Philosophy Now Forum

This is an essay of some sort about the idea of "false consciousness" (a Marxian term used in Marxist dialecticism) and how and why the masses are not really conscious of there own selves, and are just merely "drones" (defined here as simply followers, and not thinkers). Consciousness here is to be fully aware of things, and in Philosophical terms, for me, is to be aware of things within Ethics, Pragmatics, Metaphysics, Morality, Causation; to be aware of the surroundings and the environment of that where you are at. The opposite of that would obviously be none of those things, so here's why most people are not really conscious.

1. They are merely indoctrinated into a specific religion, or indoctrinated into the governmental institutions, such as public schools. They are not told to critically think: to ask questions that may challenge teachers, principals, parents, or whatever adult that guides one in their life. Because they were not versed in any logical system, they are bound to simply believing things without any thought, which cuts them off from seeking Truth. Many of them are sucked into mainstream culture: the entertainment, music, foods, fashion styles that represent nothing more than a simple commodity, as Capitalism (in a profit and corporate driven sense) reduces value to the fixed quantities of capital.
2. They are not learned in actual Ethics and Morality, or Logic (all in Practical terms), outside of what they're told within institutions (education, religion), to learn to actually know why things in society are wrong. The collective examples are: consumerism, wealth, economic growth, war, etc.
3. Even the people who do know (the majority, in fact now days, have varying degrees of mistrust in government and society) are not grounded in Logic to actually discern what is fact from fiction without any emotional bias attached to the thinking. So they are still herds, and they still do not question things as they are stuck in their ideological paradigms.
4. Much of their thinking, in terms of thinking ideally, is not realistic and centered around the real world. They tend to be irrational with their solutions, and tend to be irrational in activism. For instance, they yell very radical things without any foundational explanation for it, which causes disruption and alienation between people and individuals or activist groups (a "them" against "all" scenario). This is typical activism within whatever ideology is used, and this is mentioned because people use emotions instead of developing clear thinking capabilities.

So summarizing all of these four points, it is a case that people are not wholly conscious of there own selves; that they hold a "false consciousness", or something that is not realistic and not well thought of to the point of being confirmed or denied as being true. They are rebels without a clue of what they are doing, and they are sowing their seeds of destruction by not searching and developing mental clarity.

does this mean then that the realisation of not being fully consciouse is being fully consciouse.so its the realisation of the feeling of not being fully aware that is in its self full awareness.

WanderingLands wrote:1. They are merely indoctrinated into a specific religion, or indoctrinated into the governmental institutions, such as public schools.

Are you sure about this? What is your evidence? Do you not think it might be the case that most people are perfectly 'conscious' of the political reality they find themselves in and try to work within it to the best of their ability? The current conditions in 'western' democracies are tolerable to enough people to maintain stability, but history shows that people can and do rise against oppressive governments.

WanderingLands wrote:They are not told to critically think: to ask questions that may challenge teachers, principals, parents, or whatever adult that guides one in their life.

Anyone who is paying any attention to the world will be only too aware that there are differences of opinion. If it is the 'adult that guides one' that is the problem, one can only marvel at the wisdom of nature, turning teenagers into stroppy know-it-alls, just like I once was. (As someone said: I am too old to know everything.)

WanderingLands wrote:Because they were not versed in any logical system, they are bound to simply believing things without any thought, which cuts them off from seeking Truth.

You keep going on about 'Truth' with a capital T. Is it the sort of truth you think you will discover by turning letters into numbers? It's been done; check out the Reverend bobevenson if you want the 'Truth' about gematria or whatever it's called. The truth is you will bugger about with systems until you achieve something that fits your purpose. This you will then wave at the world as evidence, 'proof' if you turn out completely barking, of your 'Truth' and an ungrateful world will be completely indifferent.

WanderingLands wrote:So they are still herds, and they still do not question things as they are stuck in their ideological paradigms.

Utter bollocks. As I intimated, most people try and make the best of the lives they find themselves living and don't have particularly strong convictions. There are others though, that do have strong convictions. If they are sufficiently charismatic, they can persuade people to become part of their 'herd'; the irony is that they always think it is they who are thinking for themselves.
You may want people to agree with you to reassure you. There is enough madness for you to find such people, but there is also enough sanity to tell you that you are on a fool's errand. I'd listen if I were you.

uwot.you come across like a good guy.who is automaticaly in side the kingdom of heaven.wot do yeah reakon no bodys going to tell you you aint in the kingdom of consciousness already.

jackles wrote:uwot.you come across like a good guy.who is automaticaly in side the kingdom of heaven.wot do yeah reakon no bodys going to tell you you aint in the kingdom of consciousness already.

That's very kind of you, jackles. I've no idea whether this is the kingdom of heaven or of consciousness. I'm only really conscious of what I can see and hear, and that there is something roughly equating to 'me' that is trying to make sense of it. It's a funny old world.

To do this....

Consciousness here is to be fully aware of things,

...get rid of this...

and in Philosophical terms, for me, is to be aware of things within Ethics, Pragmatics, Metaphysics, Morality, Causation;

....and stick with this.

to be aware of the surroundings and the environment of that where you are at.

falasco .could this mean you to are also in the kingdom of the unmoving singularity.

jackles wrote:falasco .could this mean you to are also in the kingdom of the unmoving singularity.

I am sorry to report I do not know what the unmoving singularity is. However, I can report that...

I am Baba Bozo, the founder of Bozoism, the next great world religion, and I live at the Gullible Gals Ashram, high in the mist covered San Felasco Mountains of north Florida.

Here is a photo of me looking deep in to your soul.

ha ha---ha .funny thing is i pictured ya lookin a bit like that felasco.you know a bit important hippie physisist lookin.no doubt play frank zappa.av i got that right.

Yes, as the founder of Bozoism, Baba Bozo is course a bit important. And it's true he has a hippy heritage, and maintains his ratty gray hair as proof that he is a prophet.

However, he is not a Frank Zappa loving physicist living in the kingdom of the unmoving singularity, at least as far as he knows.

uwot wrote: Are you sure about this? What is your evidence? Do you not think it might be the case that most people are perfectly 'conscious' of the political reality they find themselves in and try to work within it to the best of their ability? The current conditions in 'western' democracies are tolerable to enough people to maintain stability, but history shows that people can and do rise against oppressive governments.

Nobody is truly conscious to anything once they've signed themselves up to poluitical ideologies; although they do cater to them on common grounds, there are things that should be questioned but aren't by the most adherent followers. Also, the "protests" in the 21st century, especially in America, have become increasingly weaker and more insignifacnt than the each of the last ones (examples: Tea Party Movement, Occupy Wall Street, and the NSA Protests which lasted a day and recurred sporadically in 2013). None of these movments that I have listed ever solved any issues; the elites are still in power and are still wielding their axe against the heads of innocent people. These are the long-term effects of the comulsory school system in America that has been put in place since the 19th century, modeled after the authoritarian Prussian school systems that seeks blind obedience in every children.

uwot wrote:Anyone who is paying any attention to the world will be only too aware that there are differences of opinion. If it is the 'adult that guides one' that is the problem, one can only marvel at the wisdom of nature, turning teenagers into stroppy know-it-alls, just like I once was. (As someone said: I am too old to know everything.)

Of course, children do need guidance from their parents, and they have become more arrogant and rude to them (the symptoms of a globalized society with its institutions manufacturing the "new images" of the younger, common folk). That does not mean, though, that they should follow in their mistakes; it's about correcting them. Also, the "adults" that I I'm listing moreso are the authority figures in schools and government, where they use age, such as being "too young" to know things, to justify comulsory indoctrination on these kids.

uwot wrote:
You keep going on about 'Truth' with a capital T. Is it the sort of truth you think you will discover by turning letters into numbers? It's been done; check out the Reverend bobevenson if you want the 'Truth' about gematria or whatever it's called. The truth is you will bugger about with systems until you achieve something that fits your purpose. This you will then wave at the world as evidence, 'proof' if you turn out completely barking, of your 'Truth' and an ungrateful world will be completely indifferent.

My friend, saying that my truth is "turning letters into numbers" is a strawman fallacy. It's more complicated than what you've made it out to be; it's about looking deeper into things ranging from History, Politics, to Religion, Theology, Occultism/Esotericism -Truth is a wholistic viewpoint that incorporates all of those things, and that's what I'm exploring.

uwot wrote: Utter bollocks. As I intimated, most people try and make the best of the lives they find themselves living and don't have particularly strong convictions. There are others though, that do have strong convictions. If they are sufficiently charismatic, they can persuade people to become part of their 'herd'; the irony is that they always think it is they who are thinking for themselves.

You may want people to agree with you to reassure you. There is enough madness for you to find such people, but there is also enough sanity to tell you that you are on a fool's errand. I'd listen if I were you.

The last paragraph I agree, but I do not want people to simply "agree" with me. I want people to question things and to research for themselves; I'm just making arguments about the things that I know and the things that I believe in.

wanderinglands your consciousness is the exact same consiousness that everyvody elses consciousness is.its ya brain thats different.consciousness is indistinguishable of its self.o and it dosent move.

jackles wrote:wanderinglands your consciousness is the exact same consiousness that everyvody elses consciousness is.its ya brain thats different.consciousness is indistinguishable of its self.o and it dosent move.

Of course we have a collective consciousness, but I'm talking of the Ego and the false perceptions it attaches itself to.

yeah thats the taking of the event identity to be above the super ego id.its self importants in the event.or arrogants.

jackles wrote:yeah thats the taking of the event identity to be above the super ego id.its self importants in the event.or arrogants.

Yes, that is correct.