4 ms·
> I don’t believe they actually miss the tourists themselves. Tourists are merely delivery vehicles for food. I’ve recently taken to the idea that intellectual
by undershirt 6y ago
> I don’t believe they actually miss the tourists themselves. Tourists are merely delivery vehicles for food.
I’ve recently taken to the idea that intellectual stances and embodied experiences are not derivable from one another. Each toolkit is separate, and weird things happen when you try to extend one into the other.
For example, I felt it emotively when reading your comment, that the intellect is extraordinarily good at reducing everything into nothing, because it is a core presupposition that we must view things mechanically, to have mechanical proficiency.
Similarly, to have emotional proficiency, we must make our emotional presuppositions. This is not the obsolete definition of “myth” as stories we make up to make us feel good, because that’s again a framing of a reductionist intellect.
What I’m trying to limn is not anti-intellectualism, but that there is no common framework to contain both of these separate modalities. Don’t let the stomach cannibalize the liver, we need both.
- keenmaster 6y agoI hear you, and I think it’s valuable to delineate the intellectual from the emotional to some extent. With love being such a nebulous concept, I want to set out my narrow definition in the context of this conversation. Anthropomorphic love necessarily requires abstract cognition which is beyond the abilities of dolphins. Dolphins can love you, and love each other, but the love is entirely rooted in lower cognitive states which simply draw a connection between you and a few very tangible, primal things. There’s love, and then there’s love love.
- undershirt 6y agoi agree, and thanks for your charitable reading (re-reading what i said, i actually hate the way i said it). > love is entirely rooted in lower cognitive states you likely already know this, but emergence adds a famous corollary to what “rooted in” means: > Downward causation can be defined as a converse of the reductionist principle: the behavior of the parts (down) is determined by the behavior of the whole (up), so determination moves downward instead of upward. The difference is that determination is not complete. It gets into an example that makes this sound less mystical. But applying that here, “love love” abstractly might be the higher signal abstraction for understanding “lower cognitive states”, because the lower stuff emerges higher stuff that constrains its behavior using higher complexity rules. [1]: http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/DOWNCAUS.html http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/DOWNCAUS.html