Why Thinking Is Over-rated

[vegetariantaxidermy]

When I look out my window I mostly notice all of the beautiful women walking by.

Are New York men really the horniest on the planet, or is that just a carefully cultivated front?

Who else were you thinking of? (I'm just curious who else was saying something like I said above.)

Videos like this I suppose. Amazingly, ALL women here can walk around the city and do what they need to do, WITHOUT the constant harassment.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1XGPvb ... l=RobBliss

[Terrapin Station]

Are New York men really the horniest on the planet, or is that just a carefully cultivated front?

Who else were you thinking of? (I'm just curious who else was saying something like I said above.)

Videos like this I suppose. Amazingly, ALL women here can walk around the city and do what they need to do, WITHOUT the constant harassment.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1XGPvb ... l=RobBliss

Ah--yeah, re stuff like that, there is a percentage of New Yorkers who are more aggressive when it comes to a lot of different social things. The reason for that is just that it's such a densely populated city, with so much competition for a lot of different things, that the way some people respond to the challenge is by becoming more aggressive. That can work in some situations--like hailing a cab or squeezing into a subway car or getting to your destination more quickly when you're driving, but in other situations, like attracting women, it doesn't tend to work, obviously.

[Age]

Imagine! said Einstein. Am I getting hotter/colder?

The idea is that man's attempt to improve upon Reality [via conceptual thought] continues to be an abject failure. Conceptual thinking takes what is and transforms it into what is thought to be [which almost always seems to be some kind of bizarre dystopian reality].

Instead of imagining, perhaps accepting what it is might serve our species better.

When you LOOK OUT into the Universe, through or through not a window, what is 'it' than you SEE?

[simplicity]

Imagine! said Einstein. Am I getting hotter/colder?

The idea is that man's attempt to improve upon Reality [via conceptual thought] continues to be an abject failure. Conceptual thinking takes what is and transforms it into what is thought to be [which almost always seems to be some kind of bizarre dystopian reality].

Instead of imagining, perhaps accepting what it is might serve our species better.

When you LOOK OUT into the Universe, through or through not a window, what is 'it' than you SEE?

"It," just is. No need for additional conceptual refinement subsequent to perception.

[simplicity]

You can only understand somebody's actions, never their motivations. There are an infinite number of reasons why people do the simplest of things, therefore it is beyond human comprehension.

No, but you can trigger others' actions psychologically, even without much conceptual thinking. That's what the Schopenhauer book is about.

Can you imagine believing that you can actually understand another person. Most people don't have the fainted Idea of who they are!

[Fja1]

You can only understand somebody's actions, never their motivations. There are an infinite number of reasons why people do the simplest of things, therefore it is beyond human comprehension.

No, but you can trigger others' actions psychologically, even without much conceptual thinking. That's what the Schopenhauer book is about.

Can you imagine believing that you can actually understand another person. Most people don't have the fainted Idea of who they are!

Triggering another person might be conductive to increased understanding of them. To trigger someone, no understanding about him or her is necessary.

[Age]

The idea is that man's attempt to improve upon Reality [via conceptual thought] continues to be an abject failure. Conceptual thinking takes what is and transforms it into what is thought to be [which almost always seems to be some kind of bizarre dystopian reality].

Instead of imagining, perhaps accepting what it is might serve our species better.

When you LOOK OUT into the Universe, through or through not a window, what is 'it' than you SEE?

"It," just is. No need for additional conceptual refinement subsequent to perception.

True. There is NO limit to what IS SEEN through this type of observation. So, ANY suggestion of ANY limitation to thee eternal AND infinite Universe is just additional conceptual refinement, correct?

[Gary Childress]

to over rate anything requires thought

-Imp

This. ^^^^

[simplicity]

No, but you can trigger others' actions psychologically, even without much conceptual thinking. That's what the Schopenhauer book is about.

Can you imagine believing that you can actually understand another person. Most people don't have the fainted Idea of who they are!

Triggering another person might be conductive to increased understanding of them. To trigger someone, no understanding about him or her is necessary.

Why all the concern about understanding other people?

[simplicity]

When you LOOK OUT into the Universe, through or through not a window, what is 'it' than you SEE?

"It," just is. No need for additional conceptual refinement subsequent to perception.

True. There is NO limit to what IS SEEN through this type of observation. So, ANY suggestion of ANY limitation to thee eternal AND infinite Universe is just additional conceptual refinement, correct?

Words are not the way. One can prove or disprove anything if you have the skills.

Things just are. There's not much else to say about it.

[simplicity]

to over rate anything requires thought

-Imp

This. ^^^^

Which is why thinking is as paradoxical as it is absurd...but its the way we communicate.

I believe the key is in understanding its limitations [which few do]. The best words [or any conceptual thought] can do is in pointing the way.

[Age]

"It," just is. No need for additional conceptual refinement subsequent to perception.

True. There is NO limit to what IS SEEN through this type of observation. So, ANY suggestion of ANY limitation to thee eternal AND infinite Universe is just additional conceptual refinement, correct?

Words are not the way.

If this was actually true, right, and correct, then this would actually be false, wrong, and incorrect.

The ones who believe and insist "words are not the way" are just the ones who still have quite a lot more to learn and understand, including thee RIGHT words to use.

One can prove or disprove anything if you have the skills.

If the words to be used are defined, agreed upon, and accepted first, then what you say here may NOT be correct at all. Unless, of course, you can and will prove otherwise.

Things just are. There's not much else to say about it.

So, what is 'it' that you came to this forum to SAY, and inform 'us' of, EXACTLY?

[Fja1]

Can you imagine believing that you can actually understand another person. Most people don't have the fainted Idea of who they are!

Triggering another person might be conductive to increased understanding of them. To trigger someone, no understanding about him or her is necessary.

Why all the concern about understanding other people?

Well, since we were talking about the constraints of conceptual thinking, I suggested one way of structural thinking that is not necessarily conceptual, a way of thinking which is accessible even to animals, and this was meant as a point of departure for a more generalized notion which doesn't only entail other beings. The idea that knowledge and understanding are separate came from reading about Jacoby.

[simplicity]

Words are not the way.

If this was actually true, right, and correct, then this would actually be false, wrong, and incorrect.

The ones who believe and insist "words are not the way" are just the ones who still have quite a lot more to learn and understand, including thee RIGHT words to use.

Almost people who use words would agree with you.

One can prove or disprove anything if you have the skills.

If the words to be used are defined, agreed upon, and accepted first, then what you say here may NOT be correct at all. Unless, of course, you can and will prove otherwise.

Words, like all things knowable are subject to constant change as are their definitions. If you understand the nature of thinking, you will see that thinking is as amorphous as it gets.

Things just are. There's not much else to say about it.

So, what is 'it' that you came to this forum to SAY, and inform 'us' of, EXACTLY?

I am here to chat with people such as yourself. I am not here to inform you of anything. Why, is there something you would like to know?

[simplicity]

The idea that knowledge and understanding are separate came from reading about Jacoby.

Knowledge is a phantasm and understanding, an impossibility. The best any of us can so is to see things as clearly as possible moment after moment.
Don't worry about figuring it out. "It" will do just fine on its own.