Philosophy Now Forum

HaHaHa wrote:

Dalek Prime wrote:I care about almost everything in existence, exactly because im an antinatalist. And you'd know that if you really knew anything about it, besides a bit on another philosophy forum.

But I'm not going to martyr myself over existence either. Not my problem, especially once I'm gone.

One moment you don't care and now you do care. You're confusing.

You seem to be fascinated upon exiting out of this world. How very interesting.

It's going to happen, so why shouldn't I be?

It's going to happen, so why shouldn't I be?

I was merely refering your obsession with death especially your own to be fascinating.

HaHaHa wrote:

It's going to happen, so why shouldn't I be?

I was merely refering your obsession with death especially your own to be fascinating.

Fair enough. Antinatalism is all about existence, and how unnecessary it is to create more conscious existence.

"If nothing we do matters, then all that matters is what we do."
- Angel

HaHaHa wrote:

Dalek Prime:
Influence over the powerful is what I was referring to. Reminds me of the story of the stone mason, who wishes to be better and better, more and more powerful, until he comes full circle, wishing to be himself again.

Hmm..sounds like a terrible story with a moral undertone or metanarrative attached. I don't really care for quaint stories like that myself. Sounds like a story boring simpletons would embrace.

Your avatar, nym and this last line of yours has revealed your psyche.

Play many video games where you kill things, humans maybe?

So, "What really matters," to you?

For me, what matters is getting where you need/want to be... NOT the steps you take.

I was watching a video last night, which I thought might offer some thought-provoking ideas... but so far (I’m only halfway through because I needed a break from it), most of it has been the speaker’s ideas of the STEPS involved for one thing or another. Steps for receiving information... steps for processing information... steps that lead to more steps. The most interesting thing to me is that people get so obsessed and derailed with SUPPOSED STEPS. Don’t people realize that the steps are MADE-UP? But how many religions and systems of thought base themselves firmly on following THE STEPS... as if the steps themselves are sacred? It’s like looking at a mountain range and saying “the only way to get there, and do it correctly, is to take these particular steps”. Doesn’t that seem nuts?

I’m still waiting for the video to tell me the substance that the steps supposedly lead to... and I’m starting to suspect that the speaker is just intoxicated with the magnificent steps he has dreamed up. Shouldn’t any intelligent person know that you can give precise steps to someone, and it probably won’t work for most people because there are so many factors involved? The important thing is the MESSAGE... the SUBSTANCE... the OUTCOME, I think! And stop telling people HOW to get there!

This is a common theme in my life. When I was a little kid in school, I remember the teacher marking my correct math answers as wrong because I didn’t show how I came to my conclusion. Who the hell cares about my path? I got there, and I got there fast! People need to get out of the way of progress... with all of their funky ideas on how things must be done. As an adult, all of my steps and paths have been unconventional, but I made it to where I was going... and beyond. Conventional steps/rules create false barriers! They are created by limited thinking... and they limit the potential results. Blow past them, I say. I don't need no stinkin' steps.

The important thing is the MESSAGE... the SUBSTANCE... the OUTCOME, I think! And stop telling people HOW to get there!

I think most of the self-help stuff assumes that you already have a goal, a desired outcome. Losing 100 pounds, obtaining a degree, recovering from cancer, getting rich, beating an addiction - something the 'seeker' wants very badly for him- or herself. In the case of religion or ideology, the outcome is presumed to be something the 'seekers' have in common: world peace, the withering away of the state, unregulated trade, sustainable communities, eternal salvation, or like that. The steps program is how to get there [what both the seeker and the guide consider a desired result] from here [the seeker's present condition]. It is usually further assumed that the guide was once a seeker and found The Way.

It’s like looking at a mountain range and saying “the only way to get there, and do it correctly, is to take these particular steps”. Doesn’t that seem nuts?

Not if you don't want to be the 234th corpsicle on Mount Everest. The assumption is that whatever we accomplish is done incrementally, through many small individual acts, and if we do the necessary operations in the correct order, we are far more likely to succeed than if we just rush at it with the ignorant enthusiasm of a puppy.

But none of this matters, unless you already know the goal. If you don't have a specific objective in mind, no road- map, no directions, no equipment or instructions are any use to you.

Who the hell cares about my path? I got there, and I got there fast! People need to get out of the way of progress... with all of their funky ideas on how things must be done.

Well, there, the goal was understanding how to do math. Getting the answer to any particular problem is very much beside the point. You may get to a correct answer fast by looking in the back of the book or copying off your neighbour or guessing, but that won't stop somebody, twenty years later, selling you a mortgage with balloon payments. The teacher needs to see how you get there, so that you can get there again, reliably.
Progress taking shortcuts can backfire pretty badly.

You bring up some good points Skip.

Certainly if someone wants to learn something in particular (like flamenco dancing ) they might prefer that someone show them the steps. Or any of the things you listed... people might be looking for steps. I, however, am usually interested in less specific things... and I want just enough information to pick and choose and create for myself. Maybe that's unusual.

Skip wrote:

It’s like looking at a mountain range and saying “the only way to get there, and do it correctly, is to take these particular steps”. Doesn’t that seem nuts?

Not if you don't want to be the 234th corpsicle on Mount Everest. The assumption is that whatever we accomplish is done incrementally, through many small individual acts, and if we do the necessary operations in the correct order, we are far more likely to succeed than if we just rush at it with the ignorant enthusiasm of a puppy.

Yes, of course... I agree. But I see a flip side too... in which people may define the "correct order", although there may be many ways to go about it, and they can end up limiting and discouraging themselves and others simply because the options are so limited. And, as with religion or certain cultural traditions, people can be ostracized for not following the "right steps". This is what I mean when I say people become obsessed with the steps, rather than focusing on the result. I think we limit our collective potential when we force too many specific paths on people.

Skip wrote:The teacher needs to see how you get there, so that you can get there again, reliably.
Progress taking shortcuts can backfire pretty badly.

Well, yes... especially with the example I gave. At the same time, in many areas we don't all process information the same way -- and in some cases, some people might even be utilizing other parts of their brain or senses, which would function less efficiently if forced to do it a "longer" or more convoluted way. I realize the value of standards. And I realize that we can't teach everyone according to their own uniqueness. But I think there's value in recognizing how we swing to the extreme of uniformity, which is not really a natural or flexible state. And by claiming to know or have "the correct steps", we may be more tied to our sense of authority and rightness, than to acknowledging many alternative views/paths of truth.

Lacewing wrote:You bring up some good points Skip.

Certainly if someone wants to learn something in particular (like flamenco dancing ) they might prefer that someone show them the steps. Or any of the things you listed... people might be looking for steps.

That would be the main reason they attend classes or buy training videos, yes. There simply isn't a shortcut to teaching people a new subject or complex skill. Obviously, some students will be 'natural' and pick it up faster than others; some will hop over intermediate steps or develop their own style - but you can't design a program of instruction based on that: the whole point of the 'different drummers' is unpredictability.

I, however, am usually interested in less specific things... and I want just enough information to pick and choose and create for myself. Maybe that's unusual.

And nobody- no author, teacher, instructor or programmer, can possibly anticipate what it is you will want. So you'll always have to skim, cherry-pick and move on.


As for organized religion, its main purpose is a compliant populace. The offered reward is an incentive, not an objective; the punishment for doing it wrong is an incentive, not a corrective. The rules are the substance; what's offered as textual content is window-dressing.

Skip wrote: As for organized religion, its main purpose is a compliant populace. The offered reward is an incentive, not an objective; the punishment for doing it wrong is an incentive, not a corrective. The rules are the substance; what's offered as textual content is window-dressing.

"The rules are the substance" -- Wow... no wonder it seems a bit hellish to me. Now THAT is thought-provoking (which I like), and you didn't even tell me I had to take certain steps to get it.

Anytime I hear someone start off saying something like, "There are 5 steps to...", my eyes glaze over and I think, "No there aren't, you're making it up." Now if that person were to say, "Here are 5 steps to...", THAT wouldn't turn me off. But to frame things in such a way as to proclaim that something is THE WAY TO GO and THIS IS IT, sets off alarms for me -- seemingly a warning that I'll be wading through and following someone's ego, and I'm not interested in that.

The video I rented has to do with particles of energy (like from the sun) that we're continually being showered with, and the implications of how we might be affected by or able to use that. Sounded interesting to me. But when the speaker started listing particular steps/doorways -- my alarms went off. It just doesn't ring clear and true for me that anything we think that we experience or know or fathom can (nor should) be fully defined and/or locked down in our present terms. We are simply doing the best we can with our limitations -- why don't we acknowledge that more? At any given point, we might have ONE way of seeing/understanding/guessing... but it is not "the way" or "the definition". Maybe if this speaker had said, "Here are some concepts I came up with to help explore ways this might work..." then I'd keep listening, and I'd have more trust in him for acknowledging that. It seems like such a simple shift to make to be truthful and open and flowing. Why does everyone have to act like they know "THE WAY" and/or "how it definitively is"? I think that limits us... and keeps us primitive.

I have lots of opinions about "what this is" and "How that works" and I'm not very humble in expressing them. Of course, lots of people disagree, dismiss or just plain diss those opinions - and that's okay, because I respond the same way to theirs.

The # steps is a publishing fad. It's supposed to reassure the potential reader that the process presented is finite, accessible and well defined. Everybody who devises a program of self-help or self-instruction or self-improvement seems to think they have to follow this convention - even if they have no idea how many steps it actually takes to understand their subject or achieve their goal.

I like TED talks, because they're short and free and you can turn off anyone who seems to be full of 'it' or of themselves, without having invested too much. They're good 'doorways' to unfamiliar subject matter, which you can then follow up with serious reading or pass on by.

Lacewing wrote:For me, what matters is getting where you need/want to be... NOT the steps you take.

I was watching a video last night, which I thought might offer some thought-provoking ideas... but so far (I’m only halfway through because I needed a break from it), most of it has been the speaker’s ideas of the STEPS involved for one thing or another. Steps for receiving information... steps for processing information... steps that lead to more steps. The most interesting thing to me is that people get so obsessed and derailed with SUPPOSED STEPS. Don’t people realize that the steps are MADE-UP? But how many religions and systems of thought base themselves firmly on following THE STEPS... as if the steps themselves are sacred? It’s like looking at a mountain range and saying “the only way to get there, and do it correctly, is to take these particular steps”. Doesn’t that seem nuts?

I’m still waiting for the video to tell me the substance that the steps supposedly lead to... and I’m starting to suspect that the speaker is just intoxicated with the magnificent steps he has dreamed up. Shouldn’t any intelligent person know that you can give precise steps to someone, and it probably won’t work for most people because there are so many factors involved? The important thing is the MESSAGE... the SUBSTANCE... the OUTCOME, I think! And stop telling people HOW to get there!

This is a common theme in my life. When I was a little kid in school, I remember the teacher marking my correct math answers as wrong because I didn’t show how I came to my conclusion. Who the hell cares about my path? I got there, and I got there fast! People need to get out of the way of progress... with all of their funky ideas on how things must be done. As an adult, all of my steps and paths have been unconventional, but I made it to where I was going... and beyond. Conventional steps/rules create false barriers! They are created by limited thinking... and they limit the potential results. Blow past them, I say. I don't need no stinkin' steps.

It seems that you are saying that the ends justifies the means. If so, I for one completely disagree. Dependent, of course, on the cleanliness of the means. If it's clean, fine! If it's dirty, no way! Then we're right back to the need of 'correct steps.'

Let's be honest, I answer this question with every letter I type here.

Skip wrote:

Lacewing wrote:You bring up some good points Skip.

Certainly if someone wants to learn something in particular (like flamenco dancing ) they might prefer that someone show them the steps. Or any of the things you listed... people might be looking for steps.

That would be the main reason they attend classes or buy training videos, yes. There simply isn't a shortcut to teaching people a new subject or complex skill. Obviously, some students will be 'natural' and pick it up faster than others; some will hop over intermediate steps or develop their own style - but you can't design a program of instruction based on that: the whole point of the 'different drummers' is unpredictability.

I, however, am usually interested in less specific things... and I want just enough information to pick and choose and create for myself. Maybe that's unusual.

And nobody- no author, teacher, instructor or programmer, can possibly anticipate what it is you will want. So you'll always have to skim, cherry-pick and move on.


As for organized religion, its main purpose is a compliant populace. The offered reward is an incentive, not an objective; the punishment for doing it wrong is an incentive, not a corrective. The rules are the substance; what's offered as textual content is window-dressing.

'Naturals,' are those who's life experiences, support any new area of exploration, such that it's easier for them to use such associations, to their benefit. If you all catch my meaning.

Skip wrote:What's important?
Most people will immediately think in personal terms and say - my family, my marriage, my security, my art, my state of mind - my something. And that's true; those personal issues do require the majority of our effort and concern.

But, look outside - farther. What really matters in the world?
What's important enough to spend a lot of time thinking about?
What's worth composing a lot of sentences, absorbing insults, repeating, explaining, to try to communicate?
What's worth a lot of effort trying to bring about, or to stop or to change?

Thinking about how to live or what is the good life - young people should be taught to think about this question.