences.

You were founded by Protestants as well as a bourgeois, that is a business, revolution. And both reinforced one another and both strongly believed in personal experience.

Whereas we were founded by the Scottish and English Enlightenment and have had no revolution, neither bourgeois nor proletarian.

So we remain the children of the Aristocratic Enlightenment.

While you are the children of the Protestant Bourgeoise.

So you think being Aristocratic is superior?

Not only that, but I happen to know that your country was once a massive holding pen for prisoners.

So you're actually the children of Aristocrats and criminals.;)

[Athenian200]

So we remain the children of the Aristocratic Enlightenment.

While you are the children of the Protestant Bourgeoise.

How would you describe the difference between the two?

[Victor]

Not only that, but I happen to know that your country was once a massive holding pen for prisoners.


You seem to forget that you were a colony for one hundred and fifty years - and a penal colony to boot.

I think you are being disingenuous in forgetting you were a penal colony.

But after your eight year war of treachery (1775-1783), the Colonial Office could not longer send convicts to you, so they sent them to us.

And yet we both turned out OK.

[Victor]

So you think being Aristocratic is superior?


Each one of us thinks our own country is best.

However, in my case, I am right.

[Victor]

So you're actually the children of Aristocrats and criminals.;)

In our bilious moments, we like to say that our fellow Australians are either guards or prisoners.

[shortnsweet]

Personal experience is what makes this site great.
If it wasn't for us all sitting around here and talking about personal experience, then what would be the point?
We would just make a book list of things to read and classes to take.
Personal experience is what we have- and its great to see all the viewpoints of real people- not just what we read in books or areas of expertise. (OR some random profound and original idea that we've just invented. In which case we'd be at the genius convention, not here.)

I do agree that quoting personal experience for an argument or as gospel can get awfully annoying! But, I guess that's just the nature of these kinds of discussions. (In my experience, anyways !!! ;) )

If we were only allowed to talk about these great broad views that we've developed or had some area of expertise, then this site would be a pretty desolate land. (And a boring one at that!) We go to work and school to talk about things that we know for fact, right? Why not spew off some opinions and stories for fun?

(Excuse my dogma, by the way. I know this sets typologycentral back in it's broader mission to achieve larger social ends.:doh:)

[marmalade.sunrise]

Each one of us thinks our own country is best.

However, in my case, I am right.

ha ha ha...how ironic of you to point out that you think your personal experience is best :smile:

[Oom]

Wow, this thread exudes spite, I can feel it.

Who is to say that we can't just generalize more than we already are. Lets say we look at the even bigger picture. Humans evolved on this earth (or were created, pick your poison) and have made civilization. Thus cultures were created by settling into different areas of the globe. All of the cultures want to progress as a main source of survival and convenience. It is a selfish endeavor, but who is to say selfishness isn't the best path to bettering your position in life?

If you want to get back to the roots, the primal instincts and say personal experience is a bad thing then... have a nuclear holocaust.

[Victor]

Personal experience is what makes this site great.
If it wasn't for us all sitting around here and talking about personal experience, then what would be the point?
We would just make a book list of things to read and classes to take.
Personal experience is what we have- and its great to see all the viewpoints of real people- not just what we read in books or areas of expertise. (OR some random profound and original idea that we've just invented. In which case we'd be at the genius convention, not here.)

I do agree that quoting personal experience for an argument or as gospel can get awfully annoying! But, I guess that's just the nature of these kinds of discussions. (In my experience, anyways !!! ;) )

If we were only allowed to talk about these great broad views that we've developed or had some area of expertise, then this site would be a pretty desolate land. (And a boring one at that!) We go to work and school to talk about things that we know for fact, right? Why not spew off some opinions and stories for fun?

(Excuse my dogma, by the way. I know this sets typologycentral back in it's broader mission to achieve larger social ends.:doh:)

The really nicest thing is to marry personal experience with the experience of our family, our peers, our affiliations and our culture.

Our own personal experience is directly available to us but our experience of our family, our peers, our clubs, societies and religions, not to mention the worlds of science, literature and art, are all mediated to us by language, literacy and the internet.

For instance a poem based entirely on personal experience is mawkish.

But a poem that addresses the whole world, including personal experience, lifts off, takes off and flies.

To talk only in terms of personal experience is like crawling awkwardly along the bottom of the ocean like a crab, when you could be flying like a stingray or cruising like a shark or floating like a jellyfish in the wide and free, deep blue sea.

But most of all our well-being and our happiness depend on finding something larger than ourselves.

And indeed our happiness and well-being depend on our gratitude for something larger than ourselves.

[Victor]

ha ha ha...how ironic of you to point out that you think your personal experience is best :smile:

Oops, - you caught me.

[Victor]

Personal experience is what makes this site great.

And when you limit yourself to personal experience you lead yourself open to scamsters like Mrs Briggs and Mrs Myers.

And when you limit yourself to personal experience, you limit others to personal experience.

And you limit others to personal experience for a purpose - so they can be scammed as well.

And hey, look at us - if we are all being scammed, no one is being scammed - there is no one responsible - there is no one in charge - we are finally our own authority - no more teachers, no more books, no more teachers' dirty looks.

But most of all, you limit yourself to personal experience because it is your cultural imperative.

And naturally you want to be good, your want to be a good girl, so you do as you culture tells you and you limit yourself to personal experience with a clear conscience.

[Victor]

Wow, this thread exudes spite, I can feel it.

Spite is very interesting, isn't it?

Spite means you have come too close to the bone.

[Oom]

Spite is very interesting, isn't it?

Spite means you have come too close to the bone.


Main Entry:
1spite Listen to the pronunciation of 1spite
Pronunciation:
\ˈspīt\
Function:
noun
Etymology:
Middle English, short for despite
Date:
14th century

1 : petty ill will or hatred with the disposition to irritate, annoy, or thwart


No, no it doesn't

[Victor]

Main Entry:
1spite Listen to the pronunciation of 1spite
Pronunciation:
\ˈspīt\
Function:
noun
Etymology:
Middle English, short for despite
Date:
14th century

1 : petty ill will or hatred with the disposition to irritate, annoy, or thwart


No, no it doesn't

Hey, Oom, you have successfully contradicted me.

And you did draw attention to a most interesting emotion.

So you are well worth your salt.

And, "spite", reveals the deeper disposition.

It gets below the phoney self designed to look good in the eyes of others and shows the true feeling.

Spite is an authentic emotion because it comes unbiden, And it is so ugly, we instinctively recoil.

As, "Spite", is the name of the snake in the Garden of Eden.

And it was Spite who tempted Eve. And it was Spite that Eve gave into to.

And ever since, spite has been the snake in our bosom.

The repressed are repressive, and are so ugly they must hide their ugliness behind a mask of goodness and innocence.

But spite always tells the truth.

[Oom]

True, spite does always speak the truth. I just wish it wouldn't speak at all.