7 ms·

Thriverism

21 points by exolymph 6y ago

blindm 6y ago
The Internet makes it easy to see who is winning at life and who isn't. It also guides you on where you should compete. If someone else is winning at a particular topic that interests you; then you can decide to either join them or out-compete them with better results. This article addresses The Great Man Theory[0] or what I call supernaut syndrome[1] which has affected the masses terribly. Every person has to be all they can be now, and their full potential actualized, otherwise there is no point. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Man_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Man_theory [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%9Cbermensch https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%9Cbermensch
- mattgreenrocks 6y ago
  I find the connection between the increased connectivity afforded by the Internet and the widespread miasma of supernaut syndrome quite astute. To my knowledge, I haven't seen much serious discussion of this. In other words, it probably isn't healthy that we are regularly subjected to what is marketed as the best/brightest/most-anything in whatever category we're looking for information on. There's nothing wrong with this, except for the fact that continued exposure to it can change our view on the type of work that _we_ need to be doing to make our way through the world. It might be an overreach, but it smells a lot like the mind virus of so-called incels: "I'm not remarkable, so why do I have worth?" Escaping that requires an enormous amount of energy. The truth is pretty much tautological: "you have worth because you exist."
  - keiferski 6y ago
    I can’t find the passage at the moment, but in his book Notes on Culture, T. S. Eliot actually argues that this is endemic to a societal system which is run by meritocratic, technocratic elites. That is, by those who excel at the required skills necessary to ‘climb the ladder’ and not by a broad cultural class which maintains power, I.e. a hierarchical aristocracy in the British form. His argument is something like: when you get the entire populace concerned with acquiring power, they will inevitably be dissatisfied with their current societal position. Not sure I agree with him entirely, but it’s an interesting position.
- megameter 6y ago
  Of late I've noticed an emerging trend on YouTube of popular creators presenting more visible vulnerability and engaging with reflection alongside their fans, rather than hiding it. And live streaming culture often encourages such as well, since the long, unstructured time spans naturally create those moments. This practice rather counteracts the belief in the supernaut, since it humbles and demonstrates a kind of solidarity with everyone who isn't "making it". It doesn't exactly counter the negatives of parasociality in these spaces, but it opens the window for the audience to reconsider.
Kednicma 6y ago
The article searches for meaning and finds God. Whoops! It was a good try, though. Let's use the opportunity to be productive, though. Meanings must live in their own realm apart from sentences, so that when we say that a sentence has a meaning, we imply that there is a mapping from sentences to meanings. However, those meanings cannot be complete and consistent; there must be some sentences which don't have permanently-mapped meanings, because such meanings would lead to self-contradiction [1]. The author should read more Meaningness, especially the section on the fallacies of eternalism [0]. They could also read Derrida on meanings and deconstruction, although Derrida's not easy reading. Edit: As usual, downvoters, want to reply? [0] https://meaningness.com/eternalism https://meaningness.com/eternalism [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarski%27s_undefinability_theorem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarski%27s_undefinability_theo...
- exolymph 6y ago
  I literally linked to Meaningness in the post lmao
  - Kednicma 6y ago
    Understandable, and yet, you did not read. The page I linked says, openly, > Dropping religious beliefs is only a first step towards freeing ourselves from eternalism. And continues to explain how your beliefs, about how there are definite meanings and purposes to life, are illusions. The next page [0] states it clearly too: > We cling to the idea that there must be a cosmic plan because we fear that without one everything would be meaningless. But this is mistaken; which means that most ideas about meaningfulness and meaninglessness are mistaken. Fortunately, life is meaningful without any cosmic plan or ultimate source of meaning. If you like arete, you could also stand to read Pirsig. He was very concerned with ethics and values. Finally, to directly critique your metaphysics, please first consider this phrase you wrote: > Everything matters, because we feel everything, and thus it matters to us. And then consider Russell's teapot [1]. Does Russell's teapot matter, floating out there around the rings of Saturn? Can we feel it? A bit of consideration will show that, while everything is connected to everything, not everything affects everything else equally. We are, in fact, far more sensitive to things which are close to us. [0] https://meaningness.com/no-cosmic-plan https://meaningness.com/no-cosmic-plan [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot
gumby 6y ago
> While I refuse to learn philosophy What?? You want to inquire into meaning and purpose and you ignore the discipline of inquiry into meaning and purpose? That is absurd. If you can ignore for a moment the archaic sexism of terminology, there’s a reason why mathematics is called “the queen of the sciences” — the king, or Ursprung of them all, including mathematics, is philosophy.
- jimrandomh 6y ago
  No, she's right. The field of philosophy has failed to separate out its bullshit, so anyone who decides to "learn philosophy" without a lot of prior independently-generated philosophical sophistication will be lead into a trap. https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/FwiPfF8Woe5JrzqEu/philosophy-a-diseased-discipline https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/FwiPfF8Woe5JrzqEu/philosophy...
  - Kednicma 6y ago
    No, she's wrong. The modern scientific models each form a kernel of truth from among the BS, and today we have to deal with quantum mechanics and its quirky bizarre predictions which invalidate the "just look at it" and "just think about it" schools of philosophical thought. For example, she claims that God exists. A typical trait of God is knowing everything about the universe; say, knowing the positions, momenta, and spin of every particle. But QM gives us Heisenberg's Uncertainty, which prevents anybody, including hypothetical deities, from knowing that information. Indeed, QM typically isn't materialistic; it is wrong to insist that all of those particles definitely have some position and momentum at an instant in time. So, whatever her God is, it isn't the all-powerful one. (The all-powerful God has many better-tread problems in pure metaphysics, like the Problem of Evil, but I don't know what "evil" is and so I'm leaning on QM.) There is no problem in having to learn philosophy by reading surveys of historical ideologies. Philosophy is cumulative, and as little as one semester of studying historical philosophy can massively improve a person's critical thinking skills. Really, the problem is in not taking seriously enough the invalidation of old philosophies by newer thoughts, as we continue to improve what we know. There are many positions that are simply wrong, including positions which we currently think are correct!
toiletfuneral 6y ago
"Following Christianity and its core tenants as described in scripture will always be radical and counter-cultural." The vast majority of political power in the US is held by evangelicals, how anyone could write this with a straight face is beyond me. Fucking christians man, no amount of dominance will ever stop them them from crying about being victims
SarikayaKomzin 6y ago
It may not be exactly for the reasons she gives, but I think her instinct is correct to reduce these metaphysical questions into minutiae. To “unanswer” them by forcing them to conform to her empirical observation without any additional inquiry, because that inquiry quite frankly is a waste of time (the important caveat being unless you’re making the inquiry for its own sake and therefore enjoying it). It’s a deeply pragmatic approach. It reminds me of the Buddhist parable about the poison arrow: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_Poisoned_Arrow https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_Poisoned_Arrow "‘Suppose a man is struck by a poisoned arrow and the doctor wishes to take out the arrow immediately. Suppose the man does not want the arrow removed until he knows who shot it, his age, his parents, and why he shot it. What would happen? If he were to wait until all these questions have been answered, the man might die first.’ Life is so short. It must not be spent in endless metaphysical speculation that does not bring us any closer to the truth.”
rektide 6y ago
Arete is one of my favorites. Picked up by way of Mage: the Ascension, where you are a reality bending mage & your general mastery over reality is called "arete". Your efficacy at magic, your excellence... silly intro but got me introduced to the idea & a host of other good ones that still shape my perception of the world. That game world also has a "trimurti" which closely parallels the Hindu triumvirate, which is another good perspective I've been glad to carry. Creating/sustaining/destroying, crudely said.

21 points by exolymph 6y ago

The Internet makes it easy to see who is winning at life and who isn't. It also guides you on where you should compete. If someone else is winning at a particular topic that interests you; then you can decide to either join them or out-compete them with better results. This article addresses The Great Man Theory[0] or what I call supernaut syndrome[1] which has affected the masses terribly. Every person has to be all they can be now, and their full potential actualized, otherwise there is no point. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Man_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Man_theory [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%9Cbermensch https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%9Cbermensch

mattgreenrocks 6y ago
I find the connection between the increased connectivity afforded by the Internet and the widespread miasma of supernaut syndrome quite astute. To my knowledge, I haven't seen much serious discussion of this. In other words, it probably isn't healthy that we are regularly subjected to what is marketed as the best/brightest/most-anything in whatever category we're looking for information on. There's nothing wrong with this, except for the fact that continued exposure to it can change our view on the type of work that _we_ need to be doing to make our way through the world. It might be an overreach, but it smells a lot like the mind virus of so-called incels: "I'm not remarkable, so why do I have worth?" Escaping that requires an enormous amount of energy. The truth is pretty much tautological: "you have worth because you exist."
- keiferski 6y ago
  I can’t find the passage at the moment, but in his book Notes on Culture, T. S. Eliot actually argues that this is endemic to a societal system which is run by meritocratic, technocratic elites. That is, by those who excel at the required skills necessary to ‘climb the ladder’ and not by a broad cultural class which maintains power, I.e. a hierarchical aristocracy in the British form. His argument is something like: when you get the entire populace concerned with acquiring power, they will inevitably be dissatisfied with their current societal position. Not sure I agree with him entirely, but it’s an interesting position.
megameter 6y ago
Of late I've noticed an emerging trend on YouTube of popular creators presenting more visible vulnerability and engaging with reflection alongside their fans, rather than hiding it. And live streaming culture often encourages such as well, since the long, unstructured time spans naturally create those moments. This practice rather counteracts the belief in the supernaut, since it humbles and demonstrates a kind of solidarity with everyone who isn't "making it". It doesn't exactly counter the negatives of parasociality in these spaces, but it opens the window for the audience to reconsider.

Kednicma 6y ago

The article searches for meaning and finds God. Whoops! It was a good try, though. Let's use the opportunity to be productive, though. Meanings must live in their own realm apart from sentences, so that when we say that a sentence has a meaning, we imply that there is a mapping from sentences to meanings. However, those meanings cannot be complete and consistent; there must be some sentences which don't have permanently-mapped meanings, because such meanings would lead to self-contradiction [1]. The author should read more Meaningness, especially the section on the fallacies of eternalism [0]. They could also read Derrida on meanings and deconstruction, although Derrida's not easy reading. Edit: As usual, downvoters, want to reply? [0] https://meaningness.com/eternalism https://meaningness.com/eternalism [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarski%27s_undefinability_theorem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarski%27s_undefinability_theo...

exolymph 6y ago
I literally linked to Meaningness in the post lmao
- Kednicma 6y ago
  Understandable, and yet, you did not read. The page I linked says, openly, > Dropping religious beliefs is only a first step towards freeing ourselves from eternalism. And continues to explain how your beliefs, about how there are definite meanings and purposes to life, are illusions. The next page [0] states it clearly too: > We cling to the idea that there must be a cosmic plan because we fear that without one everything would be meaningless. But this is mistaken; which means that most ideas about meaningfulness and meaninglessness are mistaken. Fortunately, life is meaningful without any cosmic plan or ultimate source of meaning. If you like arete, you could also stand to read Pirsig. He was very concerned with ethics and values. Finally, to directly critique your metaphysics, please first consider this phrase you wrote: > Everything matters, because we feel everything, and thus it matters to us. And then consider Russell's teapot [1]. Does Russell's teapot matter, floating out there around the rings of Saturn? Can we feel it? A bit of consideration will show that, while everything is connected to everything, not everything affects everything else equally. We are, in fact, far more sensitive to things which are close to us. [0] https://meaningness.com/no-cosmic-plan https://meaningness.com/no-cosmic-plan [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot

gumby 6y ago

> While I refuse to learn philosophy What?? You want to inquire into meaning and purpose and you ignore the discipline of inquiry into meaning and purpose? That is absurd. If you can ignore for a moment the archaic sexism of terminology, there’s a reason why mathematics is called “the queen of the sciences” — the king, or Ursprung of them all, including mathematics, is philosophy.

jimrandomh 6y ago
No, she's right. The field of philosophy has failed to separate out its bullshit, so anyone who decides to "learn philosophy" without a lot of prior independently-generated philosophical sophistication will be lead into a trap. https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/FwiPfF8Woe5JrzqEu/philosophy-a-diseased-discipline https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/FwiPfF8Woe5JrzqEu/philosophy...
- Kednicma 6y ago
  No, she's wrong. The modern scientific models each form a kernel of truth from among the BS, and today we have to deal with quantum mechanics and its quirky bizarre predictions which invalidate the "just look at it" and "just think about it" schools of philosophical thought. For example, she claims that God exists. A typical trait of God is knowing everything about the universe; say, knowing the positions, momenta, and spin of every particle. But QM gives us Heisenberg's Uncertainty, which prevents anybody, including hypothetical deities, from knowing that information. Indeed, QM typically isn't materialistic; it is wrong to insist that all of those particles definitely have some position and momentum at an instant in time. So, whatever her God is, it isn't the all-powerful one. (The all-powerful God has many better-tread problems in pure metaphysics, like the Problem of Evil, but I don't know what "evil" is and so I'm leaning on QM.) There is no problem in having to learn philosophy by reading surveys of historical ideologies. Philosophy is cumulative, and as little as one semester of studying historical philosophy can massively improve a person's critical thinking skills. Really, the problem is in not taking seriously enough the invalidation of old philosophies by newer thoughts, as we continue to improve what we know. There are many positions that are simply wrong, including positions which we currently think are correct!

toiletfuneral 6y ago

"Following Christianity and its core tenants as described in scripture will always be radical and counter-cultural." The vast majority of political power in the US is held by evangelicals, how anyone could write this with a straight face is beyond me. Fucking christians man, no amount of dominance will ever stop them them from crying about being victims

SarikayaKomzin 6y ago

It may not be exactly for the reasons she gives, but I think her instinct is correct to reduce these metaphysical questions into minutiae. To “unanswer” them by forcing them to conform to her empirical observation without any additional inquiry, because that inquiry quite frankly is a waste of time (the important caveat being unless you’re making the inquiry for its own sake and therefore enjoying it). It’s a deeply pragmatic approach. It reminds me of the Buddhist parable about the poison arrow: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_Poisoned_Arrow https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_Poisoned_Arrow "‘Suppose a man is struck by a poisoned arrow and the doctor wishes to take out the arrow immediately. Suppose the man does not want the arrow removed until he knows who shot it, his age, his parents, and why he shot it. What would happen? If he were to wait until all these questions have been answered, the man might die first.’ Life is so short. It must not be spent in endless metaphysical speculation that does not bring us any closer to the truth.”

rektide 6y ago

Arete is one of my favorites. Picked up by way of Mage: the Ascension, where you are a reality bending mage & your general mastery over reality is called "arete". Your efficacy at magic, your excellence... silly intro but got me introduced to the idea & a host of other good ones that still shape my perception of the world. That game world also has a "trimurti" which closely parallels the Hindu triumvirate, which is another good perspective I've been glad to carry. Creating/sustaining/destroying, crudely said.