4 ms·

Not addressing your point directly (I thought it was interesting). I would recommend you simply replace the word "lies" with "stories," or "fictions". You might

Not addressing your point directly (I thought it was interesting). I would recommend you simply replace the word "lies" with "stories," or "fictions". You might find people more willing to engage you constructively, and less willing to downvote you.

fit2rule 8y ago
Thanks for the feedback. I think 'lie' is the appropriate word, and the reason is because it really is a lie - a non-truth - which must be continually told in order to persist through time. There is no such thing as culture, until we say "this behaviour/activity/ideal is culture" - it's not a part of the natural world, but rather an invention of a human mind, creating something in order to entertain/amuse/protect itself. Perhaps 'fallacy' could be used just as well, but I feel that people don't understand the word well enough. "Here is an empty space. I shall call it 'Golliginamipopo'". It is un-true that the space is 'Golligaginamipopo' - unless I can get at least a few others to agree to call it that. At that point, it becomes a "collective truth", but nevertheless: this isn't really what the space is. Perhaps someone else has a name for it. Perhaps there is no name at all (the default state of every point in the universe). The downvotes actually help prove the point and are useful in this case. People don't agree with my lie. :)
- mkingston 8y ago
  I wonder, did you develop this idea yourself? I ask because it sounds similar to the central idea in the book Sapiens, and if you haven't read that I expect you'd appreciate it. At least for the sense of satisfaction you might get at your idea having broader recognition, but also because it's an interesting book. Sapiens discusses that countries are lies, money is a lie, every human organisation is a lie. (I use your terminology here, IIRC the author uses the term "collective fiction"). I found your comment interesting because you consider culture as a collective fiction, but I think you might be right that there's a difference between a self-identifying culture; and a non-self-identifying culture. Which, for me, raises the question: is the latter type an unspoken collective fiction, but a collective fiction nonetheless? And what are the practical differences between the two. Especially: does one type persecute outsiders more than the other? Should we try to avoid self identifying cultures as a rule? If so, when should we make an exception? Anyway, perhaps I ought to turn my armchair sociology into a reading list.
  - fit2rule 8y ago
    Thanks for the book recommendation - I'll definitely read it. To be honest I feel like this idea is a natural law, so I didn't develop it - just made the personal observation as a consequence of abandoning my own born-culture, adopting another, abandoning it, adopting another, etc. as I've moved around the world to live. >Which, for me, raises the question: is the latter type an unspoken collective fiction, but a collective fiction nonetheless? I would say, yes. Because its a natural law - there is no such thing as human culture, unless we perpetuate it in the telling - and this is why I chose the word, quite carefully, lie. Lies have to be re-told in order to persist. Collective fiction is a great phrase, and I will integrate that into my thinking. :) >And what are the practical differences between the two. Especially: does one type persecute outsiders more than the other? I think the human mind identifies, associates, and differentiates - and that each of these activities can either support perpetuating collective fiction, or deny it. To the extent that the individual recognises that they are indeed perpetuating a fiction, determines the 'detriment' to other individuals who are also capable of the same feat, albeit within their own identified cultures. >I ought to turn my armchair sociology into a reading list. Likewise, and thanks for the insight.
- philistine 8y ago
  People downvote because you're saying that culture is a lie when it's the incorrect word. You're not wrong per se, you're using the incorrect word. Others point that out to you, and you still insist on using the word lie. You double down on your error and say that you must be right because everybody else says you're wrong. Language is culture, and you're blowing it.
  - fit2rule 8y ago
    Sorry but I disagree. Lies have to be told and re-told in order to persist, they are not the natural order of things, a base truth. This is the nature of culture, also. Culture doesn't persist unless the human mind identifies with it, differentiates and associates it from other cultures. The downvotes are actually a manifestation of this point.

fit2rule 8y ago

Thanks for the feedback. I think 'lie' is the appropriate word, and the reason is because it really is a lie - a non-truth - which must be continually told in order to persist through time. There is no such thing as culture, until we say "this behaviour/activity/ideal is culture" - it's not a part of the natural world, but rather an invention of a human mind, creating something in order to entertain/amuse/protect itself. Perhaps 'fallacy' could be used just as well, but I feel that people don't understand the word well enough. "Here is an empty space. I shall call it 'Golliginamipopo'". It is un-true that the space is 'Golligaginamipopo' - unless I can get at least a few others to agree to call it that. At that point, it becomes a "collective truth", but nevertheless: this isn't really what the space is. Perhaps someone else has a name for it. Perhaps there is no name at all (the default state of every point in the universe). The downvotes actually help prove the point and are useful in this case. People don't agree with my lie. :)

mkingston 8y ago
I wonder, did you develop this idea yourself? I ask because it sounds similar to the central idea in the book Sapiens, and if you haven't read that I expect you'd appreciate it. At least for the sense of satisfaction you might get at your idea having broader recognition, but also because it's an interesting book. Sapiens discusses that countries are lies, money is a lie, every human organisation is a lie. (I use your terminology here, IIRC the author uses the term "collective fiction"). I found your comment interesting because you consider culture as a collective fiction, but I think you might be right that there's a difference between a self-identifying culture; and a non-self-identifying culture. Which, for me, raises the question: is the latter type an unspoken collective fiction, but a collective fiction nonetheless? And what are the practical differences between the two. Especially: does one type persecute outsiders more than the other? Should we try to avoid self identifying cultures as a rule? If so, when should we make an exception? Anyway, perhaps I ought to turn my armchair sociology into a reading list.
- fit2rule 8y ago
  Thanks for the book recommendation - I'll definitely read it. To be honest I feel like this idea is a natural law, so I didn't develop it - just made the personal observation as a consequence of abandoning my own born-culture, adopting another, abandoning it, adopting another, etc. as I've moved around the world to live. >Which, for me, raises the question: is the latter type an unspoken collective fiction, but a collective fiction nonetheless? I would say, yes. Because its a natural law - there is no such thing as human culture, unless we perpetuate it in the telling - and this is why I chose the word, quite carefully, lie. Lies have to be re-told in order to persist. Collective fiction is a great phrase, and I will integrate that into my thinking. :) >And what are the practical differences between the two. Especially: does one type persecute outsiders more than the other? I think the human mind identifies, associates, and differentiates - and that each of these activities can either support perpetuating collective fiction, or deny it. To the extent that the individual recognises that they are indeed perpetuating a fiction, determines the 'detriment' to other individuals who are also capable of the same feat, albeit within their own identified cultures. >I ought to turn my armchair sociology into a reading list. Likewise, and thanks for the insight.
philistine 8y ago
People downvote because you're saying that culture is a lie when it's the incorrect word. You're not wrong per se, you're using the incorrect word. Others point that out to you, and you still insist on using the word lie. You double down on your error and say that you must be right because everybody else says you're wrong. Language is culture, and you're blowing it.
- fit2rule 8y ago
  Sorry but I disagree. Lies have to be told and re-told in order to persist, they are not the natural order of things, a base truth. This is the nature of culture, also. Culture doesn't persist unless the human mind identifies with it, differentiates and associates it from other cultures. The downvotes are actually a manifestation of this point.