If this "online street" thing was made, it could actually become very important to detect these kinds of issues. Something like if everyone has access to this public forum and it's very popular and commonly used, then if your government shuts the site down, you know there's something wrong automatically. Well that could be said of Facebook, YouTube and Twitter as well, but this "street" would exist for the sole purpose of that.
Mutual knowledge... sigh. For a start, any knowledge that can ever be assessed to even exist, exists mutually between reality and self. And here's one that's been one to get thinkers thinking... what is it that an idea, actually is, anyway? Did it always exist on some metaphysical potentiality to be "calculated," or is it new to existence itself, in a linear fashion? There's a little bit of a feeling, that it doesn't even matter. But maybe subjectively to others, it might.
Also, there is definitely some bullshit into thinking that someone HAS to rely upon what others think. That's 'collective influential' bullshit. People can think on their own, even without language or social discourse, and STILL come up with hypothetical dimensions of thought, that bring forth ideas and creativity. Imagination, foresight and insight, have their own mutuality with will.
Guess there's some "secret" knowledge spilled onto a mutual active framework of "think." Sigh. Come on guys, get a grip. What happens in successful revolutions, is a great man grows a pair, and leads. Then every other part of mob mind, follows whatever pied piper is piping, on whatever pipe of revolt is playing.
Do you think this mutual knowledge could be positively affected by something like Empathy? (some people say empathy is the basis for morality) it seems that many voices help create shame reduction. is the realization of mutual knowledge what we call SOLIDARITY?
@luminousanomaly I think empathy could possibly be made easier if we had mutual knowledge of one another's feelings. I'd be more likely to be empathetic toward someone if I knew they were going through stuff that I was also going through, or had gone through in my past.
For thousands of years people have fought tooth and nail to avoid the harsh reality of biological life endowed with sentience. There is no grand plan or mystical magical purpose to biological life. Every second of every day billions of sentient creatures are torn to pieces by other creatures who in turn are predated or succumb to disease decrepitude and death. Why are so many so scared to share this shared knowledge?
What it is I think I need to give some more thought.
Paradigm shift techno boffin BS BINGO, I used to play at presentations because I'd heard it all before and with so much chatter these days everyone has heard it all before and the people that chatter in the most appealing way are the ones many people listen to.
One of the things which really irritates me is the endless theorising and changing nothing. The sort of thing where people will put on some site 'put this on your page if you want to change the world: let us imagine a world where there is peace and all have what they need, if we all think it hard the power of our thoughts will make it happen'. No, it won't, you have to do something. Mutual knowledge of any kind has to become mutual action or nothing whatsoever changes.
@Loreleila Afterthought, in addition to this there is usually a sense of self rightousness in those who do it and often an implication that if you don't it's because you don't care. As if the action of reposting some sanctimonious bit of nonsense makes you a real agent of change.
@conferencereport More seriously, I would agree, although I think it can be the case that the creation of mutual knowledge (of shared disaffection with a regime for example) is a necessary precursor to the kind of change that requires a critical mass of people to cry for it.
@conferencereport ROFL! Of course you're right, and people need to feel there are enough others that it's worth acting, but on the other hand millions of people smugly sitting in front of screens feeling they've changed the world through a piece of text will probably have the opposite effect. A placebo. I suspect in part if depends what your own life is like and whether acting is likely to have any real effect on it. There are a lot of armchair warriors about.
I'm shuddering at the thought of a society with 'mutual knowledge' (although I think that 'mutual interpretation' might function better in its place) of "nothing new under the sun", a truly nihilistic, "nothing left to explore", "nothing else can be created", swimming--in-postmodernism type of society.
I like the idea of an on-line river. as our attention is directed at someone, or a topic, it will be pushed towards the shore, with enough attention it will be pushed onto the bank and as more and more people come flowing by their continued attention keeps that topic anchored there. when a topic resolves itself in some way, or the pressure/attention diminishes then that part of the shore becomes available for the next. the more people, the longer the river. yours earl
If this "online street" thing was made, it could actually become very important to detect these kinds of issues. Something like if everyone has access to this public forum and it's very popular and commonly used, then if your government shuts the site down, you know there's something wrong automatically. Well that could be said of Facebook, YouTube and Twitter as well, but this "street" would exist for the sole purpose of that.
Jontman42 11 months ago
Mutual knowledge... sigh. For a start, any knowledge that can ever be assessed to even exist, exists mutually between reality and self. And here's one that's been one to get thinkers thinking... what is it that an idea, actually is, anyway? Did it always exist on some metaphysical potentiality to be "calculated," or is it new to existence itself, in a linear fashion? There's a little bit of a feeling, that it doesn't even matter. But maybe subjectively to others, it might.
U5312N4M34Y0UTU133 1 year ago
Also, there is definitely some bullshit into thinking that someone HAS to rely upon what others think. That's 'collective influential' bullshit. People can think on their own, even without language or social discourse, and STILL come up with hypothetical dimensions of thought, that bring forth ideas and creativity. Imagination, foresight and insight, have their own mutuality with will.
U5312N4M34Y0UTU133 1 year ago
Anybody that can't rely upon themselves for invention, is an idiot that's been given will, with no ideology or utility of how to use it. Sheep.
U5312N4M34Y0UTU133 1 year ago
Comment removed
U5312N4M34Y0UTU133 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Guess there's some "secret" knowledge spilled onto a mutual active framework of "think." Sigh. Come on guys, get a grip. What happens in successful revolutions, is a great man grows a pair, and leads. Then every other part of mob mind, follows whatever pied piper is piping, on whatever pipe of revolt is playing.
U5312N4M34Y0UTU133 1 year ago
i sick in my mouth a little bit when people make those condecending videos sayin 'talk about this, not that'.. urgh
SkidRowRadio 1 year ago
Do you think this mutual knowledge could be positively affected by something like Empathy? (some people say empathy is the basis for morality) it seems that many voices help create shame reduction. is the realization of mutual knowledge what we call SOLIDARITY?
luminousanomaly 1 year ago
@luminousanomaly I think empathy could possibly be made easier if we had mutual knowledge of one another's feelings. I'd be more likely to be empathetic toward someone if I knew they were going through stuff that I was also going through, or had gone through in my past.
conferencereport 1 year ago
For thousands of years people have fought tooth and nail to avoid the harsh reality of biological life endowed with sentience. There is no grand plan or mystical magical purpose to biological life. Every second of every day billions of sentient creatures are torn to pieces by other creatures who in turn are predated or succumb to disease decrepitude and death. Why are so many so scared to share this shared knowledge?
TheSuicidalOptimist 1 year ago
"I don't understand."
AND
"I don't think that was fair play."
What if we just said those things when we were confused? Instead we always want to say what's popular or 'smart' instead.
2bsirius 1 year ago
im getting sea sick
glasseay 1 year ago
Seems to me that you are on the way to something.
What it is I think I need to give some more thought.
Paradigm shift techno boffin BS BINGO, I used to play at presentations because I'd heard it all before and with so much chatter these days everyone has heard it all before and the people that chatter in the most appealing way are the ones many people listen to.
TheFairenoughclough 1 year ago
he is interesting, this predictable irrationality guy
pyrrho314 1 year ago
@pyrrho314 As indeed is your good self P. Still thinking about your 'how we are manipulated' vid.
conferencereport 1 year ago
One of the things which really irritates me is the endless theorising and changing nothing. The sort of thing where people will put on some site 'put this on your page if you want to change the world: let us imagine a world where there is peace and all have what they need, if we all think it hard the power of our thoughts will make it happen'. No, it won't, you have to do something. Mutual knowledge of any kind has to become mutual action or nothing whatsoever changes.
Loreleila 1 year ago
@Loreleila Afterthought, in addition to this there is usually a sense of self rightousness in those who do it and often an implication that if you don't it's because you don't care. As if the action of reposting some sanctimonious bit of nonsense makes you a real agent of change.
Loreleila 1 year ago
@Loreleila I completely agree with this statement and encourage everyone to repeat it on their sites.
conferencereport 1 year ago
@conferencereport More seriously, I would agree, although I think it can be the case that the creation of mutual knowledge (of shared disaffection with a regime for example) is a necessary precursor to the kind of change that requires a critical mass of people to cry for it.
conferencereport 1 year ago
@conferencereport ROFL! Of course you're right, and people need to feel there are enough others that it's worth acting, but on the other hand millions of people smugly sitting in front of screens feeling they've changed the world through a piece of text will probably have the opposite effect. A placebo. I suspect in part if depends what your own life is like and whether acting is likely to have any real effect on it. There are a lot of armchair warriors about.
Loreleila 1 year ago
I'm shuddering at the thought of a society with 'mutual knowledge' (although I think that 'mutual interpretation' might function better in its place) of "nothing new under the sun", a truly nihilistic, "nothing left to explore", "nothing else can be created", swimming--in-postmodernism type of society.
Adrian101882 1 year ago
I like the idea of an on-line river. as our attention is directed at someone, or a topic, it will be pushed towards the shore, with enough attention it will be pushed onto the bank and as more and more people come flowing by their continued attention keeps that topic anchored there. when a topic resolves itself in some way, or the pressure/attention diminishes then that part of the shore becomes available for the next. the more people, the longer the river. yours earl
bikemessenger7 1 year ago