![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
To one degree or another, everyone thinks of themselves as rational decision makers weighing the evidence then steering their lives along the best course. I assert that, to one degree or another, everyone miscalculates the degree to which they are rational assuming they are more rational than they really are.
Why? We view the world not as it is, but as we subconsciously think it is. We decide not based in reality but inside our distortion of the real world and the real facts. To each individual, their picture of reality is real and the other guy has his facts wrong or is mentally ill.
People have "honest differences of opinion" but there isn't the possibility for an "honest difference" of reality. As an example, fundamentalists who assert that their religion/god is the one TRUE religion/god are expressing opinion not reporting fact.
To one degree or another, everyone has beliefs that they do not and cannot distinguish from reality. It is sometimes interesting to converse with someone about one of their superstitions. Ask for data to back up their assertions, and get answers that contain only more opinion. Ask enough questions (really only takes a few) and you find yourself in a circular set of statements that are often internally consistent, but devoid of testable or replicable data.
Many of our individual superstitions are created when we are very young at a time when we are physiologically incapable of determining fact from fantasy. We build up a store of "knowledge" that builds a shaky framework of a child's view of the world. These are superstitions that we use to make sense of what we observe. At some point, we dress up our superstitions with more thoughtful language and arguments, but the underlying superstition is still the work of a four- or five-year-old trying to make sense of the world. We like to make this organization of life sound important and wonderful. We are protecting "our cultural heritage" or some such name for passing down our superstitions from generation to generation. (In my opinion, this is what the christian "original sin" really means!)
Testable, repeatable facts that interfere with our superstitions are initially rejected outright. The slow adoption of proven physical facts by the Catholic Church provides many great examples. The current crop of folks who are denying climate change is an example. Holocaust deniers, yet another example. Most people do not want their world view disturbed. Their experience of the fear of the unknown is powerful and it feels safer to hide in a self-imposed closet of ignorance.
When the evidence that our superstition is incorrect or irrational can no longer be ignored or rejected outright, we meld the new facts by twisting them to fit a slightly altered version of our superstition. It is rare indeed for a person to drop a superstition that proves entirely false. My guess is that this is what "enlightenment" means. Transforming one's view of the world such that it is aligned with reality rather than child-like interpretation of reality.
Many people want life to be straightforward and easily understandable -- no ambiguity. These folks have a high fear index and a low tolerance for difference. Pushed far enough and they will organize themselves in order to impose their collected view or order on those who prefer a bit of chaos in their lives. Lets call them "conservatives."
Since 1965 or so, when the various human rights (race, sex, LBGT) struggles where coming into full-bloom, the conservatives became so afraid that they high-jacked the Republican Party and starting dragging the entire country into their closet with them even though most of their rhetoric is laughably irrational and many of the policies are demonstrably failures.
it is not easy, though, to dissuade a fool of his foolishness. It probably isn't worth the time. Better to just remove the fool from any position of power. Let the fool be the fool, not the king (CEO, Governor, Congressman, etc.)
The Republican "debates" has been a constant stream of fools trying to out clown each other. It seems strange to me that they have more than a 5% following. Really, are half the citizens of the United States so terrified of the monster under the bed, that they are willing to vote for a mentally ill candidate? Seems so.
It is my opinion that a constant diet of social repression inevitably leads to revolution -- occasionally peaceful (relatively), but more often bloody. This is not want the conservatives want. It is never what they want. It is always what they produce. It is one definition of insanity.
We are not in a class or culture war. We are in a struggle between the relatively sane and the obviously mentally ill and the inmates are currently running the asylum. Until we get some reality into our policies, we will remain on the brink of civil war. Until we get some reality into our policies, huge numbers of people are going to suffer and die in the name of various morality superstitions.
Maybe we need to make the conservatives so afraid that they can't even come out of their houses long enough to vote? Nah, won't work. The more terrified they are, the easier it is for their masters to control them. The best course of action is to make the fanatics irrelevant.
In 11 months, America has an important election. It represents a choice between insane and mildly delusional. Good luck, America. Good luck, Planet.
Why? We view the world not as it is, but as we subconsciously think it is. We decide not based in reality but inside our distortion of the real world and the real facts. To each individual, their picture of reality is real and the other guy has his facts wrong or is mentally ill.
People have "honest differences of opinion" but there isn't the possibility for an "honest difference" of reality. As an example, fundamentalists who assert that their religion/god is the one TRUE religion/god are expressing opinion not reporting fact.
To one degree or another, everyone has beliefs that they do not and cannot distinguish from reality. It is sometimes interesting to converse with someone about one of their superstitions. Ask for data to back up their assertions, and get answers that contain only more opinion. Ask enough questions (really only takes a few) and you find yourself in a circular set of statements that are often internally consistent, but devoid of testable or replicable data.
Many of our individual superstitions are created when we are very young at a time when we are physiologically incapable of determining fact from fantasy. We build up a store of "knowledge" that builds a shaky framework of a child's view of the world. These are superstitions that we use to make sense of what we observe. At some point, we dress up our superstitions with more thoughtful language and arguments, but the underlying superstition is still the work of a four- or five-year-old trying to make sense of the world. We like to make this organization of life sound important and wonderful. We are protecting "our cultural heritage" or some such name for passing down our superstitions from generation to generation. (In my opinion, this is what the christian "original sin" really means!)
Testable, repeatable facts that interfere with our superstitions are initially rejected outright. The slow adoption of proven physical facts by the Catholic Church provides many great examples. The current crop of folks who are denying climate change is an example. Holocaust deniers, yet another example. Most people do not want their world view disturbed. Their experience of the fear of the unknown is powerful and it feels safer to hide in a self-imposed closet of ignorance.
When the evidence that our superstition is incorrect or irrational can no longer be ignored or rejected outright, we meld the new facts by twisting them to fit a slightly altered version of our superstition. It is rare indeed for a person to drop a superstition that proves entirely false. My guess is that this is what "enlightenment" means. Transforming one's view of the world such that it is aligned with reality rather than child-like interpretation of reality.
Many people want life to be straightforward and easily understandable -- no ambiguity. These folks have a high fear index and a low tolerance for difference. Pushed far enough and they will organize themselves in order to impose their collected view or order on those who prefer a bit of chaos in their lives. Lets call them "conservatives."
Since 1965 or so, when the various human rights (race, sex, LBGT) struggles where coming into full-bloom, the conservatives became so afraid that they high-jacked the Republican Party and starting dragging the entire country into their closet with them even though most of their rhetoric is laughably irrational and many of the policies are demonstrably failures.
it is not easy, though, to dissuade a fool of his foolishness. It probably isn't worth the time. Better to just remove the fool from any position of power. Let the fool be the fool, not the king (CEO, Governor, Congressman, etc.)
The Republican "debates" has been a constant stream of fools trying to out clown each other. It seems strange to me that they have more than a 5% following. Really, are half the citizens of the United States so terrified of the monster under the bed, that they are willing to vote for a mentally ill candidate? Seems so.
It is my opinion that a constant diet of social repression inevitably leads to revolution -- occasionally peaceful (relatively), but more often bloody. This is not want the conservatives want. It is never what they want. It is always what they produce. It is one definition of insanity.
We are not in a class or culture war. We are in a struggle between the relatively sane and the obviously mentally ill and the inmates are currently running the asylum. Until we get some reality into our policies, we will remain on the brink of civil war. Until we get some reality into our policies, huge numbers of people are going to suffer and die in the name of various morality superstitions.
Maybe we need to make the conservatives so afraid that they can't even come out of their houses long enough to vote? Nah, won't work. The more terrified they are, the easier it is for their masters to control them. The best course of action is to make the fanatics irrelevant.
In 11 months, America has an important election. It represents a choice between insane and mildly delusional. Good luck, America. Good luck, Planet.