The relevance of thought must be obtained (and sometimes wrested) from the circumstance we exist in.
We could then best describe thought as distillation than as searching. To talk about the inner working of thought, we must deal in heuristics (as opposed to, say, universality or validation or platonic enlightenment). Heuristics are the mechanics of circumstances. Heuristics are circumstance-navigation. What does that say to us about knowledge? Read More »
Sometimes it seems that to abandon a given idea is like to abandon your very being. One of the ideas most commonly taken this way is Truth — and this is why some people still want truth in some form even if they agree to all the arguments against truth itself. This is why a commenter some time ago quipped me that “giving up truth is giving up”. But exactly that we are so reluctant to give up a given idea shows that it is a blind spot, something we can’t really analyse, something we (somewhat literally) can’t take in a distanced perspective.
To illustrate this thought, i’ve chosen to use the idea that the human being is the top of all creation, that humans are better than anything else anywhere. And i am choosing this idea exactly because i think it is very completely bogus, so much so that i believe it will be hard to find someone who still believes in this. If i’m wrong, and you are really positive Human-Being is the Ultimate, rest assured the exact same point could be made with any idea you previously held very dearly but ended up discovering it was simply bogus. Read More »
It’s tacky, but i love it. Found on one of those blogs, something that crawled unnoticed into my gReader from somewhere. [Some editing involved…] A group of students go visit a professor, he comes from the kitchen with assorted cups of coke, and after everyone has taken one, he gets the left over, ugly, uncool, last picked glass, and says: “Why did you all go straight for the colourful stylish glasses, when it was the ugly one the only where i did pour some ice?”. As in, you know, do not judge a book by the cover. But the thing is, it is a good message, if only you can realize that it must be applied in a multitude of different levels. If you just get a little more inclusive with good books having bad covers, this fable is probably not making you much good. The general principle here must be applied very, but very, deep. As in you must make “disregard the unimportant” so much a second nature that you actually disregard almost everything that people are running after — in fact, you disregard almost everything PERIOD. But maybe i am just a fool.
The NYT has a piece on snopes, it is worth the read, even more because snopes is such an important piece of contemporary culture. Anyway, i just wanted to comment two snippets. Read More »