User Tag List

123 Last

Results 1 to 10 of 24

  1. #1

    Default Explain "fact checking", "brain washing", "dispelling illusions" without "reality"

    I have recently returned to thinking about reality and it's nature.

    One challenge of thought I posed to myself was one I thought others may enjoy.

    I have not yet been able to explain all these concepts, in a manner I find satisfying, without reference to "reality".

    Fact checking
    Brain washing
    Dispelling illusions

    Can one of you?

    Although semantics are important here, simply replacing the word 'reality' with 'truth' or something like that is a cop out.

    This thread is meant for people interested in improving their abilities to conceptualize, not just to play word games.

    Accept the past. Live for the present. Look forward to the future.
    Robot Fusion
    "As our island of knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance." John Wheeler
    "[A] scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy." Richard Feynman
    "[P]etabytes of [] data is not the same thing as understanding emergent mechanisms and structures." Jim Crutchfield

  2. #2
    Senior Member Adam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    MBTI
    DEUS
    Posts
    162

    Default

    How one chooses to explain the three concepts is highly dependent on one's worldview; for example, people will disagree on what constitutes a fact and whether such a thing even exists. My attempt:

    Quote Originally Posted by ygolo View Post
    Fact checking
    Matching statement to empirical data.

    Brain washing
    Depending on the context, it can either be blindness to the merits (and I daresay, superiority) of empiricism, or desiring the continuity of something which is detrimental to your own happiness and well-being. It can also be described as protecting yourself from cognitive dissonance by limiting the rate and degree to which you are willing to evaluate alternative ideas before discarding them.

    Alternatively, the act of brain washing another individual is making him/her accept a set of ideas as truth, not by the merits of the ideas themselves, but rather the circumstances and methods used to impose them.

    Dispelling illusions
    Utilizing the full amount of information and knowledge at your disposal to compare your current belief with an alternative, which is more likely to be true? If the alternative comes out on top, you accept to have been believing in an illusion up until that point.

    Illusion is a strong word, though. Could you expand a bit upon it?

    You will notice that I have replaced reality with empiricism, and you might call this a cop-out, but it does not make sense to discuss the first point without including a reference to some notion of the "objective truth".
    ‘Many novelties have come from America. The most startling of these, a thing without precedent, is a mass of undignified poor. They do not love one another because they do not love themselves.’

    ‘And we will have made great strides in equality,
    when few have too much and fewer too little.’.

  3. #3
    Listening Oaky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Socionics
    SLI None
    Posts
    6,168

    Default

    Isn't reality the core premise of these concepts though? The anchor of them?

    Like fact checking would be the segregation of fiction. Isn't 'fact' fairly synonymous with reality if reality is defined as truth?

    For the explanation of brain washing I thought it would be something along the thoughts of formatting a thinking process of an individual to inject another. In a way, to add reality to this, a difference phrase would be initiated where for example:
    Brainwashing a brainwashed person: <- premise holds reality as second use of 'brainwashed' indicates alteration from the reality anchor.
    Brainwashing a person: <- doesn't need to hold an anchor on reality.

    I may be missing things. Blind spots.

  4. #4

    Default

    @Adam @Oaky

    Thanks for your responses. It seems like both of you are running into the same problems I did.

    There are a lot of philosophical frameworks that deny objective truths (pragmatism for example).

    But, what I was wondering was, if things like empiricism, valuing facts, resisting brainwashing, or dispelling illusions are possible without some notion of objective truths or reality.

    Some people claim the Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics requires abandoning the notion of objective reality. But I didn't see it as a requirement. It certainly allows for pragmatism, but I saw CI as a very flexible framework.

    That led me to think about how a lack of belief in objective truth may change people's values regarding how to deal with things like facts and illusion.

    Accept the past. Live for the present. Look forward to the future.
    Robot Fusion
    "As our island of knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance." John Wheeler
    "[A] scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy." Richard Feynman
    "[P]etabytes of [] data is not the same thing as understanding emergent mechanisms and structures." Jim Crutchfield

  5. #5
    Google "chemtrails" Bush Did 9/11's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    MBTI
    eNtp
    Enneagram
    3w4 sp/sx
    Socionics
    γ Ni
    Posts
    4,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oaky View Post
    Isn't reality the core premise of these concepts though? The anchor of them?
    Good word: anchor.

    Long and short, you've gotta anchor yourself to something in order for the notion of 'fact-checking' etc. to make any sense at all.

    Which leads to:
    Quote Originally Posted by ygolo View Post
    Although semantics are important here, simply replacing the word 'reality' with 'truth' or something like that is a cop out.
    What's the quality of that 'something'? Perhaps if not reality per se, then 'a sense of consistency that's as universal as possible'? Maybe, because, e.g.:
    Quote Originally Posted by ygolo View Post
    (pragmatism for example).
    Even though pragmatism doesn't equate 'consistency' with 'reality', it does find 'consistency' useful.

    I wonder whether our anchor is consistency.
    J. Scott Crothers
    aka "Bush Did 9/11"
    Founder, Truthtology, est. 1952
    Prophet and Channel, God Almighty
    Author, the Holy scripture Elevenetics

    "Just as jet fuel cannot melt steel beams, so too cannot the unshakeable pillars of Truthtology ever be shaken, whether by man, nature, or evidence."
    - Elevenetics

  6. #6
    noʎ ɟo ǝʇnɔ ʍoH Mademoiselle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    MBTI
    -NTJ
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    928

    Default

    Beautiful question.
    Reality: Is sum of facts, that exists and we cannot change that by choosing not to believe in it.
    Illusion: An incorrect image/thought that doesn’t actually exist.
    Brain washing: the act of reprogramming a brain, is illegal, mostly to erase facts and create illusions.
    I’ve tried my best to keep it simple.
    Imagine this is the best thing you've ever read.

  7. #7
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    13

    Default

    Don´t trust pure factś, listen to your emotions/impression/sesations as well, as they try to tell you something important about the situation. Listen to your gut. You realise something is wrong, what is it?
    "The hardworking, efficiant, moneymaking person (with the cold eyes and seductive words); tried to make you buy their product even though you explained to them your finacial situation but they told you those caring people are taking atvantage of you; and you need to get in touch with your pride; and independece, and stick up for your self, fight for your rights, and buy their superiour product, since it is sooo beneficial to you (big lie) and will get you there in NO time!!" (huge lie from "money making machines people")

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    686

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ygolo View Post
    I have recently returned to thinking about reality and it's nature.

    This thread is meant for people interested in improving their abilities to conceptualize, not just to play word games.
    I'm not a realist so I can't play. Sorry.

    But I'll leave you with this thought. If the only way to assess the veracity of reality is to compare it, to itself, then how useful is that anyway?

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jscrothers View Post
    Good word: anchor.

    Long and short, you've gotta anchor yourself to something in order for the notion of 'fact-checking' etc. to make any sense at all.

    Which leads to:

    What's the quality of that 'something'? Perhaps if not reality per se, then 'a sense of consistency that's as universal as possible'? Maybe, because, e.g.:

    Even though pragmatism doesn't equate 'consistency' with 'reality', it does find 'consistency' useful.

    I wonder whether our anchor is consistency.
    I was thinking along these lines myself. But, as I tried to highlight what this consistency was, the concept formed seemed like yet another version of corporeal reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mademoiselle View Post
    Beautiful question.
    Reality: Is sum of facts, that exists and we cannot change that by choosing not to believe in it.
    Illusion: An incorrect image/thought that doesn’t actually exist.
    Brain washing: the act of reprogramming a brain, is illegal, mostly to erase facts and create illusions.
    I’ve tried my best to keep it simple.
    This is the simple common sense perspective I keep returning to. The challenge is to find a viable alternative.

    Quote Originally Posted by Electra2 View Post
    Don´t trust pure factś, listen to your emotions/impression/sesations as well, as they try to tell you something important about the situation. Listen to your gut. You realise something is wrong, what is it?
    "The hardworking, efficiant, moneymaking person (with the cold eyes and seductive words); tried to make you buy their product even though you explained to them your finacial situation but they told you those caring people are taking atvantage of you; and you need to get in touch with your pride; and independece, and stick up for your self, fight for your rights, and buy their superiour product, since it is sooo beneficial to you (big lie) and will get you there in NO time!!" (huge lie from "money making machines people")
    What is the difference between a lie and truth, if there's no truth? What is it that our feelings are distinguishing, wether rightly or wrongly, if only our own perspective is correct, and everyone else's wrong?

    Quote Originally Posted by Chthonic View Post
    I'm not a realist so I can't play. Sorry.

    But I'll leave you with this thought. If the only way to assess the veracity of reality is to compare it, to itself, then how useful is that anyway?
    It seems like someone who's not a realist could play much better. It seems like you have the answer to my challenge already.

    To answer your question, however, the device or machine you used to post your message, the networks that connected that object allowing it to be seen by others, the structure that you were in or on, the means of transportation for getting supplies there, were all based on a myriad of tests of reality with itself. If you don't find these things useful, I find that surprising.

    I see value in the belief of non-corporeal reality. What I am struggling with is the lack of appreciation by many for facts, and a notion of reality that denies value in the things that people use every day, and usually, by extension, a lack of appreciation for those who toil most of their lives to bring these things into the reality that is denied.

    Accept the past. Live for the present. Look forward to the future.
    Robot Fusion
    "As our island of knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance." John Wheeler
    "[A] scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy." Richard Feynman
    "[P]etabytes of [] data is not the same thing as understanding emergent mechanisms and structures." Jim Crutchfield

  10. #10
    noʎ ɟo ǝʇnɔ ʍoH Mademoiselle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    MBTI
    -NTJ
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    928

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ygolo View Post
    This is the simple common sense perspective I keep returning to. The challenge is to find a viable alternative.

    Straightly give me examples of what you cannot apply those lines above.
    Imagine this is the best thing you've ever read.

Similar Threads

  1. Fact Checking
    By theflame in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 04-17-2017, 03:03 PM
  2. Colorful Sayings/Quotes
    By ladypinkington in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 05-10-2010, 06:28 PM
  3. Words of Wisdom, Inspiring Quotes, etc
    By rivercrow in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 11-21-2008, 06:39 PM
  4. [MBTItm] Quote on Intution
    By heart in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 07-15-2007, 01:28 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO