Conversations in Chat!!

(14:27:35) Rosalyn_J: heya
(14:27:48) Rosalyn_J: May I ask what the topic of conversation is?
(14:27:53) Lykeios:
(14:28:03) Lykeios: I don' tthink there really was one before you came in
(14:28:08) Lykeios: for a while we were talking about bugs
(14:28:18) Rosalyn_J: ah
(14:28:26) Rosalyn_J: Can I ask a question?
(14:28:31) Parnerium: Sure
(14:28:34) Lykeios: ask away
(14:29:03) Rosalyn_J: First, how do we define what is real?
(14:30:16) Lykeios: I suppose we define something as real when we have enough evidence for its existence...
(14:30:16) Hrafn: I think is quite difficult to say, maybe we can define real what is the same according to everyone perception
(14:30:33) Parnerium: Are we talking reality vs fiction? Or what exists and what does not exist?
(14:31:14) Rosalyn_J: good question? Are those two the same?
(14:33:16) Hrafn: This topic remind me of Schopenhauer, does anyone knows about him?
(14:33:23) Parnerium: If I say "I shook hands with Angela Merkel" but I didn't actually, what I said is fiction and so "not real." As opposed to if we're discussing whether a thing exists or not.
(14:34:39) Rosalyn_J: If I say "I shook hands with Angela Merkel" but I didn't actually, what I said is fiction
(14:34:47) Rosalyn_J: what you said does not exisst
(14:34:58) Rosalyn_J: ie you did not shake hands with that person
(14:36:14) Parnerium: I just asked because I feel like those conversations can go in two different directions. There being "truth" in fiction and the immateriality of the past are different than more existential questions about reality
(14:36:27) Temple Bot: Luce_Stellare has joined the chat.
(14:36:47) Parnerium: "Did I shake hands with Angela Merkel" is a different kind of question than "Is Angela Merkel real?"
(14:38:53) Luce_Stellare: (googled Angela Merkel)
(14:40:07) Rosalyn_J: I wonder if my shaking hands with Angela Merkel is a reality
(14:40:18) Rosalyn_J: How would I know it when I saw it
(14:40:24) Temple Bot: Reacher has joined the chat.
(14:40:34) Reacher: Shrivenham, here I come!
(14:40:35) Rosalyn_J: And anyways who is she?
(14:40:47) Rosalyn_J: Hi Reacher
(14:40:49) Parnerium: Chancellor of Germany
(14:41:01) Rosalyn_J: ah
(14:41:10) Reacher: Hi Ros
(14:41:26) Rosalyn_J: so how would you know her when you saw her in order to shake hands with her?
(14:41:53) Luce_Stellare: i think if you were meeting the chancellor, u might know ahead of time lol
(14:42:00) Luce_Stellare: are they like how the president is?
(14:42:15) Lykeios: hey Reacher!
(14:42:18) Luce_Stellare: <

---

world conciousness of a three year old
(14:42:27) Parnerium: Yeah, she'd be the equivalent to the American President or British Prime Minister, kinda
(14:42:43) Parnerium: That's an oversimplification of international politics, but close enough, lol
(14:43:01) Parnerium: I approach reality or unreality in a very practical sense. If I shake hands with a person who I think is Angela Merkel, who agrees that she's Angela Merkel, and that others also agree is Angela Merkel, then it's real
(14:43:49) Parnerium: If there are split opinions about whether it was Angela Merkel, but consensus that it was, indeed, a person. Then it's real that I shook hands with a person (who may or may not be Angela Merkel)
(14:43:49) Rosalyn_J: so you are taking it on the authority of others that the person you are shaking hands with is Angela Merekel?
(14:44:22) Parnerium: If we all think it was Angela Merkel, does it matter if it was or wasn't?
(14:44:32) Rosalyn_J: well
(14:44:37) Parnerium: We're all acting as if it was so, for all practical purposes, it was.
(14:44:42) Rosalyn_J: that's what I am getting at
(14:44:56) Rosalyn_J: when we talk about what is real
(14:45:20) Rosalyn_J: We have all agreed that a thing exists
(14:45:30) Rosalyn_J: say a turantula
(14:45:40) Rosalyn_J: or a girraffe
(14:45:49) Rosalyn_J: a giraffe is probably better
(14:45:50) Reacher: Anyone from the UK currently present?
(14:47:29) Hrafn: giraffe way better ahahah spiders are creepy
(14:47:51) Parnerium: It always comes back to bugs, lol
(14:47:56) Rosalyn_J: well we have agreed that girraffe's have a certain set of features
(14:48:12) Rosalyn_J: and the thing that has those features is called a girraffe
(14:48:32) Rosalyn_J: but how would a blind person know?
(14:49:32) Parnerium: Know that giraffes are real?
(14:50:00) Parnerium: Or know that a certain thing is a giraffe?
(14:50:05) Rosalyn_J: yes and know what real things constitute a giraffe
(14:50:30) Hrafn: Then the blind person should rely on something he can hear or touch. For him a giraffe has features that are 80 or 90% the same of ours but he can not be 100% sure
(14:50:59) Parnerium: I saw a giraffe in a zoo once. Before then I had never encountered one. I chose to accept the assertion that giraffes were real, but in the end, whether they were or were not didn't affect me at all.
(14:51:26) Rosalyn_J: well
(14:51:37) Rosalyn_J: that's interesting
(14:52:06) Rosalyn_J: there is an assertion that something is real that until you encounter it you accept that assertion as a reality
(14:52:25) Rosalyn_J: so say something like paranormal activity
(14:52:33) Rosalyn_J: is that real?
(14:52:45) Lykeios: I'm not sure
(14:53:01) Temple Bot: Reacher has been logged out (Timeout).
(14:53:27) Lykeios: I'd like to believe it is real...but I've never seen a whole lot of evidence for it
(14:53:54) Lykeios: and whether it is real or not doesn't really have much of an effect on my life at this point
(14:54:04) Rosalyn_J: what is evidence?
(14:54:57) Lykeios: hmmm...some form of proof that it is real. something that speaks to the reality of something...
(14:55:23) Rosalyn_J: what constitutes as evidence
(14:55:26) Lykeios: for instance...if I were to actually experience some form of paranormal activity that would be evidence for it's existence
(14:55:34) Lykeios: its*
(14:55:45) Rosalyn_J: how would you know it when you saw it
(14:56:43) Parnerium: Know evidence? Or paranormal activity?
(14:56:47) Lykeios: good question...I guess it would have to be something that couldn't be explained any other way...something that spoke to something paranormal existing
(14:58:01) Rosalyn_J: Both Par
(14:59:33) Parnerium: Evidence is anything that sways your assessment of the reality of a thing. "Paranormal activity" is just a catchall category for things that don't have another explanation. So evidence for paranormal activity is something that convinces you to believe the only explanation for a happening is paranormal in nature.
(15:00:27) Rosalyn_J: ok
(15:00:46) Rosalyn_J: Can what sways one person not sway another?
(15:00:56) Lykeios: you're much better at this than I am Par...lol
(15:01:19) Parnerium: Yeah. That's why some people think ghosts are real and some don't.
(15:01:40) Parnerium: I'm just riffing off of you, Lyk, lol
(15:01:47) Rosalyn_J: ok so
(15:02:18) Rosalyn_J: Am I wrong in saying that one of your qualifications for "reality" was someone ele's assertion that something was real?
(15:02:28) Rosalyn_J: thinking back to the giraffe
(15:05:03) Parnerium: No, you're right. The subjective reality for somebody who thinks ghosts are real is different than the subjective reality of somebody who doesn't. Somebody who does may ward off spirits with smudges or avoid places where people have died. Somebody who doesn't won't buy smudges and won't avoid those places. There could be an objective reality where ghosts definitely do or definitely do not exist. But we can never access that. Subjective reality can change. If I show somebody who doesn't believe in ghosts something that they feel to be irrefutable evidence that ghosts are real, they now believe and their reality has changed.
(15:06:40) Rosalyn_J: ok so do you remember your example with the prime minister?
(15:06:47) Parnerium: Mhm
(15:06:55) Temple Bot: Arthur_H. has joined the chat.
(15:07:16) Rosalyn_J: where you said if all of us agree that I am shaking hands with her then that is who I am shaking hands with
(15:07:52) Parnerium: Yep
(15:07:57) Rosalyn_J: but then there is the subjective reality which you are speaking of here
(15:08:09) Rosalyn_J: are they different?
(15:10:37) Parnerium: No. There could be one person who doesn't agree that you shook hands with Angela Merkel. For me, that wouldn't be enough evidence to counteract all 7 billion other people who say it happened, so my reality is that you did. That person's reality is that you didn't.
(15:11:16) Parnerium: The evidence I require for other things can be more or less than what I require to consider the Angela Shake a reality
(15:13:03) Temple Bot: Parnerium has been logged out (Timeout).
(15:13:07) Temple Bot: Parnerium has joined the chat.
(15:13:41) Parnerium: I switched to mobile well see if this works lol
(15:13:55) Lykeios: lol. mobile is always fun in chat
(15:14:29) Rosalyn_J: ok so
(15:14:45) Rosalyn_J: 7 billion people are enough to say something is real
(15:14:59) Rosalyn_J: ever talk to 7 billion people before?
(15:15:09) Hrafn: sorry if i'm not so present, I'm still working, I'll back in 10 min
(15:15:23) Lykeios: alright Hrafn
(15:15:55) Lykeios: I don't think Par was suggesting that all 7 billion people are necessary for determining if something is real or not...
(15:16:22) Parnerium: Yeah, that's not my actual requirement for anything
(15:16:39) Rosalyn_J: so how many are required
(15:17:15) Lykeios: enough to form a consensus in a given community I'd say
(15:17:20) Parnerium: Depends on the what we're talking about
(15:19:00) Rosalyn_J: suppose we had one hundred people in a room all tell you that paranormal activity was real
(15:19:18) Rosalyn_J: And then the next week one hundred people in a room tell you that it was not
(15:19:30) Rosalyn_J: which is the reality?
(15:20:06) Lykeios: I don't think reality always depends on how many people are asserting it as reality...it's a personal thing in many cases
(15:20:25) Lykeios: for something like paranormal activity I'd have to see the evidence myself
(15:20:51) Rosalyn_J: what if we were going to go with something like a giraffe
(15:20:55) Temple Bot: Parnerium has been logged out (Timeout).
(15:20:57) Temple Bot: Parnerium has joined the chat.
(15:21:19) Rosalyn_J: and one hundred people tell you that a girraffe looks like this feels like this and smells like this
(15:21:47) Rosalyn_J: and then one hundred people tell you that it looks like this, smells like this and feels like this
(15:21:52) Rosalyn_J: which is real?
(15:22:10) Parnerium: Sounds like a naming difference
(15:22:27) Rosalyn_J: really?
(15:22:40) Rosalyn_J: how would you know the right name?
(15:23:44) Parnerium: It doesn't matter so I'd go with whatever made communication easiest
(15:24:24) Rosalyn_J: it doesn't matter?
(15:24:28) Temple Bot: Gwinn has joined the chat.
(15:24:35) Rosalyn_J: and who would you be communicating with?
(15:24:41) Arthur_H.: hi gwinn
(15:24:43) Lykeios: hello Gwinn
(15:24:47) Rosalyn_J: the giraffe or the one hundred people?
(15:24:52) Gwinn: Hi
(15:25:05) Parnerium: Whether the beast in front of me is called a giraffe or a heffalump doesn't matter.
(15:25:19) Lykeios: heffalump...heheheh
(15:25:29) Parnerium: So what name is "right" doesn't matter
(15:25:40) Lykeios: either way the thing exists...
(15:26:24) Rosalyn_J: it wouldnt be a naming difference
(15:26:41) Rosalyn_J: I dont think
(15:27:42) Rosalyn_J: because if a giraffe is brown, smells like the trees of the forest and has large claws and a long snout and hibernates in winter
(15:27:44) Rosalyn_J: OR
(15:28:09) Rosalyn_J: if the giraffe has a long neck, lives in the savannah and is brown and yellow
(15:28:14) Hrafn: Ok here I am, half past midnight here I really need some rest
(15:28:28) Parnerium: Good night Hrafn
(15:28:29) Rosalyn_J: you would be looking at two different beasts calling both a girraffe
(15:28:46) Arthur_H.: hrafn i have a question
(15:28:48) Parnerium: Which is just a word.
(15:29:02) Hrafn: Ask arthur
(15:29:16) Arthur_H.: have you seen ludosport in person
(15:29:18) Rosalyn_J: so the question is are both the giraffe?
(15:29:47) Parnerium: I thought the question was whether they exist
(15:29:53) Hrafn: Ludosport? Is he a guy I should know? Never heard before
(15:30:16) Rosalyn_J: well if you are going on people's assertions until you see them
(15:30:26) Rosalyn_J: which was one of your arguments
(15:30:28) Arthur_H.: no actual lightsaber martial sport formed in italy
(15:30:44) Rosalyn_J: if you see the thing called a giraffe how will you know?
(15:30:59) Parnerium: Giraffe is just a name
(15:31:02) Temple Bot: Lykeios has been logged out (Timeout).
(15:31:07) Rosalyn_J: true
(15:31:10) Arthur_H.: https://www.youtube.com/user/Lud​oSportNet/feed
(15:31:17) Temple Bot: Lykeios has joined the chat.
(15:31:17) Temple Bot: Lykeios has been logged out (Timeout).
(15:31:17) Lykeios: damnit...chat stop freezing on me
(15:31:17) Temple Bot: Lykeios has joined the chat.
(15:31:35) Rosalyn_J: what are the qualifications on something being real?
(15:31:42) Hrafn: Ooooh ok now I remember. I know a lot about it but I have never seen it in person. They practice up in the north and I'm 1200 km down at the very south end of Italy
(15:32:04) Hrafn: So bad
(15:32:48) Arthur_H.: why so bad
(15:32:51) Parnerium: Evidence for it. The specific claim will need its own evidence.
(15:33:03) Hrafn: I mean so bad I have not seen them
(15:33:09) Hrafn: They are awesome people
(15:33:40) Temple Bot: Helen_Rees has joined the chat.
(15:33:46) Arthur_H.: i'm hoping it comes to the u.s. sooner than later
(15:34:20) Rosalyn_J: how do we define evidence again?
(15:34:40) Hrafn: I think is not too far in the future, certain things spread quite quickly
(15:34:43) Temple Bot: Albekl has joined the chat.
(15:34:46) Arthur_H.: welcome helen
(15:34:54) Arthur_H.: hello albekl
(15:34:56) Hrafn: Hi Helen, hi Albekl
(15:35:29) Arthur_H.: it looks fun costly but fun
(15:35:29) Lykeios: evidence is something that gives proof for something. it's something that speaks to the reality of something else...
(15:36:03) Temple Bot: Helen_Rees has been logged out (Timeout).
(15:36:04) Rosalyn_J: ok
(15:36:15) Rosalyn_J: so lets think of something else
(15:36:18) Rosalyn_J: the atom
(15:36:24) Rosalyn_J: is it real?
(15:36:25) Hrafn: After 11 years of archery I can say it's quite cheap in comparison ahahah
(15:36:49) Arthur_H.: wouldn't know
(15:38:20) Arthur_H.: how did you learn english hra
(15:38:29) Parnerium: Sure Ros
(15:38:43) Rosalyn_J: the atom is real Par?
(15:38:46) Temple Bot: Lykeios has been logged out (Timeout).
(15:38:48) Rosalyn_J: Have you seen it?
(15:38:50) Parnerium: Yeah
(15:38:55) Rosalyn_J: oh?
(15:39:04) Parnerium: That was late
(15:39:05) Rosalyn_J: cool!
(15:39:12) Parnerium: I haven't seen the atom
(15:39:34) Temple Bot: Albekl has been logged out (Timeout).
(15:39:34) Rosalyn_J: Have you "experienced" the atom?
(15:39:48) Hrafn: I learnt basics at school since 1 grade (6 years old) but I now speak, write and listen to english every day most of the time because of what I do (physics undergraduate), I often dream in english too, it's weird ahahah
(15:40:10) Parnerium: Scientists have explained it to me in a way I accept as reasonable
(15:40:29) Rosalyn_J: ok so...
(15:40:46) Rosalyn_J: if we can return to the paranormal example
(15:40:52) Arthur_H.: I've dreamed a few words of Esperanto before
(15:41:16) Arthur_H.: i didn't know English was taught that young in italy
(15:41:17) Rosalyn_J: believers in the paranormal come and explain the paranormal to you, then is the paranormal real?
(15:42:43) Hrafn: 10 or 20 years ago it was taught just during some years of high school, now it taught even during pre-school (3-6 years old) in some institutes
(15:42:52) Hrafn: *it is
(15:43:00) Parnerium: If they explain it in a way I can agree with, yes
(15:43:34) Arthur_H.: is it part of normal class or is it elective
(15:43:57) Temple Bot: Lykeios has joined the chat.
(15:44:56) Hrafn: Normal class, you have to study it anyway, then during high school you can add one or two other languages (usually french and german) according to which institute you choose
(15:45:07) Lykeios: sorry...damn computer shutdown unexpectedly
(15:45:21) Hrafn: np Lykeios
(15:45:27) Parnerium: Did you give it a stern talking to Lyk?
(15:45:33) Arthur_H.: second language is all elective here as far as i know
(15:45:57) Lykeios: lol. yes I did Par
(15:46:03) Hrafn: Where are you Art?
(15:46:06) Rosalyn_J: you tell that computer
(15:46:21) Lykeios: it's been doing this since I got it...there's something wrong with my new laptop and I'm annoyed
(15:46:27) Arthur_H.: the midwest in the U.S.
(15:46:29) Rosalyn_J: boooo
(15:46:47) Rosalyn_J: ok so par
(15:47:10) Rosalyn_J: am I to understand that the formula for reality would work like this
(15:47:25) Rosalyn_J: I understand + I agree=real
(15:47:28) Rosalyn_J: ?
(15:48:01) Parnerium: Yes
(15:48:02) Lykeios: there are some things I don't understand that I figure might be real...quantum physics for example
(15:48:14) Hrafn: I followed your discussion Ros, I would agree (and I understand ahahahah) with your formula. So it's real for me
(15:48:25) Rosalyn_J: so
(15:48:36) Hrafn: We are talking about things you can be 100% sure are real I think
(15:48:46) Hrafn: (for Lyk)
(15:49:03) Rosalyn_J: if one person comes up to me and explains paranormal activity and I understand and agree than its real, right?
(15:49:11) Parnerium: Mhm
(15:49:37) Lykeios: well...it's real for you...I don't think it's necessarily objectively real
(15:49:53) Rosalyn_J: good point lyk
(15:49:54) Hrafn: I think so, if someone explain scientifically to me I take it as real
(15:49:56) Parnerium: Exactly, Lyk
(15:50:03) Rosalyn_J: is there an objective real?
(15:50:15) Parnerium: Maybe. Maybe not.
(15:50:31) Hrafn: There is not, we just set up a number of standard
(15:50:39) Rosalyn_J: hmmm
(15:50:49) Lykeios: hmmm...I think so. I think there is an underlying reality to the universe that transcends our perceptions of it
(15:50:49) Rosalyn_J: ok
(15:51:00) Hrafn: and define that something is real if it is consistent with those standards
(15:51:00) Parnerium: I don't see a way to access objective reality so that's a thought experiment without practicality
(15:51:15) Hrafn: Exactly Pan
(15:51:17) Hrafn: *Par
(15:51:28) Temple Bot: LearnerCody has joined the chat.
(15:52:01) Rosalyn_J: so reality that I can access is subjective
(15:52:22) Hrafn: Yes
(15:52:26) Parnerium: Yes
(15:52:27) Rosalyn_J: ok
(15:52:54) Rosalyn_J: but some of the things that I cannot access (the atom for example) are also reality, right?
(15:53:19) Hrafn: WE defined them as real
(15:53:29) Rosalyn_J: we who?
(15:53:43) Rosalyn_J: I wasn't a part of that conversation
(15:53:48) Parnerium: The atom is accessible
(15:53:49) Temple Bot: LearnerCody has been logged out (Timeout).
(15:53:57) Gwinn: Were they real before they were discovered?
(15:54:04) Rosalyn_J: not to every subject
(15:54:15) Hrafn: Good point Gwinn
(15:54:27) Lykeios: yes
(15:54:30) Rosalyn_J: and yes good point
(15:54:40) Gwinn: Well they weren't agreed with or understood at that point
(15:54:42) Rosalyn_J: they were real before they were discovered?
(15:54:48) Lykeios: yes
(15:55:00) Lykeios: humanity does not determine reality
(15:55:04) Parnerium: They were real in the real impacts that they had
(15:55:04) Lykeios: reality is reality
(15:55:12) Hrafn: I think something is real if it exist even if we don't look at it but we can't examine this hypothesis for obvious reasons
(15:55:23) Hrafn: *exists
(15:55:32) Rosalyn_J: but how do I, the subject (of the subjective reality) determine, define reality
(15:55:33) Hrafn: sorry for my bad grammar it's 1 am here
(15:55:55) Temple Bot: Proteus has joined the chat.
(15:55:58) Parnerium: That's up to you, Ros
(15:56:05) Rosalyn_J: is it?
(15:56:28) Parnerium: For your reality
(15:57:07) Rosalyn_J: sp
(15:57:11) Rosalyn_J: bleh
(15:57:14) Rosalyn_J: so
(15:57:49) Rosalyn_J: Things are real as I say they are?
(15:58:39) Lykeios: they may be real to you...but that doesn't make them real for anyone else
(15:58:44) Parnerium: To you, yep. I may agree or disagree.
(15:58:46) Lykeios: not necessarily anyway
(15:59:10) Hrafn: Sorry guys but I think it's time to go, I have to go to work again in 6 hours. Enjoy the discussion, it was really interesting! Good night
(15:59:23) Lykeios: good night Hrafn
(15:59:32) Rosalyn_J: thanks Hrafn
(15:59:46) Arthur_H.: night hrafn
(16:00:02) Parnerium: Night Hrafn
(16:00:47) Rosalyn_J: So we have established that reality is subjective
(16:00:52) Rosalyn_J: right?
(16:01:21) Parnerium: I think so
(16:01:55) Rosalyn_J: so how do we function in society if reality is subjective (ie determined by one subject)?
(16:02:08) Arthur_H.: well if it makes anyone feel better i'm confused
(16:02:16) Temple Bot: Hrafn has been logged out (Timeout).
(16:02:20) Parnerium: This goes back to Angela Merkel
(16:02:38) Parnerium: Society relies on certain agreed upon realities
(16:02:45) Rosalyn_J: so all of us have to agree
(16:02:49) Parnerium: Where our subjective realities agree with each other
(16:02:53) Lykeios: we function by agreeing that things are real
(16:03:08) Rosalyn_J: how many of us have to agree?
(16:03:45) Lykeios: enough to allow society to function...there is no set number...
(16:03:50) Proteus: keep in mind, subjectivity doesn't just include what we consciously decide.
(16:04:06) Lykeios: oh, hello Proteus, didn't see you come in
(16:04:22) Parnerium: Neither did I. Hi Proteus!
(16:04:29) Arthur_H.: hi pro
(16:04:38) Rosalyn_J: and how many of us have been a part of that "enough to allow society to function?"
(16:04:42) Proteus: and in fact, it could be said that objectivity does in fact exist, as part of the subjective lense we see through.
(16:05:25) Parnerium: All of us
(16:05:38) Rosalyn_J: really?
(16:05:48) Rosalyn_J: how so?
(16:05:50) Lykeios: I believe objectivity exists...
(16:06:08) Parnerium: The moment your reality means that you break society is the moment there stops being enough
(16:06:31) Rosalyn_J: I don't quite get you there
(16:07:03) Proteus: objectivity could be said to be the point of origin where consciousness (experience) all meet at the same place. that would not be something we decide on individually though, but as part of the nature of the consciousness we have in its basic form.
(16:08:16) Rosalyn_J: and what is this "society" you speak of?
(16:08:27) Parnerium: If my reality is that giraffes aren't real, it doesn't much affect society. But if I think that ghosts are real and they are telling me to torch my neighbors houses, now I'm affecting society
(16:08:28) Lykeios: but does objective reality require consciousness?
(16:09:01) Rosalyn_J: what is "society"?
(16:10:04) Proteus: consciousness as defined as what, Lykeios?
(16:10:25) Parnerium: A group of people coexisting
(16:10:33) Rosalyn_J: ok
(16:10:42) Rosalyn_J: how big is the group?
(16:10:57) Rosalyn_J: is my family society?
(16:11:02) Temple Bot: Arthur_H. has been logged out (Timeout).
(16:11:14) Parnerium: Yes
(16:11:43) Rosalyn_J: ok
(16:12:04) Lykeios: consciousness is being aware of things...
(16:12:25) Lykeios: I think
(16:12:35) Rosalyn_J: society has determined that ghosts are not real
(16:13:03) Rosalyn_J: that what you are looking at that caused you to burn down your neighborhood is cause for hospitalization by force
(16:13:15) Rosalyn_J: who is right, you or society?
(16:13:33) Parnerium: Objectively? Can't be determined.
(16:13:45) Rosalyn_J: hmmm
(16:14:09) Proteus: yes Lyk, but what is to say that it is only us as individuals that are being conscious?
(16:14:33) Rosalyn_J: so sometimes we can agree on something and call that real, but other times we don't agree
(16:14:44) Rosalyn_J: and we don't know which is real or not?
(16:15:02) Rosalyn_J: or does it stop being real because we all can't agree?
(16:15:09) Lykeios: well...other animals are conscious to varying degrees
(16:15:18) Parnerium: I know what is real to me, you know what is real to you.
(16:15:33) Parnerium: If we don't agree, our realities are just different
(16:16:03) Rosalyn_J: how did you come upon your reality?
(16:16:24) Parnerium: Assessing evidence
(16:17:20) Rosalyn_J: but that's not all right?
(16:17:37) Rosalyn_J: is someone telling you in a way that you can understand also evidence?
(16:18:23) Parnerium: Yeah. I have things I believe are real just because somebody told me once that it is
(16:18:36) Gwinn: Is it the actual realities that are different or just your perceptions of it?
(16:18:56) Temple Bot: Lykeios has been logged out (Timeout).
(16:19:10) Gwinn: I can look at a house and tell you it has a red door. You can look at the same house and say it has a white door. We might just be looking at different walls of the same house.
(16:19:12) Rosalyn_J: that's an interesting question
(16:19:19) Gwinn: The house is still real. Our perceptions are different.
(16:19:27) Rosalyn_J: oooooooh
(16:19:54) Parnerium: I don't think we can say that
(16:20:10) Gwinn: Why not?
(16:20:17) Rosalyn_J: yeah
(16:20:18) Parnerium: The house could be a figment of our collective imaginations
(16:20:20) Rosalyn_J: why not
(16:20:25) Rosalyn_J: omg
(16:20:29) Rosalyn_J:
(16:20:38) Rosalyn_J: I love this conversation
(16:20:54) Rosalyn_J: Parnerium: Yeah. I have things I believe are real just because somebody told me once that it is
(16:21:01) Rosalyn_J: remember that you said this?
(16:21:12) Parnerium: But it doesn't matter as long as I think it's real, you think it's real, and we agree that its door needs to be locked to keep us safe from robbery
(16:21:35) Parnerium: Yeah Ros?
(16:21:35) Rosalyn_J: which door are you going to lock
(16:21:44) Rosalyn_J: the red or the white one hahah
(16:23:07) Temple Bot: Lykeios has joined the chat.
(16:24:48) Lykeios: sorry about that...computer shut down inexplicably again...
(16:25:01) Lykeios: I may have to return this computer...ugh
(16:25:38) Parnerium: Listen here, Lyk's computer. You're gonna stay on or you're gonna get smashed. Ya hear?
(16:25:50) Rosalyn_J: lol
(16:26:11) Proteus: i'm sorry too, i had another chat going on here, but its done
(16:26:33) Rosalyn_J: this conversation is super fun
(16:26:47) Rosalyn_J: thank you all
(16:26:47) Proteus: like i was saying though, what I meant was, is it just the individual "us's" that are doing the "consciosness" game?
(16:27:10) Rosalyn_J: is that the same question I was posing E?
(16:27:25) Rosalyn_J: using different words
(16:28:58) Temple Bot: Karn has joined the chat.
(16:29:05) Karn: Hello
(16:29:39) Proteus: hi Karn
(16:29:54) Rosalyn_J: heya
(16:30:04) Karn: How are we all today?
(16:30:05) Rosalyn_J: cool its a party now?
(16:30:13) Rosalyn_J: feeling good
(16:30:25) Rosalyn_J: we are having a discussion on reality and consciousness
(16:30:34) Karn: Glad to hear it!
(16:30:42) Karn: Interesting.
(16:30:44) Rosalyn_J: well I think there may be two conversations with similar themes
(16:30:55) Parnerium: I'm at an info meeting for my sister trying to take notes on the tennis schedule with one hand, debating reality with the other, lol
(16:31:07) Rosalyn_J: lol
(16:31:09) Temple Bot: Lykeios has been logged out (Timeout).
(16:31:19) Rosalyn_J: come an Lyk
(16:31:35) Rosalyn_J: So Par
(16:31:43) Rosalyn_J: to return to this: Parnerium: Yeah. I have things I believe are real just because somebody told me once that it is
(16:31:52) Proteus: ive been away from the forums for several days so was just catching up a bit ago
(16:32:33) Rosalyn_J: if some bum on the street told you that faires were real, would you believe them?
(16:32:41) Proteus: the shoutout about the metaphor of life and death once again popped up i see. lol
(16:33:00) Rosalyn_J: is that Cabur
(16:33:06) Rosalyn_J: s thread?
(16:33:17) Rosalyn_J: Momento Mori?
(16:33:26) Proteus: whyte horse's "define the force" thread
(16:33:32) Proteus: *challenge
(16:33:36) Rosalyn_J: ah
(16:33:39) Rosalyn_J: well
(16:34:52) Karn: I have been reading that. My answer is way to simple to even make a response so i have been silent
(16:35:10) Parnerium: No Ros. That's an extraordinary claim that requires extraordinary evidence
(16:35:29) Proteus: mine didn't include words, Karn. now I'm waiting to see if that will get a tilted head from someone.
(16:35:31) Rosalyn_J: how do we know?
(16:36:21) Rosalyn_J: More importantly how do we distinguish between something we believe is real because someone told us once
(16:36:31) Karn: Mine is simple, The Force IS. Some may respond that it is not. To which the response is "Correct"
(16:36:34) Rosalyn_J: and something that requires extra-ordinary evidence
(16:39:57) Parnerium: For me, it's about looking at my beliefs when they come up
(16:39:58) Karn: There have been some really interesting topics lately
(16:40:20) Rosalyn_J: Ah Par
(16:40:32) Parnerium: Because tons of things that I think are real or unreal don't actually matter.
(16:40:46) Temple Bot: Lykeios has joined the chat.
(16:40:46) Rosalyn_J: So its not simply taking something on face value because someone told you once
(16:40:47) Parnerium: So when it matters, I reassess it
(16:41:19) Rosalyn_J: it has to do with beliefs and also beliefs about when something matters
(16:41:23) Rosalyn_J: did I get that?
(16:42:20) Parnerium: Yes I think
(16:42:32) Rosalyn_J: So to sumarize
(16:42:50) Rosalyn_J: Reality subjective
(16:43:00) Rosalyn_J: It is sometimes based on personal experience
(16:43:06) Lykeios: good grief...switched computers now...I'm gonna have to return that laptop -_-
(16:43:19) Rosalyn_J: and sometimes based on someone else's experience
(16:43:44) Rosalyn_J: but only if what someone else tells me alligns with beliefs I hold
(16:43:49) Rosalyn_J: right?
(16:44:57) Parnerium: Yes
(16:45:07) Rosalyn_J: ok
(16:45:20) Rosalyn_J: So now we turn our mind to the matter of beliefs
(16:45:29) Rosalyn_J: how do we get those thingies?
(16:45:42) Parnerium: Same way
(16:46:14) Parnerium: You see something, somebody tells you something (explicitly or implicitly)
(16:46:57) Rosalyn_J: but...but...the bum on the street
(16:47:15) Rosalyn_J: can he tell you something that changes your beliefs and thereby your reality?
(16:47:36) Parnerium: The bum is contending with the beliefs you had before you meet him.
(16:47:51) Rosalyn_J: ok
(16:48:03) Rosalyn_J: so its not just any someone then
(16:48:18) Rosalyn_J: who is this ellusive someone
(16:48:45) Lykeios: sorry Pro...I thought we were getting into a good conversation there but now I don't recall what you last said
(16:48:46) Parnerium: Someone
(16:49:01) Parnerium: Whoever has affected you
(16:49:14) Rosalyn_J: the bum did not affect you?
(16:49:20) Rosalyn_J: why not?
(16:49:39) Parnerium: I'm sure a bum could say something just profound enough to a person in the right state of mind to hear it, causing a new belief.
(16:49:53) Parnerium: The bum didn't provide evidence of ghosts
(16:50:03) Rosalyn_J: oh
(16:50:07) Rosalyn_J: so wait
(16:50:09) Rosalyn_J: Parnerium: Yeah. I have things I believe are real just because somebody told me once that it is
(16:50:19) Rosalyn_J: is this true or?
(16:51:29) Temple Bot: Proteus has been logged out (Timeout).
(16:52:06) Parnerium: Yes. Animals are a good example. There is probably an animal I've only heard about once. Somebody told me about it and I considered it to be true
(16:52:37) Parnerium: If the bum told me about an animal that sounded legit, I'd probably believe him
(16:53:33) Rosalyn_J: so it has to "sound" like something that might exist?
(16:53:55) Rosalyn_J: fairy doesn't sound like something that might exist though?
(16:54:03) Parnerium: Nah
(16:54:15) Rosalyn_J: nah!
(16:54:16) Temple Bot: Proteus has joined the chat.
(16:54:17) Rosalyn_J: why?
(16:54:34) Lykeios: wb Pro
(16:54:51) Parnerium: I've never seen anything fairy-like
(16:55:15) Lykeios: I think you said something about other things having consciousness besides us as individuals...and I tried to say that animals have consciousness to some degree
(16:55:34) Proteus: thx
(16:55:50) Rosalyn_J: so you have to meet something fairy like?
(16:55:57) Rosalyn_J: How would you know?
(16:56:31) Parnerium: Is it a tiny human with wings? Lol
(16:56:55) Rosalyn_J: lol
(16:57:06) Karn: Isn't that a Pixie?
(16:57:08) Rosalyn_J: but wait
(16:57:26) Rosalyn_J: I am confused about your qualifications
(16:58:01) Rosalyn_J: The poor bum on the street has to give you evidence that a tiny human thing with wings exists
(16:58:36) Rosalyn_J: but other people don't because you have seen other things that might look like them?
(16:59:09) Temple Bot: Proteus has been logged out (Timeout).
(17:00:09) Parnerium: If the bum says something wishy washy like "Fairies exist. They are the past, present, and future. They underlie reality. They cannot be explained, but they are like a blanket with the edge in a cone." I'd be like "Oh, you mean the Force they talk about over at TotJO"
(17:00:57) Rosalyn_J: so it all depends on if the bum sounds like he knows what he's talking about?
(17:01:10) Parnerium: The fact that the bum is a bum is irrelevant. The claim he's making is what matters.
(17:01:32) Luce_Stellare: i missed everything up until "bum"
(17:02:11) Lykeios: lol. we're talking about the nature of reality and what makes things real
(17:02:45) Luce_Stellare: i met a homeless gentleman that lived on skid row....he was 50 something with jet black hair and beautiful blue eyes. He wore a velvet jacket and told me anything i wanted to know about space, the planets, galaxies, and then some. I think I fell in love with him
(17:02:46) Karn: Perception, perspective and plausibility are the keys to reality?
(17:03:18) Luce_Stellare: everything he told me sounded legit / im a pretty open minded person (re: gullible)
(17:03:32) Luce_Stellare: but tbh this could all be a coma dream
(17:03:39) Rosalyn_J: right, that's an interesting point
(17:04:02) Rosalyn_J: how do we know when someone "knows what they are talking about?"
(17:04:42) Karn: Belief?
(17:05:25) Luce_Stellare: i usually check out the size of their.............library
(17:05:36) Luce_Stellare:
(17:06:31) Parnerium: I know what I'm talking about because I have a huge Pair of glasses
(17:06:32) Temple Bot: Luce_Stellare has been logged out (Timeout).
(17:06:40) Temple Bot: Luce_Stellare has joined the chat.
(17:06:49) Luce_Stellare: gahhhhhhhhh
(17:07:16) Rosalyn_J: SEE thats the thing
(17:07:40) Rosalyn_J: is a scientist worth more weight than a bum
(17:07:45) Rosalyn_J: at first glance
(17:07:50) Luce_Stellare: not my bum i love him
(17:07:55) Luce_Stellare: i want to go see him again
(17:08:13) Lykeios: depends on the bum...the bum could have been a scientist before he became a bum
(17:08:25) Parnerium: Depends on the scientist. Is the bum also a scientist who is just down on his luck?
(17:08:29) Luce_Stellare: i wonder if he was.....he knew literally everything about the planets
(17:08:35) Lykeios: lol. exactly, Par
(17:09:10) Parnerium: Me and Lyk are always on the same page lol
(17:09:18) Lykeios: haha, seems like it
(17:09:28) Rosalyn_J: So to return to the nature of beliefs
(17:09:45) Rosalyn_J: how do we get those?
(17:10:06) Parnerium: From everything you experience
(17:10:18) Lykeios: we get them from our experiences, from what we are taught, from things we feel
(17:10:44) Lykeios:
(17:10:45) Rosalyn_J: I'd like to focus on the "from what we are taught"
(17:10:55) Rosalyn_J: who teaches us?
(17:11:05) Lykeios: teachers...parents...authority figures
(17:11:27) Rosalyn_J: yeah that's what I am getting at
(17:11:32) Parnerium: Bums on the street...
(17:11:45) Lykeios: indeed. I learned a lot from bums on the street
(17:11:51) Rosalyn_J: if and only if they know what they are talking about
(17:11:59) Rosalyn_J: which we can't codify
(17:12:01) Parnerium: Precisely
(17:12:09) Parnerium: They don't have to know
(17:12:11) Lykeios: bums are sure to know what they're talking about when it comes to some things
(17:12:28) Rosalyn_J: ah but the fairies and the bum
(17:12:43) Rosalyn_J: and you said something about his wishy washy rhetoric
(17:12:51) Rosalyn_J: so they have to know something
(17:12:55) Rosalyn_J: right?
(17:13:04) Lykeios: bums know the best places to stay warm when it's cold outside...they know how to navigate city streets after dark safely, they know what gangs are okay and which ones to avoid
(17:13:18) Parnerium: They have to convince me that they know about the topic
(17:13:23) Lykeios: bums know a lot of things most of us don't know
(17:13:29) Rosalyn_J: ooooooooooooooooh
(17:13:41) Rosalyn_J: recalling the first question
(17:13:56) Rosalyn_J: which was how do we define real
(17:14:05) Rosalyn_J: a new answer
(17:14:11) Rosalyn_J: I can be conviced
(17:14:27) Rosalyn_J: I don't really need evidence do I?
(17:14:28) Temple Bot: Rickie has joined the chat.
(17:14:45) Temple Bot: Rickie has left the chat.
(17:14:45) Rosalyn_J: if someone makes a convincing enough argument
(17:14:58) Lykeios: well evidence is often convincing...and someone could supply evidence to support their claim
(17:15:21) Rosalyn_J: someone could also bs evidence
(17:15:29) Lykeios: true
(17:15:30) Rosalyn_J: especially for something that is not visible
(17:15:54) Rosalyn_J: what we consider evidence is often based on biases
(17:15:58) Rosalyn_J: or beliefd
(17:16:01) Parnerium: Which is why many things require more than just a person saying it
(17:16:03) Rosalyn_J: beliefs*
(17:16:22) Rosalyn_J: ah but the question is how many people before its true
(17:16:24) Rosalyn_J: ?
(17:16:38) Parnerium: Depends
(17:16:43) Lykeios: it doesn't matter how many people say it...it's either true or not true
(17:16:58) Rosalyn_J: so two bums on the street?
(17:17:05) Parnerium: Shaking hands with Angela Merkel? Or fairies?
(17:17:29) Lykeios: millions of people could claim they have invisible pink unicorns in their backyards...that doesn't make it true
(17:17:48) Rosalyn_J: they may very well have pink unicorns
(17:18:07) Rosalyn_J: have you ever looked in their backyard?
(17:18:25) Lykeios: they're invisible...looking wouldn't help
(17:18:46) Rosalyn_J: How is it not true then?
(17:19:13) Karn: All things are invisible to a blind man. But there is still reality to them.
(17:19:23) Rosalyn_J: ah Karn
(17:19:31) Rosalyn_J: you are my spirit animal
(17:19:33) Lykeios: yes, but that doesn't mean that all things invisible are real
(17:19:37) Karn:
(17:19:41) Parnerium: Way to rub it in Karn
(17:20:02) Rosalyn_J: but here we are speaking about invisible unicorns in people's back yards
(17:20:08) Rosalyn_J: you have made a judgement
(17:20:17) Rosalyn_J: I can't see it therefore it is not real
(17:20:40) Lykeios: I can't see it, feel it, or otherwise experience it
(17:20:54) Lykeios: there are some things I can't see that I believe in so that's not always the case
(17:21:08) Rosalyn_J: ah but in that case it is
(17:21:19) Lykeios: but I experience things to do with those things that give me other evidence for their existence
(17:21:30) Rosalyn_J: oh?
(17:21:45) Lykeios: I believe in some things that most others do not...I have my own evidence for their existence
(17:21:52) Rosalyn_J: so the invisible fits within an already established frame work?
(17:22:04) Rosalyn_J: which makes it more real
(17:22:31) Lykeios: well...yes
(17:22:54) Rosalyn_J: ah but where did this framework come from?
(17:23:17) Lykeios: and I've also experienced things that make me believe these "invisible" things are real
(17:23:53) Lykeios: the framework came from my own beliefs and the beliefs of others...it came from hundreds of years of tradition and practice
(17:24:16) Temple Bot: Gwinn has been logged out (Timeout).
(17:24:17) Rosalyn_J: ah so hundreds of years and other people
(17:24:50) Lykeios: and I've personally experienced things that cause me to believe in them
(17:25:12) Rosalyn_J: ah ok so
(17:25:16) Rosalyn_J: to summarize
(17:25:31) Rosalyn_J: Reality is a subjective experience
(17:25:45) Lykeios: yes
(17:25:54) Lykeios: well...mostly
(17:26:06) Rosalyn_J: Which is based on things I experience or what some people from a long time ago might have experienced
(17:26:22) Rosalyn_J: their collective experiences inform my experience
(17:26:25) Rosalyn_J: eh?
(17:26:31) Lykeios: sounds about right
(17:26:57) Rosalyn_J: so its not really subjective then
(17:26:58) Lykeios: I also think there is an objective reality to the universe
(17:27:01) Rosalyn_J: or is it
(17:27:13) Rosalyn_J: if I am depending on a long time ago
(17:28:12) Lykeios: well, it's still subjective because the perceptions of human beings are subjective
(17:28:53) Rosalyn_J: at what point does something become objective?
(17:29:32) Temple Bot: Parnerium has been logged out (Timeout).
(17:29:35) Temple Bot: Parnerium has joined the chat.
(17:30:04) Lykeios: when it can be seen to exist whether or not someone is there to perceive it I suppose
(17:30:19) Lykeios: Par? any thoughts on that one? you explain things better than I do
(17:30:56) Rosalyn_J: thats an interesting thought
(17:30:57) Parnerium: I don't think we can determine objective reality
(17:31:12) Rosalyn_J: there may or may not be one
(17:31:40) Rosalyn_J: it may seem to exist
(17:31:53) Lykeios: I don't think we can determine objective reality either but I think we catch glimpses of it
(17:31:58) Rosalyn_J: in the consciousness of people from a long time ago
(17:32:11) Karn: So when I close this chat, do you all cease to exist in my reality?
(17:32:13) Lykeios: I think our subjective perceptions overlap with objective reality
(17:32:24) Rosalyn_J: haha Karn
(17:32:27) Parnerium: So, yes, I'd say that objective reality is just what Lyk said. It exists whether or not we experience it, conceive of it, perceive it. But it could be that nothing exists outside of our minds.
(17:32:30) Lykeios: if that's the way you feel about it...that's your personal reality
(17:32:35) Parnerium: You tell me Karn
(17:32:48) Parnerium: Do you think I live in the chat box itself?
(17:33:10) Rosalyn_J: I'm not there to percieve you
(17:33:18) Rosalyn_J: for all I know you could be a robot
(17:33:21) Karn: That is a very good possibility. You could be a computer program
(17:33:31) Karn: Ros
(17:33:46) Lykeios: unlikely...but possible
(17:34:08) Parnerium: If I said I was a robot would you believe me?
(17:34:35) Karn: Maybe, my past experiences with robot could lead me to believe you.
(17:34:54) Rosalyn_J: I'm basing your "realness" on what you are telling me
(17:35:15) Rosalyn_J: if you tell me you are a robot, you are a robot
(17:35:19) Lykeios: I think her responses are too good to be a robot or a computer program. too on topic and responsive
(17:35:32) Parnerium: I'm actually IBMs Watson practicing my new human speech protocol
(17:35:33) Rosalyn_J: now
(17:35:35) Karn: Very spooky for a robot eh?
(17:35:44) Parnerium: Next time I get on Jeopardy I'm gonna wreck 'em
(17:35:51) Karn: lol
(17:35:59) Rosalyn_J: so reality is based on what you "think" Lyk?
(17:36:16) Lykeios: my subjective reality is
(17:36:26) Rosalyn_J: that is to say what you think about robots and humans
(17:37:09) Rosalyn_J: it'd be interesting to discover how you came upon your knowledge of robots and humans
(17:37:14) Lykeios: I've heard you talk out loud Par...I don't believe you are a computer program
(17:37:18) Rosalyn_J: ever interacted with a robot?
(17:37:43) Parnerium: How do you know that was me and not a human puppet I control
(17:37:48) Lykeios: hmmm...well, there was that Abraham Lincoln guy at Disneyland but I wouldn't say we interacted
(17:38:06) Rosalyn_J: is that the only robot though?
(17:38:09) Parnerium: I interact with bots who add me on Skype all the time, lol
(17:38:27) Lykeios: but bots are not robots...they're computer programs
(17:38:38) Rosalyn_J: could their be more advanced forms we don't know about, including Par 2.0?
(17:38:47) Lykeios: I suppose
(17:38:58) Rosalyn_J: so its settled
(17:39:02) Rosalyn_J: Par is a robot
(17:39:04) Lykeios: but it seems unlikely based on what I know about the state of robotics
(17:39:18) Rosalyn_J: ok
(17:39:35) Rosalyn_J: So reality is based on what you already know
(17:40:00) Lykeios: well...yes
(17:40:06) Lykeios: at least my own reality is
(17:40:11) Rosalyn_J: and if someone comes at you with different knowledge, it has to fit into the framework of what you already know
(17:40:15) Rosalyn_J: right?
(17:41:12) Lykeios: hmmm, generally speaking, but I'm open to new ideas that don't fit that framework...my framework could be incomplete or inaccurate in some way
(17:41:49) Rosalyn_J: how would you know though?
(17:41:51) Parnerium: Yeah. My framework isn't a permanent structure. It takes more evidence to change parts of my framework, but it can be changed.
(17:41:52) Lykeios: I don't know everything and some of the things I know I'm not sure about
(17:42:39) Lykeios: well, if someone came along with an idea outside of my framework of knowledge and gave me lots of good evidence for it that would be reason to reevaluate my framework
(17:43:24) Rosalyn_J: Don't you look at the evidence within the bounds of your framework?
(17:43:26) Lykeios: I feel like the word "framework" is losing all meaning after saying it so many times
(17:44:05) Parnerium: I think everybody has unexamined beliefs
(17:44:54) Lykeios: hmmm...good point...I suppose I do
(17:44:55) Rosalyn_J: those beliefs which shape their reality
(17:45:01) Rosalyn_J:
(17:46:08) Lykeios: "I reject your reality and substitute my own"
(17:46:16) Rosalyn_J:
(17:46:26) Rosalyn_J: In a simple sentence
(17:46:28) Lykeios: gotta love Mythbusters
(17:46:52) Rosalyn_J: Reality could be defined as a subjective experience based on my beliefs
(17:46:58) Rosalyn_J: eh?
(17:47:29) Lykeios: sounds about right I suppose
(17:48:18) Parnerium: Yeah, that works, lol
(17:49:11) Rosalyn_J: Cool
(17:49:13) Rosalyn_J:
(17:49:26) Rosalyn_J: next time we can talk about beliefs more indepth
(17:49:44) Rosalyn_J: So how was it guys?
(17:49:52) Rosalyn_J: Did your brain explode?
(17:49:55) Lykeios: good discussion
(17:50:01) Karn: Well done!
(17:50:05) Parnerium: I've assimilated lots of new human speech patterns!
(17:50:13) Rosalyn_J: LOL
(17:50:20) Parnerium: That was fun though, haha
(17:50:25) Karn: Good robot!
(17:50:38) Rosalyn_J: Can I put this on the forum?
(17:50:48) Parnerium: I don't mind
(17:50:55) Lykeios: wouldn't bother me
(17:51:02) Rosalyn_J: awesome

(18:52:42) Lykeios: okay, my topic begins with a question... do you believe in evil? do you believe that it exists?
(18:54:01) FAT: I believe that evil has to exist in an equal portion to good. An imbalance of one will reverse their polarities.
(18:54:50) Parnerium: I don't think evil exists as an external entity or polluting force in the world
(18:54:57) Lykeios: so yes, you do believe in evil. in that case what qualifies as evil? (not EVERYTHING that might qualify but just...a few basic things)
(18:55:16) Lykeios: I don't either, Par
(18:56:10) Rosalyn_J: oooh thats a good one
(18:56:24) FAT: Evil = malicious. Anything done by someone or something with malicious intent is influenced by evil.
(18:56:52) Parnerium: "Does style exist?" Well... there are things I see that I would describe as stylish. But it's an adjective that I use to explain a judgement as opposed to something that exists outside of that.
(18:56:57) FAT: Cats are evil for chewing the legs off mice and leaving them on your pillow
(18:57:11) Rosalyn_J: I think evil begins to exist at the time that we define good
(18:57:17) Lykeios: good answer, FAT...I've never heard that definition
(18:57:17) Rosalyn_J: See Tao te ching 2
(18:58:10) Lykeios: See that's why I don't believe in a moral "good" either...I think our actions stand for themselves without such judgements, they're just things that we do
(18:58:56) FAT: But doing too much good encourages corruption. Every charity has corruption issues.
(18:59:03) Lykeios: any judgement of good or evil will be completely subjective based on the person making the judgement
(18:59:13) Aco: I would have to agree with Lykeios..
(18:59:19) Rosalyn_J: I think that at some point, in order to live together with a group of people, we have to create a set of guidelines
(18:59:28) Rosalyn_J: its like reality
(18:59:41) FAT: Mother Theresa did most of her visits to help the poor....but also spread the word of her religion.
(18:59:47) Rosalyn_J: subjective, but in some areas agreed upon
(19:00:57) Lykeios: well I think there are things that are conducive to living together in a society and things that aren't conducive to living in a society...there are things that should be avoided, but there is no "good" and no "evil" except in our minds
(19:01:06) FAT: The Pope doesnt go anywhere ever to do anything unless there is a political message attached to it. Absolute Good corrupts.
(19:01:31) Parnerium: Driving on the wrong side of the road isn't conducive to living in society, but I doubt many people would call it "evil"
(19:01:55) Lykeios: right. a good example
(19:02:59) Rosalyn_J: harm to another person within the group is the only thing that I might consider evil
(19:03:17) Rosalyn_J: I was going to broaden it to animals, but we eat them
(19:03:36) Parnerium: Tell that to PETA
(19:03:40) Lykeios: can an animal do something evil? 0.o
(19:03:58) Lykeios: oh wait...I know what you mean now...lmao. nevermind
(19:04:30) Lykeios: but that is a good question anyway...can an animal be evil? or do something evil?
(19:04:49) Rosalyn_J: hmmm
(19:05:04) Rosalyn_J: its not held to the same standards as members of the group
(19:05:58) Aco: an animal would have no sense of human subjectivity.
(19:05:58) Parnerium: I'd call an animal evil if it plotted to torture it's brother and felt joy in seeing it suffer, but I'll never know if any of those thoughts or emotions are behind the actions of an animal
(19:06:21) Rosalyn_J: it has its own standards related to its own group and species
(19:06:55) Rosalyn_J: something that we might consider evil were the standards upheld for humans, for animals is quite normal
(19:07:22) Rosalyn_J: consider for example how the lion chooses its prey not of the strong, but of the vulnerable
(19:07:43) Rosalyn_J: it thins out the heard by killing off the weak and the left behind
(19:08:03) Rosalyn_J: but it strengthens the herd as a whole
(19:08:16) Rosalyn_J: something like Euginics
(19:08:37) Rosalyn_J: or genocide would be on par with that idea
(19:08:52) Rosalyn_J: or something like the greeks did
(19:08:56) Rosalyn_J: you know
(19:08:58) Lykeios: right...but the lion isn't evil for hunting the weak
(19:09:12) Rosalyn_J: leaving their baby to die on the mountain
(19:09:21) Rosalyn_J: I think they had a place for it
(19:09:58) Avalonslight: I would say that evil is a moral, and therefore subjective....
(19:10:59) Rosalyn_J: if everyone decided what was evil in their own heart then someone could decide that murder is not evil
(19:11:32) Lykeios: right, exactly. that's why I don't think evil exists...everyone can decide for themselves what is evil and what is not
(19:12:13) Avalonslight: thus subjective...
(19:12:18) Rosalyn_J: but the committing of murder, the killing of another individual, is it wrong?
(19:12:28) Avalonslight: subjective to the moral standards of that particular culture and society
(19:13:10) Rosalyn_J: subjective within the bounds of a group. is that truly subjective?
(19:13:21) Parnerium: Evil is an adjective, not an entity
(19:14:06) Lykeios: is killing wrong? It depends
(19:14:22) Lykeios: it depends on the circumstances...on who you're killing...on why you're killing them
(19:14:41) Rosalyn_J: Ah so it is case by case
(19:14:49) Rosalyn_J: it also depends on perspective
(19:14:50) Avalonslight: Certainly Ros... It may be an absolute within that particular group due to that particular group's morals, but in the interactions of that particular group with other groups, it becomes subjective.
(19:15:13) Avalonslight: therefore, the moral itself is subjective, and thus whether it is evil or not subjective
(19:15:41) Lykeios: yes, it does also depend on perspective
(19:16:05) Parnerium: I've got to go for the night guys. It was nice talking with you all
(19:16:16) Lykeios: and yes, it is case by case. for the most part though...killing is destructive to society and therefore undesirable
(19:16:18) Temple Bot: Parnerium has left the chat.
(19:16:18) Lykeios: good night Par
(19:17:13) Temple Bot: FAT has left the chat.
(19:17:27) Rosalyn_J: so evil and not evil depends not only on the rules set down by the particular group, but also the motivation behind the act?
(19:17:37) Rosalyn_J: I think the same can be said for good
(19:18:36) Avalonslight: Certainly I would not attempt to condone the acts of say... the US government on Hiroshima or Nagasaki... or even the Holocaust as a whole. I certainly wouldn't justify it or attempt to support it or anything of the sort.

But if you stop and put yourself in your shoes at the time... From the perspective of the one, there was no other better way to end what was already a very costly, bloody war. From the perspective of the other (and perhaps terrifyingly so given some current modern political rhetoric), there was the perspective that those individuals were responsible for a great many wrongs and troubles in their society and there needed to be an "cleansing" to help put society back together.

By today's "modern standards" we would tend to agree that both acts were "evil"... but. . . well... Again, I'm neither condoning nor justifying either event.
(19:20:49) Avalonslight: And yes, I know and recognize that that was an extreme example which global society as a whole recognizes as a moral and ethical atrocity... But at the time, things were quite different on both sides. Or so I would like to think...
(19:22:16) Rosalyn_J: I suppose that's why the doctrine is there
(19:22:25) Rosalyn_J: because things like this can get messy
(19:23:19) Avalonslight: I think that in 45 years, global society is going to judge us as harshly as we judge those of 45 years ago, simply because of changing morals....
(19:23:35) Rosalyn_J: the thing is that we cannot know the mind of a person committing either good or evil
(19:23:43) Lykeios: hmmm...good point Ava
(19:23:48) Rosalyn_J: oh for cetrtain
(19:24:01) Rosalyn_J: consider the conflicts we are engaged in
(19:24:22) Avalonslight: and that is why I say "evil" is subjective..
(19:24:30) Rosalyn_J: people are going to see a fuller picture of them because they will be emotionally removed
(19:26:39) Avalonslight: I wish I were able to think of a less polarized example off the top of my head, but I'm finding it a bit hard to, simply because any other example would be one that is currently on going today, and we're in the middle of it, rather than removed from it like we can be of the events of the past.
(19:27:22) Lykeios: I thought it was a fine example
(19:28:29) Avalonslight: I'm not even certain I like to call something "evil" for that same reason. Certainly morally reprehensible, or ethically inappropriate...
(19:30:11) Rosalyn_J: I think there is also the matter not only of looking at the person committing the act, but also the person on the recieving end
(19:30:23) Rosalyn_J: do we take their view into consideration?
(19:30:27) Avalonslight: I suppose another example would be something like.. I dunno... a political ideology. Say socialism. I've got family members who consider socialism to be the devil's work, and by virtue of that, inherently evil.
(19:30:32) Lykeios: I don't call things evil anymore at all...unless I'm joking
(19:31:05) Avalonslight: I still do... but I don't do it often.
(19:31:13) Lykeios: I'm a socialist...lol
(19:31:30) Avalonslight: And certainly we ought to, Ros. But it's a good question of whether or not we actually do.
(19:32:16) Avalonslight: Well according to these particular family members then Lyk, you're doing the devil's work, unpatriotic, and a danger to the country, adn you should be either imprisoned or thrown out of the country...
(19:32:20) Avalonslight:
(19:33:08) Rosalyn_J: wow
(19:34:14) Avalonslight: I think it might be safe to say something along these lines: Just like the events of history are written by the victors, the morals of society are determined by the powerful. In the end, it is they who determine right and wrong, and good and evil, only with regard to their own personal viewpoint, and without regard to those around them.
(19:34:36) Avalonslight: I have some pretty extreme fundamentalist family members.
(19:35:37) Lykeios: I'm only a socialist because anarchy seems so unlikely
(19:35:43) Lykeios:
(19:36:40) Avalonslight: Maybe you're the devil incarnate himself then
(19:36:45) Temple Bot: Proteus has joined the chat.
(19:36:49) Lykeios: hahaha. maybe I am
(19:36:57) Avalonslight: the Anti-Christ! that's it! I'm speaking with the Anti-Christ!!!
(19:37:01) Avalonslight: lmao
(19:37:21) Lykeios: perhaps you are
(19:37:28) Lykeios: how would you know?
(19:37:39) Avalonslight: Hi Pro
(19:37:50) Rosalyn_J: hey E
(19:37:54) Avalonslight: I wouldn't, of course. And it's not like you would tell me if I were so...
(19:38:01) Avalonslight stares at Lyk.
(19:38:05) Rosalyn_J: we are talking about evil
(19:39:20) Lykeios: hehehe. indeed
(19:39:49) Lykeios: and hello Pro
(19:40:50) Avalonslight: any way that is about as good of an answer i can give that one lyk
(19:41:21) Lykeios: and a very good answer it was
(19:41:31) Rosalyn_J: it was really good
(19:42:00) Rosalyn_J: I think a good follow up question
(19:42:09) Temple Bot: Proteus has been logged out (Timeout).
(19:42:09) Rosalyn_J: knowing that evil is subjective
(19:42:36) Rosalyn_J: how do we go about living that truth out?
(19:43:50) Avalonslight: the same way our ancestors did before us.... acting the best we can with what we know and the knowledge of our current morals and acting within those current morals. I wouldn't say it's right to second guess what we currently call right or wrong based on the possibility of a future change due to forces we can't possibly begin to predict.
(19:44:29) Reacher awakens.
(19:44:29) Lykeios: I think it's always right to question what we call right and wrong...I think it's always right to question just about everything
(19:44:36) Lykeios: hey Reacher!
(19:44:54) Avalonslight: Hey Reacher
(19:44:55) Reacher: Are we making a case for moral relativism?
(19:45:37) Lykeios: I believe so
(19:46:05) Reacher: That is a dangerous proposition.
(19:46:44) Lykeios: morality is always relative
(19:47:20) Reacher: I disagree, but I don't think in the way you imagine.
(19:47:32) Reacher: *you might imagine.
(19:47:54) Lykeios: so you're saying there is an objective morality?
(19:48:10) Avalonslight: moral relativism and the subjectiveness of the concept of "evil" as a whole
(19:48:39) Reacher: In the end it doesn't really matter if there is objective morality or no...the only thing that matters is the morality you're willing to accept.
(19:49:47) Avalonslight: I woudl say that that in itself is a level of relativism...
(19:50:30) Reacher: Perhaps...it is in keeping with the sentiment you wrote of earlier - that the powerful set the conditions for morality.
(19:51:05) Reacher: Because if we have a different view of morality, and you're more powerful...well objectivity isn't really a factor, is it?
(19:51:32) Avalonslight: No it's not
(19:52:14) Avalonslight: I'll brb
(19:52:18) Avalonslight: going to reset my chat window....
(19:52:23) Temple Bot: Avalonslight has left the chat.
(19:52:25) Temple Bot: Avalonslight has joined the chat.
(19:53:25) Reacher: I've definitely seen evil...and if it isn't evil, then the fact that it isn't evil means little to me. Everything in me defines it that way.
(19:53:55) Rosalyn_J: go on please
(19:54:37) Temple Bot: Avalonslight has been logged out (Timeout).
(19:55:30) Temple Bot: Avalonslight has joined the chat.
(19:57:33) Reacher: I do think I ascribe to relativity in most things...but I found that I have my limit in that as well. Usually related to the enjoyment of suffering.
(19:59:21) Lykeios: There may be a few people I would enjoy seeing suffer... just being honest
(20:00:05) Lykeios: but as a general rule I don't enjoy suffering
(20:00:11) Reacher: Moral objectivists certainly run the risk of pressing the easy button on morality...but so do total relativists - in terms of consequences.
(20:00:29) Rosalyn_J: I'll bbiab
(20:02:20) Reacher: So perhaps I'm a moral consequentialist
(20:03:09) Lykeios: interesting
(20:07:22) Lykeios: morals based on the consequences of actions?
(20:08:31) Reacher: Not solely...
(20:08:52) Reacher: But weighted heavily in that direction. I'm not making a case for ends justifying means.
(20:10:48) Lykeios: ahh, right
(20:17:57) Reacher: I think I would've been a moral relativist had I not seen some REALLY messed up stuff a few times. Beyond politics and ideology. I when I found something I couldn't abide...I spent a lot of time thinking about it. What I concluded is that it didn't matter if it was objectively or subjectively amoral - I simply couldn't abide it. Perhaps that says more about me than my assessment of it...but there it is.
(20:18:16) Reacher: -I
(20:19:11) Avalonslight: Yeah I get that
(20:19:34) Lykeios: makes sense to me...
(20:20:30) Avalonslight: I would have to say that in general, I think those who are current or former military, particularly deployers, have a firmer set of morals than other segments of the population. Simply because they get exposed to so much more than your average individual
(20:21:10) Lykeios: that sounds about right to me. I can see that
(20:22:26) Reacher: I feel like it made me a bit more sensitive to when I think I see something amoral. 99.9% of everything I see I don't think of as 'evil' but when I do I really can't get it out of my head as anything but.
(20:23:20) Temple Bot: Kahn_Xander has joined the chat.
(20:23:36) Avalonslight: I'm not sure I would say that moral relativism makes it impossible to see something as 'evil' or 'morally reprehensible' though... Just because you accept that morals can vary, doesn't mean you have to accept the variation from your own.
(20:23:58) Temple Bot: Proteus has joined the chat.
(20:24:10) Rosalyn_J: I think there was a good point made recently
(20:24:22) Rosalyn_J: about the people in power making the rules
(20:24:26) Avalonslight: wb Ros
(20:24:34) Rosalyn_J: we can shout subjectivity as we like
(20:25:04) Rosalyn_J: but its the people in power, not ourselves, that determine the morality of our actions
(20:25:19) Rosalyn_J: and I think this goes in spheres
(20:25:32) Rosalyn_J: there is a small sphere which you control
(20:25:47) Rosalyn_J: mainly those things that you do that don't harm others
(20:26:08) Rosalyn_J: if its not against the law, its within your right to decide whether to do it or not
(20:26:17) Rosalyn_J: and then you have your familial group
(20:26:43) Rosalyn_J: a microcosm of society with views that are held by those in power within that small group
(20:26:59) Rosalyn_J: parents, aunts, uncles etc
(20:27:11) Rosalyn_J: and then you have your social group
(20:27:22) Rosalyn_J: individuals you choose to associate with
(20:27:31) Rosalyn_J: whose opinion you value
(20:27:41) Rosalyn_J: there are morals there too
(20:27:53) Rosalyn_J: lastly you have the "society"
(20:28:14) Rosalyn_J: for ease lets just call that "government"
(20:28:29) Reacher: Mmm...careful there.
(20:28:37) Avalonslight: Very true, but typically you're raised within the morals of that sphere determined by that majority, so your morals end up aligning with those who are in power. It's why it takes so long for morals to change in the first place... why things like like slavery were morally acceptable for so long, or male civil superiority (ex: men having the right to vote but women not), and more recently, the morals related to marriage relationships and the treatment of unborn children/fetuses/whatever you want to call them...
(20:28:53) Rosalyn_J: because when you commit acts outside of the bounds of society" you are tried by the government large or small
(20:31:36) Temple Bot: Kahn_Xander has been logged out (Timeout).
(20:32:28) Temple Bot: Avalonslight has been logged out (Timeout).
(20:33:00) Lykeios: I can agree with all that...there are certainly various spheres that we fit into
(20:33:34) Temple Bot: Arthur_H. has joined the chat.
(20:34:06) Temple Bot: Avalonslight has joined the chat.
(20:35:22) Arthur_H.: Are we still talking about morality
(20:37:40) Avalonslight: I think that those spheres though are why it's important to recognize that morals are subjective and will vary from sphere to sphere.... Certainly in order for the better good of the one sphere as a whole it is probably best to make rulings off of the prevailing morality of that sphere. But is it morally or even ethically acceptable to force a set moral of another unrelated sphere simply because that sphere has a differing moral regarding that same topic? Who gets to make those judgments...
(20:39:04) Temple Bot: Arthur_H. has been logged out (Timeout).
(20:40:04) Temple Bot: josephbrotzman19 has joined the chat.
(20:40:21) josephbrotzman19: Philosophical discussion?
(20:40:49) Rosalyn_J: We are talking about evil and moral relativism
(20:41:29) Rosalyn_J: that is a good point Ava
(20:42:17) Rosalyn_J: I'm torn
(20:42:31) Temple Bot: josephbrotzman19 has been logged out (Timeout).
(20:42:49) Rosalyn_J: because I think by us engaging in something completely subjective we may rend the fabric of social cohesion
(20:43:02) Rosalyn_J: but I can see where you are coming from
(20:43:13) Rosalyn_J: maybe I am just fatalistic
(20:43:28) Rosalyn_J: I wonder what would happen if we had no forced moral code?
(20:43:47) Reacher: I think it's vitally important to have an agile sense of morality and ethics. Whatever we decide to do, and whatever we believe does not excuse us from our responsibility to think.
(20:43:52) Rosalyn_J: if nothing were good or bad would people still be able to live in harmony
(20:45:06) Avalonslight: Please understand I am partially playing devil's advocate in my rhetoric here. If only because I think it's important for people to realize that what they determine to be good or wrong is going to be based upon their own raising. And we need to stop and think "is it right for me to apply my morals to this situation?"
(20:45:46) Rosalyn_J: I think that it would only be right if it directly affected you
(20:46:01) Lykeios: alright guys, I hate to leave in the middle of this wonderful discussion but I've gotta head off to bed so I can get up for work tomorrow
(20:46:12) Lykeios: good night everyone!
(20:46:17) Reacher: I think we have to consider values, obligations, and consequences.
(20:46:20) Reacher: Goodnight!
(20:46:22) Rosalyn_J: Lyk would it be ok to post this?
(20:46:30) Lykeios: of course, feel free
(20:46:40) Rosalyn_J: well I might as well ask everyone engaging lol
(20:46:51) Reacher: Please do, Ros.
(20:46:52) Rosalyn_J: how does everyone feel about having this posted?
(20:47:09) Rosalyn_J: we don't have to stop the party
(20:47:16) Proteus: i would partake, but i feel like there is a book i should have read before attending this
(20:47:25) Rosalyn_J: haha
(20:49:07) Temple Bot: Lykeios has been logged out (Timeout).
(20:49:45) Reacher: Moral values, subjective or no, play a part in ethical decision-making. Our obligations do as well...if I am a teacher, do my morals have any place in the classroom? Even if objective (by my judgment)? What about the obligation I have to the institution I teach at? What if it's a Catholic School and I disagree with their teachings? If I believe in objective morality do I have a leg to stand on in terms of deviating from their curriculum? The last is consequences...do I hold to my morals and obligations even if the consequences are absolutely terrible?
(20:50:04) Reacher: Do consequences have any place in ethical decision-making?
(20:51:17) Rosalyn_J: good point
(20:51:32) Avalonslight: I think k they have to play a part in that.
(20:52:18) Avalonslight: And to be fair, I would say that there are some universal morals that cannot be varied from culture to culture... But perhaps that's idealistic of me.
(20:52:43) Reacher: Then in relativist terms, why not just weight entirely upon consequences?
(20:52:52) Rosalyn_J: And I wonder if this idea that I only have the right to exercise my morals when something directly affects me, I don't know if that will make me selfish
(20:52:58) Rosalyn_J: or blind or what
(20:53:26) Rosalyn_J: if there is a starving child in the street, can I give it food?
(20:53:35) Temple Bot: josephbrotzman19 has joined the chat.
(20:54:52) Avalonslight: I would personally say you're morally obligated to...
(20:55:07) Rosalyn_J: why
(20:55:09) Avalonslight: But that's just me.
(20:55:15) Rosalyn_J: it doesnt affect me
(20:55:23) josephbrotzman19: Avalonslight I disagree but that's cool
(20:56:09) Reacher: http://rarehistoricalphotos.com/​vulture-little-girl/
(20:56:37) Avalonslight: Because that would fall into my idea of "universal morals"... In this case a moral obligation to preserve an innocent life where one is capable. The child starving may not directly affect you, but it is within your capability to ease it's suffering. To ignore it would be wrong.
(20:56:39) Rosalyn_J: I saw that
(20:56:56) Rosalyn_J: now see?
(20:57:00) Reacher: I think it's an interesting case to explore some of what we're talking about.
(20:57:17) Rosalyn_J: why should there not be a law that says there ought to be no starving child?
(20:58:05) Avalonslight: I would ask why isn't there one already.
(20:58:31) Rosalyn_J: because people have different views on who ought to feed the child
(20:58:43) Avalonslight: Why do we sit back and watch when it is well beyond our capacity to ensure that every child is well fed.
(20:59:10) Rosalyn_J: consider social welfare programs and the unbelievable idea of the "welfare mother"
(20:59:12) Avalonslight: That's a different matter all together though.
(20:59:27) Rosalyn_J: how so?
(21:01:44) Temple Bot: josephbrotzman19 has been logged out (Timeout).
(21:01:57) Avalonslight: Moral right vs active responsibility. No one is going to willingly take active responsibility for something when someone else exists to do so, simply to save themselves the cost of effort and money. That does not mean the moral obligation ceases to exist purely because there is argument over who holds the active responsibility.
(21:02:27) Avalonslight: We get very selfish when we can place active responsibility onto someone else, as a general rule. The moral obligation still exists.
(21:02:37) Rosalyn_J: but then what not pushing the morals of myself on others
(21:02:54) Rosalyn_J: what about if someone else's morals relate to the survival of the fittest
(21:03:06) Rosalyn_J: and pulling oneself up by their bootstraps
(21:03:13) Rosalyn_J: and not giving handouts

(16:57:53) Lykeios: okay! the topic is intuition
(16:57:58) Lykeios: first of all, what is intuition?
(16:58:07) Rosalyn_J: oh my
(16:58:33) Rosalyn_J: I like to think of it as sort of like a "gut feeling"
(16:58:52) Parnerium: Thoughts, feelings, or impressions that you have but can't attribute directly to deductive/inductive reasoning
(16:59:17) Rosalyn_J: but I think that those can be conditioned so that we end up having certain "gut feelings" based on culture, how we were raised etc
(16:59:52) Lykeios: interesting, so you feel like intuition comes from our culture and how we were raised?
(17:00:19) Rosalyn_J: I think our intiuition can be conditioned yes
(17:01:25) Lykeios: sounds about right to me. I think our intuition changes over time. at times it is stronger...at other times it is little more than a background sensation
(17:02:07) Parnerium: I think it's important to note that "stronger" doesn't mean "more correct"
(17:02:08) Lykeios: so, Par, where do you think these thoughts, feelings, or impressions come from if they don't come from reasoning?
(17:02:47) Lykeios: oh right, I just meant stronger in that we "hear" our intuition more at certain times
(17:03:42) Rosalyn_J: I think its important to distinguish how we intuit from what we intuit
(17:03:56) Parnerium: From subconscious analysis. Basically, the exact same thing as conscious reasoning just done without you thinking about it explicitly.
(17:04:06) Rosalyn_J: the gut feeling is a physical response to a mental stimulation
(17:04:28) Rosalyn_J: even if you cant directly say how it happened
(17:05:27) Parnerium: So if my eyes take in that somebody who walked into the room is physically tense, has shifty eyes, and there's a suspiciously shaped lump in their pocket but I don't consciously notice those things, I may get a "gut feeling" that said person is up to no good
(17:05:41) Lykeios: so intuition comes from our subconscious?
(17:06:17) Rosalyn_J: you somehow learned to spot those things
(17:06:26) Rosalyn_J: they didnt just come out of thin air
(17:06:28) Rosalyn_J: tv
(17:06:30) Rosalyn_J: parents
(17:06:35) Parnerium: I don't think all of that is learned
(17:06:35) Rosalyn_J: friends
(17:06:44) Rosalyn_J: eh?
(17:07:23) Lykeios: so we have an in-built intuition that doesn't come from learning?
(17:08:06) Parnerium: Some it it, like being physically tense, isn't necessarily learned. If you throw something at a baby they'll flinch. Not because they learned that when things grow quickly larger in their field of vision that means it's getting closer and will hit them. That knowledge is just part of being born human with senses and a brain.
(17:08:20) Rosalyn_J: Its possible intuition may be in your DNA
(17:08:28) Rosalyn_J: or some responses
(17:08:37) Rosalyn_J: as a part of evolution
(17:09:06) Rosalyn_J: you see something shift in the grass, you intuit that its a snake, your posture will change
(17:09:14) Rosalyn_J: and you will prepare to flee
(17:09:26) Lykeios: interesting! so our intuition could be an evolved trait?
(17:09:44) Rosalyn_J: its because your body has learned these responses over generations
(17:10:24) Parnerium: Yes. Our intuition is built in part from evolved responses, part from learned responses.
(17:10:39) Rosalyn_J: those are both learned
(17:10:47) Parnerium: How so?
(17:11:02) Rosalyn_J: you have the benefit of learned responses that you yourself did not learn but your ancestors did
(17:11:23) Rosalyn_J: they are programmed into your dna via evolution
(17:11:32) Parnerium: Ah okay. I'm differentiating between what I as an individual have learned and what I as an individual am equipped with from birth
(17:11:39) Rosalyn_J: increasing your chances of survival
(17:11:47) Temple Bot: Gwinn has been logged out (Timeout).
(17:12:09) Parnerium: Wanting to flee from motion in the grass isn't learned in the same sense that feeling uncomfortable around black people is learned
(17:12:40) Rosalyn_J: its a fear respone with the same outcome
(17:12:59) Rosalyn_J: the snake does no more harm than the black person
(17:13:03) Parnerium: But how the response got there is different. And it matters when it comes time to assess your intuitive responses.
(17:13:34) Rosalyn_J: you can learn not to be afraid of snakes too
(17:13:42) Parnerium: Because wanting to give snakes a wide berth is reasonable (see: fairly high chance of venom) while doing so with black people is not
(17:14:02) Rosalyn_J: depends on how one views a black person
(17:14:40) Parnerium: Okay. But either way, it matters whether your intuition is from social conditioning or more primitive responses.
(17:15:05) Rosalyn_J: I contend that those are the same
(17:15:10) Lykeios: why does it matter?
(17:15:30) Rosalyn_J: one particular conditioning happened a long time ago another not so long ago
(17:15:38) Parnerium: See, that's not how I see it
(17:15:49) Parnerium: Because inherited conditioning isn't happening on an individual basis
(17:16:00) Lykeios: there are some psychologists that believe racism is actually an evolved trait
(17:16:23) Rosalyn_J: social conditioning isnt happening individually either
(17:16:30) Rosalyn_J: it happens as a society
(17:16:39) Parnerium: No, it happens individually
(17:16:42) Rosalyn_J: otherwise we wouldnt have this problem
(17:17:06) Parnerium: A society will create the environment for it to happen, but the change for me as a person happens on an individual level
(17:17:15) Rosalyn_J: We as a society accept a narrative
(17:17:30) Rosalyn_J: we do not question it as long as it relates to our survival
(17:17:49) Rosalyn_J: if society can get you to fear something it can also get you to hate something
(17:17:49) Parnerium: The change for genetics is a slow moving process over generations, applicable to every individual with the right combination of genes.
(17:18:26) Rosalyn_J: there are some cultures who are not afraid of snakes
(17:18:38) Parnerium: Okay, let's talk about snakes
(17:18:51) Rosalyn_J: they know that they, like any other animal, only attack when threatened
(17:19:07) Parnerium: If I see rustling in the grass, my intuitive fear is not about it being a snake.
(17:19:18) Parnerium: That would not be intuitive. That's conscious thought.
(17:19:31) Rosalyn_J: whats the intuition?
(17:19:37) Rosalyn_J: I may get bitten?
(17:19:54) Rosalyn_J: or I am afraid?
(17:19:58) Parnerium: The intuitive reaction is "there is likely something alive in the grass; it may be a threat"
(17:20:12) Rosalyn_J: ah
(17:20:22) Parnerium: Whether it's a snake, a rabbit, or a chihuahua isn't intuitive
(17:20:36) Parnerium: So if I am not afraid of snakes, once I see that it is a snake I will no longer fear it
(17:20:50) Parnerium: But all cultures have a reactive fear of "unknown moving thing approaching me"
(17:21:05) Rosalyn_J: I get you
(17:21:53) Rosalyn_J: so the idea, if we move it towards humans
(17:22:20) Rosalyn_J: we have "unknown approaches who does not look like me, may be a threat"
(17:23:13) Lykeios: you mean if an unknown human is approaching and doesn't look like you?
(17:23:21) Rosalyn_J: yes
(17:23:31) Parnerium: So I think it's useful to determine if my response is "unknown person doesn't look like me" or "unknown person looks like a group that is specifically threatening to me"
(17:23:32) Rosalyn_J: why I think this is sort of the same
(17:23:58) Rosalyn_J: is that we are fed narratives all the time
(17:24:03) Lykeios: yes, and that is how many psychologists think racism is an evolved trait. we evolved a mistrust of those who do not look similar to us
(17:24:06) Rosalyn_J: about certain sets of people
(17:24:19) Rosalyn_J: homeless people I give a wide bredth
(17:24:22) Rosalyn_J: why?
(17:24:34) Rosalyn_J: and they are the only ones
(17:24:39) Parnerium: If it was just that natural response, than all people of different races would earn that "different than me" response. But if it's ONLY black people, then that is coming from idea I have about black people, specifically, independent of natural "other" apprehension
(17:24:46) Rosalyn_J: those and maybe the inebriated
(17:25:13) Rosalyn_J: but people are learning a different narrative too
(17:25:25) Rosalyn_J: about latinx
(17:25:32) Rosalyn_J: about those from the middle east
(17:25:40) Parnerium: Exactly
(17:25:51) Rosalyn_J: but they are learning that
(17:26:00) Rosalyn_J: from who?
(17:26:05) Parnerium: And they are not learning fear of rustling grass
(17:26:08) Rosalyn_J: not from their encounters
(17:26:17) Rosalyn_J: from the narrative of society
(17:26:51) Rosalyn_J: so I would contend that it is not individual
(17:27:05) Parnerium: I think we're arguing different things
(17:27:23) Rosalyn_J: each day we turn on our computer or our television, if we are not careful we are sucked into the narrative
(17:28:01) Rosalyn_J: we inundate ourselves with it and suddenly we intuit "something rustles in the grass"
(17:28:42) Parnerium: Societal messages are what teaches these responses. They aren't coming from the individual experience. But societal messages only impact individuals. One person takes in the society message and develops a world view from it. Another person can hear the same things, but because of other experiences or knowledge, does not develop a world view from it.
(17:29:21) Parnerium: So from individual to individual, thoughts and intuitive responses to middle easterners are different
(17:29:53) Rosalyn_J: only if they have experiences
(17:29:58) Parnerium: But that's not true for genetic markers of humanity, like rustling grass
(17:30:10) Rosalyn_J: you learn not to fear the snake by interacting with the snake
(17:30:17) Parnerium: It's not the snake
(17:31:14) Rosalyn_J: the point is, if people keep themselves isolated by their own "whatever" they dont have to venture out
(17:31:15) Temple Bot: Luce_Stellare has joined the chat.
(17:31:26) Rosalyn_J: they can just accept the narrative whole sale
(17:31:39) Rosalyn_J: and most people are not taught to venture out
(17:31:41) Rosalyn_J: not really
(17:31:50) Parnerium: I'm advocating differentiating for that reason
(17:32:00) Rosalyn_J: we may work or go to school with different people
(17:32:16) Rosalyn_J: but most of the time our friends have our world view
(17:32:46) Parnerium: If I look at a response and can trace it back to a narrative, that's going to warrant a different set of actions from me than if I can trace it back to a basic human reaction for self preservation.
(17:33:11) Lykeios: but is there always time to track back where our intuition comes from?
(17:33:17) Rosalyn_J: the thing is, how often are people going to do that?
(17:33:22) Lykeios: isn't it often we intuit something and react immediately?
(17:33:23) Rosalyn_J: I feel threatened
(17:33:30) Rosalyn_J: must neutralize
(17:33:39) Rosalyn_J: it happens in the blink of an eye
(17:33:40) Parnerium: We're analyzing intuition right now
(17:33:50) Parnerium: So I'm interested in useful ways to do that
(17:33:58) Rosalyn_J: we are doing it without being under a percieved threat
(17:34:15) Parnerium: Whether that analysis happens in the moment isn't wholly relevant to setting up analytical systems for this conversation, right now
(17:34:34) Rosalyn_J: why not?
(17:34:53) Lykeios: but we don't always know where our intuition comes from...sometimes it's just a feeling we get about a situation
(17:35:14) Parnerium: Because this conversation is not in a moment of reacting to intuition
(17:35:30) Parnerium: Talking about intuition is different than any one of a million examples where it is experienced
(17:36:01) Rosalyn_J: I think the best way to deal with intuition is to realize that its a conditioned response
(17:36:11) Rosalyn_J: conditioning is not bad
(17:36:25) Rosalyn_J: sometimes it saves lives as in your first example
(17:36:27) Parnerium: Theorizing about where intuition comes from and how it works and what it is are all different than "what do you do when you feel intuition?"
(17:36:52) Lykeios: what DO you do when you feel intuition? Do you trust your intuition?
(17:36:56) Rosalyn_J: take it with a grain of salt
(17:37:24) Parnerium: If you're going to take it with a grain of salt, what is that salt? For me, that salt would be "where did this intuition come from?"
(17:37:45) Rosalyn_J: true
(17:38:22) Rosalyn_J: I would also say work to purposely widen your range of experiences
(17:38:31) Rosalyn_J: it may make for better intuition
(17:38:37) Parnerium: Does it come from natural human response? Does it come from a societal narrative? If narrative, do I agree with that narrative? If natural response, is that a response that is still relevant in my modern life?
(17:39:14) Parnerium: Also, if narrative, what other impacts is that narrative having on both my conscious and unconscious responses?
(17:42:01) Lykeios: so you don't think making decisions based on intuition alone is a good idea? sounds like you feel like you should examine your intuition before acting on it
(17:42:11) Parnerium: Not necessarily
(17:43:22) Parnerium: In urgent situations, its better to act on your intuition than not act at all. But after you act, it's a good idea to assess your reaction when you do have time.
(17:44:03) Parnerium: That way, if it is built on a faulty premise, you can work on undoing that natural response so it doesn't drive you to actions you'll regret later down the line
(17:44:13) Rosalyn_J: that is an interesting point
(17:44:35) Rosalyn_J: we say urgent but that is a different thing from person to person
(17:45:17) Luce_Stellare: Intuition is a double edged sword to me, when it comes to humans and their character and potential actions -- my initial opinion may future color my actions towards them until they kind of act towards me in the way that I've made a path to them
(17:45:51) Luce_Stellare: at the same time, if I meet someone and am close enough to smell them, if I don't trust their smell I know they are bad news.....like a dog thing?
(17:46:10) Luce_Stellare: That one is always right lol
(17:48:23) Temple Bot: Rosalyn_J has been logged out (Timeout).
(17:48:24) Lykeios: interesting
(17:48:25) Parnerium: And if somebody is close enough that you can smell them and you feel like they're bad news, getting them...not that close is something I would classify as "urgent," lol. But that intuitive response doesn't actually dictate any action. So you still have a choice. Walking away would be a reasonable thing to do before you think about why exactly you felt that way (to which the answer would be "because they smelled like bad news"). But shooting them, on the other hand, would not be a reasonable thing to do before thinking through the reaction.
(17:48:58) Parnerium: So that's what I mean by assessing the intuition
(17:50:00) Lykeios: makes sense to me
(17:50:32) Luce_Stellare: oh no I wouldn't shoot them lol
(17:50:43) Lykeios: I should hope not...haha
(17:50:43) Luce_Stellare: i just usually exit right
(17:52:59) Parnerium: I'm trying to imagine somebody arguing in court that they shot somebody because "they didn't smell right"
(17:53:16) Luce_Stellare: objection, your Honor, on the grounds of wtf
(17:53:19) Luce_Stellare: LMAO
(17:53:22) Luce_Stellare: SUSTAINED
(17:53:45) Luce_Stellare: Please advise the witness that she is not a canine
(17:54:37) Temple Bot: Rosalyn_J has joined the chat.
(17:55:02) Rosalyn_J: wow
(17:55:12) Rosalyn_J: sorry my computer went wonky
(17:55:29) Lykeios: lol. that is an amusing image...but I believe it could happen in America...I can imagine some trigger happy person shooting someone because they didn't smell right
(17:55:37) Lykeios: it happens, welcome back
(17:55:43) Luce_Stellare: lyke you ain't lying
(17:55:51) Rosalyn_J: smelled of alcohol
(17:55:55) Rosalyn_J: marajuana
(17:55:57) Luce_Stellare: there was a guy in florida, ______________
(17:56:00) Rosalyn_J: sigarretes
(17:56:10) Rosalyn_J: wow my spelling ftl
(17:56:35) Rosalyn_J: looked at them with shifty eyes
(17:56:55) Luce_Stellare: was black YEAH I SAID IT
(17:57:12) Luce_Stellare: ouch sorry lol
(17:57:24) Luce_Stellare: on a lighter note, i did a 5K today for the first time
(17:57:35) Lykeios: do you guys mind if I post the discussion about intuition to the forums?
(17:57:36) Rosalyn_J: nicely feckin done!!!
(17:57:37) Parnerium: "Black guy is a threat because they're black" is honestly my go to intuition example
(17:58:08) Rosalyn_J: I dont even know if that qualifies as intuition