Path: csiph.com!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.nk.ca!rocksolid2!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: D Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc Subject: Re: Joy of this, Joy of that Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2024 18:33:36 +0100 Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org) Message-ID: <19c73902-c45b-2d1d-faec-45da0843dc92@example.net> References: <495550f7-796e-4414-67ae-26d3f8ba16f1@example.net> <33442f75-5afe-ce6b-d5b2-19efc78a72d3@example.net> <2c1fb128-258b-7848-e896-3246674d460f@example.net> <2d814efc-b5f8-a1f9-d273-77016cb3cbae@example.net> <87e89983-f30c-7113-695b-5b2025ae2099@example.net> <9cGcnYwc8c1pA8_6nZ2dnZfqnPsAAAAA@earthlink.com> <1824185e-aa19-77e1-4fc4-526bdf8f6c26@example.net> <723960d7-2176-d51c-0b1e-cec061960b19@example.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="8323328-1175007111-1733592817=:3169" Injection-Info: i2pn2.org; logging-data="1739099"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org"; posting-account="w/4CleFT0XZ6XfSuRJzIySLIA6ECskkHxKUAYDZM66M"; X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 In-Reply-To: Xref: csiph.com comp.os.linux.misc:61858 This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --8323328-1175007111-1733592817=:3169 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT On Sat, 7 Dec 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > On 07/12/2024 10:50, D wrote: >> >> >> On Sat, 7 Dec 2024, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote: >> >>> On 12/6/24 4:11 AM, D wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, 6 Dec 2024, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 12/5/24 7:17 AM, D wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, 5 Dec 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 05/12/2024 09:31, D wrote: >>>>>>>> There is great good and great evil in man. That's what makes him so >>>>>>>> fascinating and why fighting is such a necessary sport to give an >>>>>>>> outlet for all that aggression. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Only man creates the categories of good and evil. >>>>>>> Science does not include them >>>>>> >>>>>> I think you know what I mean. In order to avoid nitpicking, let's say >>>>>> creative and destructive energies. >>>>> >>>>>  To "Nature" ... I think it's all just superstrings hummin' >>>>> >>>>>  WE make of it all as we will. >>>>> >>>>>  Joe Alien ... he many have entirely different ideas ... >>>>> >>>> >>>> I know. Natural and I have discussed this violently and agreed to >>>> disagree. I'm a huge fan of the material world. As for the ultimate >>>> nature, laws and composition, I am agnostic, and we'll see how far >>>> science will take us. I lean towards instrumentalism/cognitive >>>> empiricism. >>> >>> >>>  IMHO, 'material' owns it - 'reality'-wise anyhow. >>> >>>  However the Quality Of Life depends on what we DO with that. >>>  It generally stops of short agreeing to the Nietzschean extreme. >>> >>>  Sci-tech will eventually take us All The Way insofar as >>>  power over our environment. But, again, how do we FEEL >>>  such power and insight be used ? >>> >>>  If it was easy they'd have resolved all this 25,000 >>>  years ago. >>> >>>  The Buddha understood there was a Real World - but >>>  WE could never ever really see/perceive it because >>>  of what we were, how nature put us together, our >>>  native environment, our IQ range. We will always >>>  have a key-hole view, seeing things through >>>  "human-colored glasses". >>> >>>  Plato's "Allegory of the cave" kinda touched on the >>>  same stuff - but, maybe for political reasons, left >>>  off the last paragraph or two. >>> >>>  ANYWAY, at the cold cold root - it's just all >>>  superstrings hummin' ... calculating a 'reality' >>>  as WE can sorta perceive it. Wolfram seems to >>>  have grasped this. >>> >> >> I pretty much agree with you. Not much to add. Interesting that this is >> your interpretation of Nietzsche. Mine is very similar. I would add, that >> Nietzsches philosophy is his own attempt, and that every person needs to >> make it "his own". >> >> Tying that to politics, I think it was Ludwig von Mises who wrote in his >> classic "Liberalism" (and this is liberalism in its original meaning, not >> the bastardized US meaning of the term, so think libertarianism), >> somethings along the lines of... >> >> Liberalism [libertarianism] is nothing more than the scientific view and >> method of how to structure society in such a way as to maximize material >> wealth and quality of life. Beyond maximizing material wealth, it makes no >> other claims or sets no other goals. >> >> So what you, as an individual, do with that wealth, if you use that to >> purchase time (work less) and what you fill that time with, is entirely up >> to you. >> >> I believe that this is why many people find libertarianism so scary. They >> have no inherent sense of value or goals. They need the goals pushed on >> them from the outside (equality, sustainability, be a cog wheel in the >> machine of the nation, the prosperity and success of the race, etc.) in >> order to feel meaning in their life. >> >> When they have an ism that does not push any form of value, but only wants >> to create time for people to flourish, since they are not self directed >> from within, they cannot make any sense at all of it, and it scares them at >> a deep level. >> >> That is why I think that the human psychology is not really ready for >> libertarianism, as long as the majority of humans are drawn to religions >> and isms in order for an external person to supply them with goals and >> values. > > I think this hits the nail on the head. Socialism now occupies the space left > by the demise of Christianity. > > A sharp Jewish girlfriend of mine once observed that 'the people need to be > told what is right and what is wrong, and how they should behave otherwise > they simply don't know what to do' > > But they are increasingly realising that socialism too, has feet of clay. > And I do not entirely agree that people cannot accept a reality without > ideology. > > Libertarianism/pragmatism/conservatism can simply say that it deliberately > restricts its activities to ensuring law, order, prosperity and social > stability and is 'ultra vires' when it comes to determining moral behaviour. > > And leave that to religion or the BBC Yes, let's hope that people will shed socialism, just like they once shed christianity. I think it partly has already started, since socialism is running out of weak groups to fire up against the rich. The richer we become, the less of a grip socialism has on the lower classes. That is why they are scrambling for new fronts such as the environment and immigration (import a new lower class and start again from the 1800:s). --8323328-1175007111-1733592817=:3169--