liquidating reality

Post Reply New Topic

Why is this process so popular? Because it allows a framework where nothing counts as evidence, nothing counts as knowledge, because by denying reality and allowing people to create and live in their own false realities, sure they might like the short term benefits, but in the long run that true reality that is greater than any single person will come back to sting them pretty damn hard.
Case in point, lets say just for example someone decided that theyr not emotionally up to dealing with the fact that the 3rd reich existed, and that millions of innocent people were slaughtered. So they choose to deny any of this. Just because in their false reality it never happened, doesn't mean in reality it didn't really happen. A false reality is an illusion, a self-swallowed illusion, but we do not live in an illusion, we live in the ACTUAL WORLD. To the best of our resources and knowledge, we can easily conclude NAZI Germany DID happen.
By denying facts, or opting to live in false realities, people are lured into this because it offers them an opening for their ignorance. If nothing is knowledge, if nothing is real, then they CAN'T be wrong. No matter what they do or where they stand, the fact-denial game is like a crack house with the ignorance being the crack. Those who go on rants attacking objectivism, altruism, are often the drug addicts, admittedly I do not believe 100% in either of them but really it's just deductive logic. One person's emotions does not determine ultimate reality. The true nature of existence of the whole does not cater to one person's emotions or biases. Sometimes your not going to like the truth in a given scenario, that doesn't make it less true.

Because people think there is no absolute truth. If there were, it could mean that they might be wrong.

Then theres the people that think their view of reality is the only "right" one. For example my sister says there has to be an afterlife because when you die that can't be it. I'm fine with her thinking that herself but she feels the need to convince everyone else to become Christian because she KNOWS shes right.

And I've seen my dad die and come back to life without medical assistance;
neurons don't allow for that and he had been dead for longer than 2 minutes.

After he came back he kept saying that everything would be okay and for us to stick together, before he died for the third and final time that night.

God does exist; faith in faith alone is nothing and prayer to nobody is meaningless. But God had kept dad going until he could go to the hospital; my mom and neighbor's praying was meaningful because they were confident in God who hears.

There is no valid, existing justification for certain activities and ways of thinking, but some people just do it anyway and close themselves to truth and reality.

"Irrational" thinking has many benefits, some of which we do not even know of, let alone understand. Emotions are often just as valid a reason to act as political reasons.

Delusion is without a shred of evidence. However, it should be treated with caution, and we should be extremely careful to separate personal, limited witness experiences from insanity. The guy who says that he had an extraterrestrial encounter might just be right, and the aliens - or government - might be very good at covering it all up.
I don't think apparently delusional people should be forced to go for treatment unless they become a threat to security and others, or are just acting so insane that it has to be done. You might be silencing someone who is speaking the truth.

Delusion and ignorance are dangerous.

Ignorance is the controlling enemy of the masses, and the tool of the few.

But when delusion to protect selfishness and ignorance clouds up almost every major issue on our political spectrum and divides the entire nation down the middle and establishes battle lines, because NEITHER side gives a flying f**k about the facts or about one anothers' well being, I think it's ok to assume we live in a delusional, psychopathic system, eh?

Here's another example "I'm not black, so I can't understand a black man's experiences, so if he goes and beats someone up and takes their wallet for being white, i have no right to judge him for it"... Look at the Michael Vick trial, I've had black people in my local town rally to say that punishing him was "racist" (here lies the danger of political correctness)..... So if your a certain color you shouldn't have to abide by any laws? I'm "racist" by thinking that a man who murdered and tortured hundreds of innocent dogs should be punished? For thinking that justice should be served?
Maybe I don't know what it's like to be female, or black, or gay, or whatever, but I know what it's like to be a living, breathing, sentient being. And I don't think it's right to screw others over or hurt others for selfish, ignorant reasons.
I stick up for ethnics, females, gays, and others too, whom I "can't understand", when I see they are logically being discriminated in this system of "f**k them over before they f**k you over". When American society had this "all muslims and arabs are evil" attitude, after 9/11, I spoke up against people like this, because not every muslim flew those planes into the building, it was a few people, and I pointed out that if theyr gonna blame the entire race, then maybe they could blame us too because of Timothy McVeigh..... But I'll just as quickly stand up for whites, males, and straights.

Last edited by snake321 on 10 Jan 2008, 6:50 pm, edited 4 times in total.

Once again, people got to stop using "you dunno what it's like to experience life from someone else's position" as an excuse for them to throw the baby out with the bath water. Many NTs have no idea what it's like to be an aspie, does that excuse my actions if I go on a shooting spree or even if I just generally act like an a**hole to everyone?

I mean is common since really THAT bad?

The two-party system in the US really needs to be abolished.

Being very different does not mean that it is in any way justified or acceptable to do something that is inherently bad, and would get someone from a social majority prosecuted. Essentially, everyone should receive the same treatment in the eyes of the law, and "reverse" racial discrimination is still discrimination.

What people don't get is that only a minority of group X are also Y. That Xs, just like Us, should be treated as individuals. You don't choose to be an X, or a U, and thus why should you be treated any different by society, and why should you receive more rights and special preferences over Us purely because you're part of a minority which has been persecuted? Why should all Vs be treated with suspicion and hatred? It's not as if they're Ds, who choose to be Ds, and often give everyone a hard time over their own selfish choice. Certain Xs should receive special treatment to help them because of the difficulties which they are born into, help which will give them greater chances of success in life than would be expected of them due to side effects of being born into unfortunately impoverished X families. In the same instance, Us in the same position should also receive that same treatment.

Ds and Ys should be condemned, and not unfairly supported by the PC brigade when other issues concerning the more deserving Ps and Qs. Xs, Vs, and Us can be Y, M, D, Q, P, and so on.

No matter how persecuted you are, you still have no reason to behave like a total jackass to the majority, most of whom have done you no harm.

A blanket of delusion and ignorance does not make a problem go away. It just stays there and festers. Compassion is a virtue, and those who cry out for need should be helped.

The violent, harmful, and otherwise nasty degenerates should be dealt with appropriately, and not let off for any reason. The causes of troublemakers should also be treated. At the same time, they should be treated without undue prejudice.
It's understandable that a peadophile who did unspeakable things is going to be treated as a horrible criminal, because of their harmful and reprehensible actions, not their unchosen identity, as people sexually attracted to children. *vomit* Sickening though it is. Accepting their perversions is not a viable option due to the risk of such people to children, but they should be treated fairly.

Prejudice towards choices and actions is often justified, irrational and imbalanced prejudice towards what you cannot choose is not.

Is it justified to be prejudiced against Orcs because almost all Orcs attack humans, and it's a fact? Yes, I think so. You should fear Orcs, for the protection of life and limb and family! They cannot be treated like Humans! That's justified discrimination.

Is it justified to be prejudiced towards or against a group because of their skin colour, gender etc? No, except when it comes to considering factors related to their own specific traits.

Common sense is in all ways good.

Ack, a huge rant, I apologise.

I appreciate the support... I guess.... Could you please explain all that last post to me in a way that is more coherent?

Mainly the paragraph with all the Ds and Vs and Ys and Xs, and what exactly are orcs?
I agree people should be judged by their actions, and by their character, not by their gender, or race, or nationality, etc.

Yes. Basically that paragraph was just symbolizing groups of people and lifestyles as letters. The message is the same.

The same sentiment does not extend to people who choose to do bad things which harm others.

Orcs are not real, I'm just saying that it it is not always the case.

Well the point of this post was that some people, actually more people than not, choose to play this "nothing counts as knowledge" game, completely over looking common since, and obvious facts, and they do this because if nothing counts as knowledge then they can't be wrong, no matter how ignorant or wrong they really are. Then they paint this as being "open minded"...... This game usually supports group think in efforts to discredit any logical criticism of their "group". People wanna feel superior because of their gender, race, religion, political label, or any number of categories they may fall into. I agree Anubis that reverse discrimination is still discrimination, truth be told the PC police will remain WILLFULLY ignorant of this. And the right wing will take the opposite extreme and often they discriminate minorities (either directly or indirectly).

Yes, that is true. Saying that nothing counts as knowledge is pure ignorance and nihilism.

I think you're talking about postmodernism. I personally believe that the "nothing is real" argument comes not from willful ignorance but rather an angry disinclination to face actual reality. In the late twentieth century philosophers retreated into nominalism and subjectivism because the atrocities of the twentieth century as a whole were too much for their ordered minds to bear. Same with la Nazis: Ahamenajad and friends find their ideologies are so disrupted by the concept of the Holocaust (anti-semitism being one of the only ideas in history that ever reductio-ad-absurdumed itself) that they feel they have no choice but to pretend it never happened. If you say ignorant, I say avoidant.