Any that believe in free & open government in western countries are kidding themselves.
That's a message that needs to be perpetuated indefinitely until action is taken to resolve it. What action you ask? Beats me.
We all think we're doing our part by going to poll booths and voting for a different colour but in the end we are all voting for the same status quo that has been around for centuries. We're good little robots that have been programmed to do nothing except consume, consume and consume some more.
We all think we're doing our part by going to poll booths and voting for a different colour but in the end we are all voting for the same status quo that has been around for centuries. We're good little robots that have been programmed to do nothing except consume, consume and consume some more.
So maybe there's a connection here. If we live in a blue state we take a blue pill, and if we live in a red state we take a red pill.
But how 'bout this. Rational thinking
a)is consistent with objective reality
Agreed! :D
Originally posted by smichener:
b) helps one accomplish their goals
Depends on the goal. For example, if your goal is to demonstrate that "Intelligent Design" is a scientific theory on par with Natural Selection then rational thinking should keep you from accomplishing that goal.
Originally posted by smichener:
c) helps one maintain their physical well being
This makes sense to me with the rare exception where people make the rational choice that risking their well being is outweighed by ensuring the well being of others.
Originally posted by smichener:
d) helps one feel they way they want to
Sometimes, except for those times we have to do something that feels bad like surgery or chemotherapy for the chance of a better long term outlook.
Originally posted by smichener:
and e) helps one avoid or reduce conflict with people they care about.
Thoughts that don't meet one or more of these criteria might be considered irrational.
I don't know, people often avoid conflict irrationally and create bigger problems for themselves or for others in the process, but I think you are correct that it often helps to be rational. To use my analogy above, it's better to keep your eyes on the road to know what's really ahead than it is to talk to your passenger, eat your food & fiddle with your ipod while just believing you know what's ahead. ;)
to those who takes the red, please remember what morpheus said, "many of them (blue pill takers) are so inured, so hopelessly dependent on the system that they will fight to protect it". this especially holds true with those in positions of power, of influence. they would fight to keep people taking the blue.
The real issue isn't about knowing the truth, it's about the pain and suffering involved in learning the truth.
The way I looked at it too. So as they say: No pain, no gain
Not really, because the saying implies that the price in pain is only paid by those who get the gains. Unfortunately, life isn't like that and there's often collateral damage.
The real issue isn't about knowing the truth, it's about the pain and suffering involved in learning the truth.
The way I looked at it too. So as they say: No pain, no gain
Not really, because the saying implies that the price in pain is only paid by those who get the gains. Unfortunately, life isn't like that and there's often collateral damage.
yes, like suddenly learning that, albeit having an elder brother all your life and memories of growing up together, you were diagnosed few days ago with schizophrenia, and found out that your elder brother never even existed.
The real issue isn't about knowing the truth, it's about the pain and suffering involved in learning the truth.
The way I looked at it too. So as they say: No pain, no gain
Not really, because the saying implies that the price in pain is only paid by those who get the gains. Unfortunately, life isn't like that and there's often collateral damage.
It implies no such thing. The breakdown of the logic in the statement makes no such implication. It states simply "without pain there can be no gain", not "all pain brings gain".
Wow, so many people popping those red pills. To be honest I would be happy at this moment in time just taking the BLUE pill. I am happy with my life as it is, good relationship, great kids, business doing better than expected for these financially turbulent times, just generally happy at the moment. Does it make one a weaker person to be happy with their lot in life?
I havent read through this whole thread so this may of been mentioned.. If you took the red pill and you found the truth was the same as what you was already living in (essentially the same as the blue pill) would all the ones who opted for the red-pill end up really depressed and feeling let down?
if its been mentioned sorry. but good thread (and good essay)
Years ago, in my intro to philosophy class, I had to read Descartes' Meditations (Summary and Explanation) which is where the idea of the Matrix began. The whole idea fascinated me and I realized that the only way to discover whether or not you were inside a Matrix or were controlled by an evil genie was to question everything and accept nothing at face value. This does not mean that you cannot be content with the life you have; on the contrary, your life can be richer and fuller with the accumulation of knowledge. Knowledge and truth needn't be painful; in fact, it can be life affirming.
The point of the matrix was similar to Plato's Allegory of the Cave. you can live in darkness with the status quo, blindly accepting what is fed you, or, you can seek the sun (knowledge) and really see the world for what it truly is.
...you can seek the sun (knowledge) and really see the world for what it truly is.
Courtenay, since you're usually pretty meticulous in your formulations, I'm gonna call you to task for the really/truly redundancy here :-)
On a more serious note, when I first saw "The Matrix" I immediately thought "Oh yeah, Descartes!": so I'm fascinated to hear that this is "where the idea of the matrix began" — I take it you mean the authors explicitly used Descartes as a starting point? If so, is that documented anywhere? I mean, a blockbuster movie based on the meditations of Descartes, on the surface of it, sounds pretty improbable, so if it's true it's quite amazing; gives one renewed hope, in an odd sort of way.
I'd say, that in GENERAL, most Americans have chosen or would choose the blue pill. It's much too comfortable here to be bothered with the problems the rest of the world faces....
Before you tear this apart or flame me, please think about it :)
...you can seek the sun (knowledge) and really see the world for what it truly is.
Courtenay, since you're usually pretty meticulous in your formulations, I'm gonna call you to task for the really/truly redundancy here :-)
On a more serious note, when I first saw "The Matrix" I immediately thought "Oh yeah, Descartes!": so I'm fascinated to hear that this is "where the idea of the matrix began" — I take it you mean the authors explicitly used Descartes as a starting point? If so, is that documented anywhere? I mean, a blockbuster movie based on the meditations of Descartes, on the surface of it, sounds pretty improbable, so if it's true it's quite amazing; gives one renewed hope, in an odd sort of way.
R.
Ha - not enough coffee and too many meds. ;) Redundancy is good - like an echo...
The idea came from the thought experiment of the brain in a vat, which was a variation of Descartes evil genie (alternate reference). I found an article that ties the two together, but I cannot find any place where the writers specifically state that it is based on Descartes. Brain in a vat is a pretty basic thought experiment and taught in Phil100. I'm pretty sure they would have had access to the information (actually, I thought everyone knew, but it turns out my husband didn't - I learned something new today).
I'd say, that in GENERAL, most Americans have chosen or would choose the blue pill. It's much too comfortable here to be bothered with the problems the rest of the world faces....
Before you tear this apart or flame me, please think about it :)
The idea came from the thought experiment of the brain in a vat, which was a variation of Descartes evil genie (alternate reference). I found an article that ties the two together, but I cannot find any place where the writers specifically state that it is based on Descartes. Brain in a vat is a pretty basic thought experiment and taught in Phil100. I'm pretty sure they would have had access to the information (actually, I thought everyone knew, but it turns out my husband didn't - I learned something new today).
Speaking of the "brain in the vat" idea, for me the interesting things is that in a very real sense we ARE all "brains in a vat"; that is to say, all our interaction with what we perceive as the "real world" is done through the interface of an enormously complex computer, our brain. The "vat" is our body, the "brain" is our brain, and "we", the essence of us, our spirit or our soul, whatever we call the part of us that is aware, relies on this computer-brain for all its perceptions.
Speaking of the "brain in the vat" idea, for me the interesting things is that in a very real sense we ARE all "brains in a vat"; that is to say, all our interaction with what we perceive as the "real world" is done through the interface of an enormously complex computer, our brain. The "vat" is our body, the "brain" is our brain, and "we", the essence of us, our spirit or our soul, whatever we call the part of us that is aware, relies on this computer-brain for all its perceptions.
