100% Metal Forum (Death Metal and Black Metal)

Metal => Interzone => Topic started by: crow on April 01, 2012, 02:38:56 PM

Title: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: crow on April 01, 2012, 02:38:56 PM
The scientific, modern Western mind seeks to verify everything it notices.
I see it as a rodent-like creature, running up and down a checklist, feverishly comparing data, to find a match.
If a match can not be found, the mind discards is as non-existent, stupid, irrelevant, a ‘straw-man’, etc.

This is part of the modern malaise; if something is not already accepted, popularly, as being true, then it can’t be. Positively Medieval.
This list-checking has become what people refer to as ‘thinking’, when in fact, it is no such thing.
Come to think of it, I am no longer sure what ‘thinking’ actually is; I do so little of it, any more.
At some point, man started walking upright.
Perhaps that is what will eventually happen with the mind; there when you need it, but not the best way of getting around.

What is 'thinking'? Can you describe it?
Do you feel it should sit at the apex of what men can do?
Title: Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: Phoenix on April 01, 2012, 02:49:44 PM
In my paradigm, it's important to distinguish between thinking, awareness and aloofness.

Thinking can be deliberate if you mean to do it, or automatic if the thoughts arise without your specific intent, and may be described as running words and sentences through your head.

Awareness falls into a wide range of conscious and unconscious awareness and consists of being cognizant or understanding of things without verbalizing it into actual words and sentences. For example, you are aware that you are sitting on a chair, that what the chair is on is a floor, and that you're on a planet circling the sun, but you do not constantly affirm or remind yourself of these notions by verbalizing them in your mind and thinking "I am on Earth and am rotating around the sun". Or for another example if a woman is very rude to you, you may verbalize in your mind the word "bitch", which is thinking, or you may immediately recognize what she's about (as far as your paradigm is concerned) which is awareness - in this case you probably could not verbalize the awareness because it's tons of concepts and cannot be quickly summarized in a few words.. unless you have simple stereotypes about women. You may think and be aware simultaneously.

Then there's aloofness, like when you zone out, which is lack of awareness of your surroundings and / or your inner and outer self self. It generally increases as thinking increases, arising simultaneously alongside thinking and to the detriment of awareness. The problem with thinking is that it's so crude and dense that it blocks out awareness, and can take a life of its own.

I think back to when my thoughts carried themselves on independently of my conscious direction of them, and it's difficult for me to remember how it was because it's such an axiomatically different state than the one I live now. It makes me very grateful to not be like that anymore!

Holy crow, we agree on something. ;)
Title: Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: crow on April 01, 2012, 03:25:33 PM
Probably not, but let's not spoil a good thing :)
Thanks. That was illuminating, clear and honest.
Nice one!
Title: Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: Wolfgang on April 01, 2012, 03:43:32 PM
The scientific, modern Western mind seeks to verify everything it notices.
I see it as a rodent-like creature, running up and down a checklist, feverishly comparing data, to find a match.
If a match can not be found, the mind discards is as non-existent, stupid, irrelevant, a ‘straw-man’, etc.

This is part of the modern malaise; if something is not already accepted, popularly, as being true, then it can’t be. Positively Medieval.
This list-checking has become what people refer to as ‘thinking’, when in fact, it is no such thing.
Come to think of it, I am no longer sure what ‘thinking’ actually is; I do so little of it, any more.
At some point, man started walking upright.
Perhaps that is what will eventually happen with the mind; there when you need it, but not the best way of getting around.

What is 'thinking'? Can you describe it?
Do you feel it should sit at the apex of what men can do?


A modern scientific approach is not rodent like, and you're misusing strawman here, inserting it into a context it wouldn't fit if you were not trying to undermine the fact the charge was laid against hours ago. Stop making new threads just to "get back" at your "oppressors".

I still see some good inside you. Perhaps like a naive teacher in the ghetto, lecturing with her brightest English lit student. But there is some potential. But your own concepts of comfort and self worth are too tied into your notions of spirituality. And attacks on them bother you greatly.

Maybe metal isn't for you.
Title: Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: Phoenix on April 01, 2012, 03:46:50 PM
The scientific, modern Western mind seeks to verify everything it notices.
I see it as a rodent-like creature, running up and down a checklist, feverishly comparing data, to find a match.
If a match can not be found, the mind discards is as non-existent, stupid, irrelevant, a ‘straw-man’, etc.

This is part of the modern malaise; if something is not already accepted, popularly, as being true, then it can’t be. Positively Medieval.
This list-checking has become what people refer to as ‘thinking’, when in fact, it is no such thing.
Come to think of it, I am no longer sure what ‘thinking’ actually is; I do so little of it, any more.
At some point, man started walking upright.
Perhaps that is what will eventually happen with the mind; there when you need it, but not the best way of getting around.

What is 'thinking'? Can you describe it?
Do you feel it should sit at the apex of what men can do?


A modern scientific approach is not rodent like, and you're misusing strawman here, inserting it into a context it wouldn't fit if you were not trying to undermine the fact the charge was laid against hours ago. Stop making new threads just to "get back" at your "oppressors".

I still see some good inside you. Perhaps like a naive teacher in the ghetto, lecturing with her brightest English lit student. But there is some potential. But your own concepts of comfort and self worth are too tied into your notions of spirituality. And attacks on them bother you greatly.

Maybe metal isn't for you.

I think you should just drop it and ignore him, you two aren't going to get along any time soon, you think?
Title: Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: Wolfgang on April 01, 2012, 03:53:58 PM
I thought about it. But that type of simian behavior typically never endured on these boards before, and considering the place is pretty slow nowdays.
I might as well adopt the tactics he is using and either capitulate him into a respectable human being, or otherwise eliminate him entirely.
Social Darwinism.
He drew his sword, and will thus be slain by it.
The golden rule. The goose-gander effect.
Don't start nothin' won't be nothing.
Hail Satan.


Title: Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: Phoenix on April 01, 2012, 03:59:44 PM
How do you plan to eliminate him (on a discussion forum)?
Title: Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: Wolfgang on April 01, 2012, 04:09:49 PM
How do you plan to eliminate him (on a discussion forum)?

Intellect based internet poser disposing is one of the black arts I do believe in and practice quite readily.
Title: Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: crow on April 01, 2012, 04:09:57 PM
Hehe.
Metal definitely isn't my thing.
But interacting with humans is.
Each encounter advises me, although the people, themselves, almost never do.

Wolfie conjures up an enemy, for reasons all his own. Now he must slay the enemy.
To be kind, I would advise against this.
But Wolfie isn't one to be advised.
And I am not kind.


Title: Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: Wolfgang on April 01, 2012, 04:11:25 PM
Hehe.
Metal definitely isn't my thing.
But interacting with humans is.
Each encounter advises me, although the people, themselves, almost never do.

Wolfie conjures up an enemy, for reasons all his own. Now he must slay the enemy.
To be kind, I would advise against this.
But Wolfie isn't one to be advised.
And I am not kind.




This is your best, and most honest post all day.
Title: Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: crow on April 01, 2012, 04:27:20 PM
It certainly isn't the 'most honest'.
All my posts are equally honest.
That is a standard from which I never deviate.
Ever.
Title: Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: JewishPhysics on April 01, 2012, 04:30:01 PM
The scientific, modern Western mind seeks to verify everything it notices.
I see it as a rodent-like creature, running up and down a checklist, feverishly comparing data, to find a match.
If a match can not be found, the mind discards is as non-existent, stupid, irrelevant, a ‘straw-man’, etc.
From my experience in the sciences, this view seems woefully misguided. I only see this type of thinking in internet "experts" and Asperger types.

Quote
What is 'thinking'? Can you describe it?
In the most basic sense, I would define thinking as simply information processing and pattern recognition.

Quote
Do you feel it should sit at the apex of what men can do?
I assume by men you mean literally only males, as women can't really think. They are overly emotional and bad drivers. To answer your question, though, I don't know. I guess so.
Title: Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: crow on April 01, 2012, 04:36:05 PM
Lest you cast me as an 'aspie' which I am not, I was not referring to scientists, as you seem to have assumed.
I referred to the way most Westerners think: in what they assume to be 'scientific' terms.
That is to say: demanding proof for absolutely everything, before they will consider it.
Proof supplied by somebody else, of course :)

Title: Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: JewishPhysics on April 01, 2012, 04:47:02 PM
Lest you cast me as an 'aspie' which I am not
Believe me, I would never confuse you with an Aspie.

Quote
I was not referring to scientists, as you seem to have assumed.
I referred to the way most Westerners think: in what they assume to be 'scientific' terms.
Fair enough. But whenever people use the term scientific, I can only immediately assume they are speaking of actual scientists. Perhaps this is a flaw in my character, but it isn't going away.

Quote
That is to say: demanding proof for absolutely everything, before they will consider it.
Proof supplied by somebody else, of course :)
Yeah, that sounds exactly like every god damn internet "expert." The really funny thing is, when I was young and naive and new to the whole experience of the internet, I used to actually provide legitimate, peer-reviewed studies and meta-analyses to persuade people. It turns out, they won't even read the fucking things.
Title: Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: crow on April 01, 2012, 04:50:38 PM
Tell me about it :)
Are you Jewish? I seem to have an inexplicable connection with Jews.
I suspect my unknown father was one.
Title: Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: JewishPhysics on April 01, 2012, 04:59:34 PM
Are you Jewish?
Partially, yes. Ashkenazi, to be specific. I'm also a part Italian and part Celtic. I'm an American made mutt.
Title: Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: crow on April 01, 2012, 05:02:08 PM
I'm a Celt. And, as I said, maybe Jewish, although if I am, I'll never be sure.
Mutt :)
Title: Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: Wolfgang on April 01, 2012, 05:20:43 PM
I have Jewish(great grandfather), Southern Anglo slave owners, Irish miscreants, Italian intellectual atheists, Norwegian, Swedish, Scottish and a dash of Cherokee and neanderthal going on in this thang.
Title: Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: crow on April 01, 2012, 05:25:47 PM
That would certainly increase the difficulty of knowing what/who you are.
I had it easy: I started out a real fuckin' mess.
The only way to go, was up.
Title: Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: Cargést on April 02, 2012, 04:06:16 AM
Of course people won't read what you give to them to read on the internet.  They're right, you're wrong; no sources you can provide will dissuade them of that fact.  I used to write two/three paragraph long responses to people on forums, so as to get some kind of actual "debate" going, but the minute attention span of the average American male seemed to doom my posts to have responses no more thought out than "hurr durr it's too long, I won't read it, so I'm right".

Edit: other than here, I don't discuss such things on the internet any longer.  There's no point, for the oases of intelligence are few and far between.
Title: Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: Dylar on April 02, 2012, 10:46:57 AM
Of course people won't read what you give to them to read on the internet.  They're right, you're wrong; no sources you can provide will dissuade them of that fact.  I used to write two/three paragraph long responses to people on forums, so as to get some kind of actual "debate" going, but the minute attention span of the average American male seemed to doom my posts to have responses no more thought out than "hurr durr it's too long, I won't read it, so I'm right".

Edit: other than here, I don't discuss such things on the internet any longer.  There's no point, for the oases of intelligence are few and far between.

This presupposes that the purpose of argument or "debate" is to convince your immediate opponent.  I've always assumed that "debate" is about laying out a position for the audience.
Title: Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: crow on April 02, 2012, 10:53:47 AM
Excellent point. Most people miss that completely.
You describe the very reason why I never debate, under any circumstances.
I am not interested in convincing anyone of anything.
Title: Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: Wolfgang on April 02, 2012, 11:05:02 AM

I am not interested in convincing anyone of anything.


Then what do you think you contribute?
Title: Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: crow on April 02, 2012, 11:06:48 AM
One thing that sticks out, is the enthusiasm I arouse in those wishing to distance themselves from any recognizable alliance with me.
Title: Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: Dylar on April 02, 2012, 11:11:53 AM
Excellent point. Most people miss that completely.
You describe the very reason why I never debate, under any circumstances.
I am not interested in convincing anyone of anything.


This seems a bit like a humpback claiming he doesn't eat krill.  You defend your position as if in debate, although your methods are less conventional than some.  I find that what you have to say is valuable, sometimes brilliant.  I just wish you'd drop the pretense of superficial novelty and present your posts in a standard paragraph format.
Title: Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: crow on April 02, 2012, 11:21:48 AM
I am not you I don't operate as you do Get used to it In time I'll move on.
How's that?
Title: Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: Dylar on April 02, 2012, 11:24:09 AM
I am not you I don't operate as you do Get used to it In time I'll move on.
How's that?


Why the insistence on idiosyncratic formatting?  Your words need no pretense to be impactful: why irritate for the sake of irritation?
Title: Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: crow on April 02, 2012, 11:33:54 AM
I am not irritated by it.
I was once a Signwriter.
Such a craftsman uses white space to emphasize the actual content.
The space is almost as important as the words themselves.
It is easy to read, and generally, people react emotionally to individual words, rather than string words together, to deduce meaning.
But there is really nothing that can be done about people's refusal to divine the intended meaning.
One can only do one's best.
I do mine.
Do you do yours?
Title: Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: Cargést on April 02, 2012, 11:37:57 AM
This presupposes that the purpose of argument or "debate" is to convince your immediate opponent.  I've always assumed that "debate" is about laying out a position for the audience.

The purpose of an argument is to convince your immediate opponent, while the purpose of a debate could be construed either (or, really, both) ways, really.

Have you ever been involved in a debate over the internet that wasn't hosted here?  Everywhere else they devolve into arguments (excepting a couple of private websites here and there).
Title: Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: crow on April 02, 2012, 11:49:01 AM
That's why I never debate, and never argue.
People often think I am doing that, but what I'm really doing is being secure in my worldview, to the point where nobody can modify it.
My worldview is always open to modification, but only by me, as a result of what I learn, through direct experience of the world around me.
I don't abdicate responsibility, by taking on board what anyone else may push upon me.
And I don't expect anybody else to take my words and wear them without due consideration.

The bane of wise men, through history, has been those damned disciples, who behave like leftists, and hear something that sounds good, then start repeating it, without ever having understood what it meant.
Title: Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: Dylar on April 02, 2012, 11:59:38 AM
I am not irritated by it.
I was once a Signwriter.
Such a craftsman uses white space to emphasize the actual content.
The space is almost as important as the words themselves.
It is easy to read, and generally, people react emotionally to individual words, rather than string words together, to deduce meaning.
But there is really nothing that can be done about people's refusal to divine the intended meaning.
One can only do one's best.
I do mine.
Do you do yours?


Formatting message to fit the medium makes sense, but this isn't a billboard.  We aren't driving by at 78 and catching your words at the periphery of vision.  The form you've chosen disrupts the continuity of your content, breaking what should or at least could be a unified thought into separate discrete bits that struggle to stand on their own.  It's also pretentious.

Writers didn't eventually settle on standard paragraph formatting for prose because they're sheep, they settled on it because paragraph formatting allows for the clearest expression of complex ideas in written form.  Paragraph form emphasizes and enhances the unity and continuity of ideas, while simultaneously demarcating discrete elements within a larger chain of ideas.  Paragraph formatting also moves the personality of the writer out of the foreground and into the background, putting content front and center.  Your formatting choices emphasize personality almost to the exclusion of content, leaving the impression that you're really interested more in exalting your own person than in either the communication of ideas or something more resembling actual dialogue.  The stance is fundamentally antagonistic, even when it doesn't really have to be, and that's kind of puzzling.
Title: Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: Dylar on April 02, 2012, 12:05:58 PM
That's why I never debate, and never argue.
People often think I am doing that, but what I'm really doing is being secure in my worldview, to the point where nobody can modify it.
My worldview is always open to modification, but only by me, as a result of what I learn, through direct experience of the world around me.
I don't abdicate responsibility, by taking on board what anyone else may push upon me.
And I don't expect anybody else to take my words and wear them without due consideration.

The bane of wise men, through history, has been those damned disciples, who behave like leftists, and hear something that sounds good, then start repeating it, without ever having understood what it meant.


And yet your methodology—point, counterpoint—frames your responses as arguments whether you recognize this or not.  My suspicion is that you do recognize that this is so, but have chosen to maintain otherwise because it allows you to maintain the illusion of being above the fray, and hence insulates you psychologically from the possibility of criticism or reproach.
Title: Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: crow on April 02, 2012, 12:07:22 PM
You think it pretentious, because if you did it, it would be.
I merely do what I do.
I am not a 'writer'. I am me.
My ideas are not important, or complex. Why do you assume they are?
It is interesting that you are antagonized by clarity.
Is clarity such a threat?

I submit that most commenters here, are all about appearing impressive.
They manifest this by over-wordiness and densely stacked copy.
If there ever was any content to their posts, it gets lost, for the most part, in the avalanche of words and unusual-arcane-language.
I write for nine year olds. If they can understand it, so can you.
Unless you are five.

Damn. Look at that. It all came out as prose, again.
Sorry; I just can't help it.
Title: Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: crow on April 02, 2012, 12:10:03 PM
My suspicion is that you do recognize that this is so, but have chosen to maintain otherwise because it allows you to maintain the illusion of being above the fray, and hence insulates you psychologically from the possibility of criticism or reproach.


Haha! That's amusing :)
I haven't noticed any such insulation from criticism or reproach.
You fellas have been firing broadsides at me ever since I showed up.
Yet, notice how I remain utterly unmoved by it.
That alone should make you pay attention.

Title: Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: Dylar on April 02, 2012, 12:28:01 PM
You think it pretentious, because if you did it, it would be.
I merely do what I do.
I am not a 'writer'. I am me.
My ideas are not important, or complex. Why do you assume they are?
It is interesting that you are antagonized by clarity.
Is clarity such a threat?

I submit that most commenters here, are all about appearing impressive.
They manifest this by over-wordiness and densely stacked copy.
If there ever was any content to their posts, it gets lost, for the most part, in the avalanche of words and unusual-arcane-language.
I write for nine year olds. If they can understand it, so can you.
Unless you are five.

Damn. Look at that. It all came out as prose, again.
Sorry; I just can't help it.


Your language is telling.  Everything is "I" this and "me" that.  Most of what you post is self-referential, not just in the sense of looping back to your own personal beliefs, but in the starkly literal sense of being concerned specifically with your own person.
Title: Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: Dylar on April 02, 2012, 12:35:35 PM
My suspicion is that you do recognize that this is so, but have chosen to maintain otherwise because it allows you to maintain the illusion of being above the fray, and hence insulates you psychologically from the possibility of criticism or reproach.


Haha! That's amusing :)
I haven't noticed any such insulation from criticism or reproach.
You fellas have been firing broadsides at me ever since I showed up.
Yet, notice how I remain utterly unmoved by it.
That alone should make you pay attention.



Don't be deliberately obtuse.  Psychological insulation has nothing to do with the actions of others.  It doesn't matter if we criticize you or not, nor matter whether or not those criticisms are valid.  You've adopted a rhetorical and psychological stance designed to delegitimize any criticism you receive.  You fire your own shots across the bow, then respond to return fire with what amounts to, "Well I'm rubber and you're glue."  Then you congratulate yourself for your "security."  It's a social ploy, and nothing more.  I'm sure you'll disagree, but just know this is transparently obvious to others.
Title: Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: Phoenix on April 02, 2012, 12:35:54 PM
I must clarify that I argue not just to persuade the person I'm in immediate correspondence with, and I'm aware of my influence on the audience at large. That's an important point. And the things I want to persuade you about may be subtle and not always the same things you think they are.

But on the topic at hand, Crow is a very spiritual person. Y'all have to understand something: to people with egos, people with no egos can appear to have very large egos. In the realm of communication, then, much of the responsibility does fall on the ego-less person, because they can see both sides of the equation, they have the upper hand. It's a fun art! But I always thought of it as a rather pointed art, at least in my left-leaning approach. And you don't make a whole bru-ha-ha with people just because you like to receive confirmation that indeed you have less ego than them, as if to confirm your superiority. Crow is not on these forums pointlessly, he has a purpose. Is he accomplishing it? And do I agree with his views about science, Pakistanis, etc? These are other matters. But I appreciate his art and his efforts. That being said, as he wields much power if he makes mistakes in his communication or is blind to certain inner facets of himself these things will show up highlighted. I'm not saying that's the case here, frankly I don't have time to read all this chit-chat, but it's a risk, it's a fine and subtle art, that can go wrong.
Title: Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: Dylar on April 02, 2012, 12:43:59 PM
Personal experience: people who talk loudly of their lack of ego are creatures dominated by their egos, and intellectual, emotional and spiritual security rarely manifest themselves in the form of dismissing opponents as 'neanderthals' or pronouncements that one is so secure as to have no need to consider thoughts that originate outside one's own direct experience. 

Throw this one to the forum: can there be such a thing as Phariseeic Buddhism?
Title: Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: crow on April 02, 2012, 12:46:58 PM
Hmmm.
Darth Vader: "The force is strong in this one..."
Crow: "I yam what I yam..."
Imperial Stormtrooper: "He is what he is. Let him pass."
Title: Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: crow on April 02, 2012, 12:58:34 PM
Forumgoer: "If it appears real, it can't be. So I must destroy it."
Crow: "If it appears real, it isn't. But nobody can tell what's real and what is not".
Forumgoer: "Damn. Why is this fake thing not being destroyed when I unleash my superior intellect against it?"
Crow: "I wonder why people see real as fake, and fake as real?"
Forumgoer: "OK. So it is immune to my kryptonite missiles. I will accuse it of being defensive!"
Crow: "Why do these people either manifest desire to obtain, or manifest a need to defend?"
Forumgoer: "This troll is taking over the forum!"
Crow: "I wonder why we can't just discuss interesting things?"
Forumgoer: "See the way it writes? It's clear! This obviously signifies some awful ulterior motive!"
Crow: "I wonder why they are unable to understand simple sentences?"

Title: Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: Wolfgang on April 02, 2012, 01:43:10 PM


(http://conservapedia.com/images/thumb/5/5a/JimCrow.gif/480px-JimCrow.gif)


Title: Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
Post by: crow on April 02, 2012, 01:52:07 PM
My goodness!
Me as a child!
Where did you GET that?
Are there more?