0
   

Making the best choice of lifestyle in the face of alternatives

 
 
Reply Wed 28 Dec, 2011 05:41 am
My claim is simple: people enjoy many arbitrary activities due to their own subconscious baggage which we've aquired as a result of an overly unnatural (another side to this is the diabetes epidemic), unminimalistic lifestyle. And ultimately, everything is the same. It's the same core archetypes again and again and again, meaning only intensity is truly worth living for, unless one carries enough baggage as to make oneself neurotic. Then the most honest activity is one that causes both psychological and physiological intensity. It's the only way of maximalizing liveliness. Here's a few examples of how the baggage shows it self.

“All writers are vain, selfish and lazy, and at the very bottom of their motives lies a mystery. Writing a book is a long, exhausting struggle, like a long bout of some painful illness. One would never undertake such a thing if one were not driven by some demon whom one can neither resist nor understand.” - George Orwell.

Wittgenstein said philosophy repels those who suspect it is a timewaste due to language confusion in it, thus reinforcing language confusion in it. Too many philosophers have been freaks, this makes it overly obvious how society's unminimalistic unnaturality has gotten to them SOMEHOW.

Non-physics scientists? "All science is either physics or stamp collecting." - Rutherford telling it like it is regarding the gruntwork that is science, and yet those in it work long hours. The abstract parts of science as bloated (i.e. few jobs) also in the west and they too attract freaks. Mathematicians actually think of numbers as beautiful; how baggage-y. Every snowflake is unique but in the end its just variations of the same old archetype anyway. Nothing new under the sun. Now if one really tries to understand a subject there may be new such archetypes to uncover, new paradigms so to say but if one has taken to a bit more meta-y perspective beforehand it quickly becomes obvious only so much is ever possible within every such paradigm so its not that exciting after all. Also, some "core archetypes" in the ways of thought will obviously resonate through different fields, turning every new realization one may come over boring.

Idealism, morality. "act so as to treat people always as ends in themselves, never as mere means." yeah who cares? Life goes on whether some philosopher sits around in his house. To care about the things Kant and others do is just an arbitrary use of one's time. They must carry much subconscious baggage to have such great passion.

Perfectionism, aestheticism in general. Why care if a cord is a little messy? Some people actually care about such bull. A painting too. It's just a painting. That's that. While research has been done into human appreciation of symmetry and such, it doesn't explain overly strong neatfreakery and how neatfreaks make a life out of aestheticism. If anything human appreciation of such should only only be a minor sidething to humanity. How can it not be their subconscious, unecessary baggage giving them an artificial enjoyment boost? I call this artifical cause I want to make the best choices as far as spending my time in life on things, and there's no time for the unecessary, the simply idiosyncratic, the boring, the random, the arbitrary.

The concept of keeping a diary. Who really cares about the past? It ain't coming back anyway. Better to be living a story than sitting around thinking about one, unless one has something yet learned for preparation for life.

Just visiting places. A city or whatever is really just another variation of the same old, same old concept.


Humans evolved to DO after all, not sitting around (sedentary). Slack activities induce no extremity or intensity. Everything else is just unnatural. Or pershaps something has passed me by, not illuminated by my limited psyche. Now, try to counter my points; prove that there's something more to it, ultimately!
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 857 • Replies: 14
No top replies

 
Procrustes
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Dec, 2011 06:51 am
@PhilosophiaQueen,
I'm not going to counter your points but try add to the 'gist' of what I think you are saying (I may jump around from point to point).

Sure, we all have our own 'subconscious baggage' and in the context of our postmodern societies we wouldn't be able to look back on history and at ourselves without all that information we've absorbed. I don't think we could ask ourselves to do things better without knowing what things need improvement. And that takes time to look back and research what was different about those things back then til now.

The idea that everything is ultimately the same is debatable, and depends what context you use this idea in. You mentioned what is the point going to different cities when each city is of a simillar concept. But I would remind you of the first time travelling to a different city and of the new experiences one may encounter on such a trip. I would think that travelling and seeing hundreds of cities might get tedious and boring after a while. But the concept of cities may be the same with slight variations but I don't think the experience of different cities are ever the same.

Quote:
Slack activities induce no extremity or intensity. Everything else is just unnatural.

This a bold thing to say. Extreme activity could lead to death, is that natural?

Welcome to a2k.
0 Replies
 
igm
 
  0  
Reply Wed 28 Dec, 2011 10:21 am
@PhilosophiaQueen,
Taking on board your examples of lifestyle problems arising from 'subconscious baggage' your thesis is a little vague and generalized without any specific solutions which are not both vague and generalized e.g. "My claim is simple: people enjoy many arbitrary activities due to their own subconscious baggage which we've aquired as a result of an overly unnatural (another side to this is the diabetes epidemic), unminimalistic lifestyle."

Can you give an example of what a natural, minimalistic lifestyle would be? Also, how would you go about removing 'subconscious baggage' or should it just be ignored and your prescribed general activity be adopted?
0 Replies
 
PhilosophiaQueen
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 Dec, 2011 10:47 am
Quote:
This a bold thing to say. Extreme activity could lead to death, is that natural?


Death is very natural. Dangerous activities brings the highest level of intensity. Their tradeoff is the risk of having one's life cut short early, robbing one of intensity one otherwise would have experienced in the future.

Quote:
Taking on board your examples of lifestyle problems arising from 'subconscious baggage' your thesis is a little vague and generalized without any specific solutions which are not both vague and generalized e.g. "My claim is simple: people enjoy many arbitrary activities due to their own subconscious baggage which we've aquired as a result of an overly unnatural (another side to this is the diabetes epidemic), unminimalistic lifestyle."


I mentioned the diabetes epidemic. So many have lifestyles which the human body wasn't made for; unnatural. Some get hooked on sedentary activities. That's also them getting baggage'd. Well, even some sedentary activities provide some degree of intensity (e.g. chess tournaments), so some of it I can understand. But there's no reason to get hooked...

Quote:
Can you give an example of what a natural, minimalistic lifestyle would be? Also, how would you go about removing 'subconscious baggage' or should it just be ignored and your prescribed general activity be adopted?


I would say removing subconscious bagage can be done by getting a better sense of scale, and stronger psychological awareness. The more one studies humans and what they create, the more one sees it's all a bunch of random individual tendencies, that everything is relative, and no imperative fuelled by neurosis can force you into anything. Regardless of how you spent your life, it ultimately doesn't matter. All this talk of progress, or Overman or whatever, no one single individual in particular HAS to care for any of that arbitrary garbage. To an un-baggage'd individual, the only thing which does matter is the individual's subjective state. However, this should be the best possible out of all possible experiences. Intensity is therefore preferable, as per definition there's more energy in it than anything else. The energy can be measured physiologically. To reach subjective fullfilment one should have the capacity to be a bit ruthless, which is also made possible by removing neurosis. Thus I would think it advantageous to remove one's baggage at first, so that one may live with no leftovers making one stumble.

Lifestyles which bring intensity most efficiently, i.e. in a minimalistic manner? Sports, gangster, soldier, martial artist. Maybe play at rock concerts.
InfraBlue
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 Dec, 2011 04:55 pm
It seems that ever since humans made the acquisition of food relatively easy for the majority of them in their particular group, the question came up, "what is there to do now? Let's give voice to the awful and or terrifying dreams that we have." I think that that is where religion and aesthetics sprung from, in part.

The lifestyles that you list could also be criticized for arbitrariness (sport), morality (gangster and soldier) and aestheticism (playing at rock concerts).

So, all that you've described is all that we have. What's the alternative?
Procrustes
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 Dec, 2011 10:39 pm
@InfraBlue,
Quote:
So, all that you've described is all that we have. What's the alternative?

Doing nothing and dying from that naturally... But who would honestly choose a lifestyle like that? Monks? Protesters?

Quote:
the question came up, "what is there to do now? Let's give voice to the awful and or terrifying dreams that we have." I think that that is where religion and aesthetics sprung from, in part.

I'm not sure that the acquisition of food made us in turn think of aesthetics and religion. I don't have anything to assert in it's place because I know I would be guessing.
Procrustes
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 Dec, 2011 10:49 pm
@PhilosophiaQueen,
So you are calling for humans to DO and not remain sedentary. But you fail to mention those with disabilities, especially those who have to be in a wheelchair, or those with intellectual disabilities. Your suggestions are seemingly pointing at those able bodied couch potatoes to get up and DO something, but to me it does not warrant the outreach to all humanity.
0 Replies
 
JLNobody
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 Dec, 2011 10:50 pm
@Procrustes,
Oh come on, GUESS. I'm sure it will be an intelligent intuition.

Here's a guess from me:
We rarely make disinterested rational choices regarding lifestyle. Our choices are expressions of drives, from our biology, personality, or pressing life circumstances. As I look back, most or all of my lifestyle moves have been of that naturee.
Procrustes
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 Dec, 2011 10:54 pm
@JLNobody,
Alright, my best guess is that lifestyles are aquired, sometimes by choice but most of the time we are just born into a place and time and we adapt.
InfraBlue
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Dec, 2011 10:35 am
@Procrustes,
Procrustes wrote:

Quote:
the question came up, "what is there to do now? Let's give voice to the awful and or terrifying dreams that we have." I think that that is where religion and aesthetics sprung from, in part.

I'm not sure that the acquisition of food made us in turn think of aesthetics and religion. I don't have anything to assert in it's place because I know I would be guessing.

I was unclear in what I meant to say. It's not that the acquisition of food made us in turn think of aesthetics and religion, it's that the easier acquisition of food freed up a lot of time spent in that pursuit, and allowed humans to spend that time for other pursuits like religion and aesthetics.
JLNobody
 
  2  
Reply Fri 30 Dec, 2011 09:41 pm
@Procrustes,
Yes, that must be part of it. My being born into the United States' middle class in the 20th century accounts for much of how I live now. What is it the existentialists say: we are "thrown" into the world?
JLNobody
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Dec, 2011 09:45 pm
@InfraBlue,
Are you thinking of Mazlow's ladder, that we must gratify our needs for the "lower" needs, air, oxygen, food and water before we satisfy our needs for sociability, security, and the "higher" needs like aesthetics, religious meaning, etc., etc.?
0 Replies
 
JLNobody
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Dec, 2011 09:45 pm
@InfraBlue,
Are you thinking of Mazlow's ladder, that we must gratify our needs for the "lower" needs, air, oxygen, food and water before we satisfy our needs for sociability, security, and the "higher" needs like aesthetics, religious meaning, etc., etc.?
0 Replies
 
Procrustes
 
  1  
Reply Sat 31 Dec, 2011 01:14 am
@JLNobody,
Yes, thrown into a world where we had no choice in the matter. I don't have sour grapes about being born, I just wish someone could of warned me first Wink
0 Replies
 
PhilosophiaQueen
 
  1  
Reply Sat 31 Dec, 2011 06:05 am
Quote:
The lifestyles that you list could also be criticized for arbitrariness (sport), morality (gangster and soldier) and aestheticism (playing at rock concerts).


Sports wouldn't be arbitrary if we first determined that pleasure is good and that liveliness is a form of it (for those who can take a bit of roughness, at least) and more energy is better thus intensity is preferable. What you say about morality is correct. Both those lifestyles have huge potential fallouts. The last one, aestheticism, I think I agree with somewhat too, but there's always the intense atmosphere which is hard to stop from seeping in when one is in the middle of high-energy action.


Quote:
So you are calling for humans to DO and not remain sedentary. But you fail to mention those with disabilities, especially those who have to be in a wheelchair, or those with intellectual disabilities. Your suggestions are seemingly pointing at those able bodied couch potatoes to get up and DO something, but to me it does not warrant the outreach to all humanity.


True. If one is limited to such an extent, then it becomes much more about mental, sedentary activities.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
DOES NOTHING EXIST??? - Question by mark noble
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
morals and ethics, how are they different? - Question by existential potential
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Making the best choice of lifestyle in the face of alternatives
Copyright © 2018 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 12/15/2018 at 11:57:46