Friday, March 24, 2006

learning to think.

there is a statement in latin that goes; gogito ergo sum. i think, therefore i am. it is a valid statement, but it`s not necessarily true.
thinking in the inate sense is what we always do. it is a passive observation of the external and limited discourse internally. it is not until one realises that there are different ways of thinking that the idea of thinking becomes a study and a craft and a science and an architecture of philosophies.
once one begins to immerse one`s self into the craft of though and dedicates one`s self to honing skills, a whole universe opens up. a universe of ways of looking at the world.......daring to question, daring to wander off the beaten path of accepting ideas that just don`t make sense and learning to pick the lock on the door of the prison that is culture.
the "i am" that i am becoming is an "i am" that changes with each new way of expressing thought. this is true of anyone who is able to resist the ego attachment to ways of thinking that we tend to believe is "i am".
no prison can trap the mind that can be flexible enough to be like a gust of wind.
no though that traps the spirit or body is useful. thinking like that has to be released. the thoughts we claim as ours, that we claim to be us, is that prison.
challenge the ego filled scientist on his beliefs and he will fight his position to the death as if his thoughts are him, his very body. challenge any person who`s ego is formed around thoughts as facts and you will have a fight of varying degrees on your hands.
are you that scientist, so bent on proving his thesis in the world that you will bend the will of others to your point of view?


anu said...

And is it worth doing all that convincing?

Non-judgement of both self and others' actions is so powferful. It has such a calming effect on mind.

I am far from it. But i do catch myself judging self and that little bit itself is helping a lot.

dr.alistair said...

convince if you will, but be conscious of the reactions of others......they are the measure of your convictions.
laughter is the antidote. a smile, once in a while.
people ask me how i can be so damn sure of what i i ask what they think about it all. hit the ball back in thier court so we can have a game of tennis.
i root it all in unconditional love......for myself. it is contagious. you can`t spend any time around me without falling in love with`s all i demand.
i will introduce you firstly.
i will point out your compatibility with your self.
i will ask that you try the arrangement for a see if you can get along, and then after a short while living like this you realise that you wouldn`t have it any other way.
some resist. they so dislike themselves that they can barely look themselves in the mirror in the morning.....forget the smile thing. not going to happen. but once you find yourself smiling at yourself in the mirror then you will live together happily for the rest of your life.
and a little elephant with a curly tail for luck :-)

Shinsyotta said...

Hi Alistair. I have a few comments:

"i think, therefore i am. it is a valid statement, but it`s not necessarily true."

Susan Blackmore suggests that the very idea of the self is a complex of memes that only exists to serve itself by reproduction. When you think about it, what she says does make complete sense.
"challenge the ego filled scientist on his beliefs and he will fight his position to the death as if his thoughts are him, his very body"

Yes, but is this a bad thing? You might pose the same challenge to the "ego-filled cell" who will fight to his death as if the human being that he forms a part of is, in-fact, his very body.
I would argue- philosophically speaking, not scientifically- that the human who fights for his beliefs is no different than the cell that fights for the animal body. He is fighting for the good of his idea, which might eventually prove to be a far more influential system than he.


In as much as I can say that I believe that I exist, I can also say that I am not my body. I am more than my body. Everyone seems to believe this one way or another. Some people attribute this difference to a soul. I see no reason to believe in souls and even if they did exist, I can't really imagine a way that they could work in a manner consistent with logic.
I attribute the extra element that is me to an emergent property of a complex system. I suppose it is safe to say that I- like Ray Kurzweil- am a patternist. This is a natural conclusion of being a materialist (as a result of this worldview being the most reasonable one that agrees with scientific knowledge) and someone who is aware that he seems to exist. I have held this position since I was about twelve years old which goes to show that I am also a dork.

dr.alistair said...

shinsyotta, welcome my thoughtful friend.
i point these sophistic processes out not to condemn them but to show that we can transcend the "hungupedness" of it all by giving ourself the permission to just let it go when it becomes too difficult to keep track of the minutia of each philosphical point and just enjoy the ride..... i stopped playing chess with anyone but my children because i realised that it was just a game and that there were those who could call up a thousand games like a movie in thier mind and crush me by playing my game against thiers and then running ahead in the video to see where i was heading.
the question i have to ask is; are we living our lives purposefully or are we running permutations?
philosophy shouldn`t be a game should be a way to see behind the curtain to get a look at the wizard......
i love the way we can approach tentitively and add and share in this digital realm......and help each other grow.