duality and multiplicity

duality and multiplicity (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

LadyEllen -> duality and multiplicity (10/6/2008 1:40:50 PM)
Looking from the outside, it seems to me that the core of the current divisions in the US as they are being played out here in the various political threads, is a simple disagreement about the nature of the world. One side sees the world as a dualistic place - there is right and there is wrong, if there is a problem then it has only one cause and one solution. The other side sees the world as a place of multiplicity - yes there is right and wrong but there is also a lot of grey area between them, if there is a problem then it has many contributing factors which require multiple solutions to resolve. The problem then arises that the dualistic people see the multiplicity people as lacking in clear vision of the distinct absolutes which the dualistic people rely on to understand the world - they accuse them of stupidity, insanity, even evil. Similarly the multiplicity people see the dualistic people as lacking in clear vision of the complex nature and interactivity of things which the multiplicity people rely on to understand the world - they accuse them of stupidity, insanity, even evil. Given its an oversimplified reduction to demonstrate the division, do you see any truth in this? If you do, do you see any means of overcoming the division? E

kdsub -> RE: duality and multiplicity (10/6/2008 1:50:36 PM)
Too complicated to be true LadyEllen...People are just very easily manipulated ...as an example... The majority can change its mind and vote because of something like gay marriage and abortion...even when the Nation is going to hell both militarily and economically. Butch

kittinSol -> RE: duality and multiplicity (10/6/2008 1:53:59 PM)
It's pretty true: typically, manichean people don't get on with those that see nuances.

pahunkboy -> RE: duality and multiplicity (10/6/2008 2:02:44 PM)
I agree. As I look at some old pics of political speeches, and what we now know to be true; I wonder how many in the crowd had deciphered right away what comes to be todays thought on it. Shades of gray not only exist, but that too is fluid. It is compared and contrasted to time, place and context. Add in age of the players. The problem in governance comes in what people envision that a government should DO. Granted the needs of 2008 are different then say 1908.

subtee -> RE: duality and multiplicity (10/6/2008 2:03:29 PM)
It seems to me it's unlikely to be overcome as the life experiences that inform both the dualistic people and the multiplistic people will be so varied, even if the place they come to view the world is very similiar. For example, the multiplistic people may have arrived at their world view because of a personal tragedy and the resultant ability to empathize with others - even if others' circumstances which prompt empathy are grossly different from their own experience.

MadAxeman -> RE: duality and multiplicity (10/6/2008 2:13:30 PM)
Those who see the world as right or wrong are made up of many who see a core problem, but which might be a different problem to another with the same attitude. Likewise thay may identify the same problem but come to a different solution. *Those who see multiple reasons for social, spiritual or economic change will inevitably also apply different weight to their pet influence.* Perhaps the current wild fluctuations in economic matters will at least allow those with a 'black and white' overview of the world to realise that there are many and myriad consequences of taking action, which action and no action.

NeedToUseYou -> RE: duality and multiplicity (10/6/2008 2:14:53 PM)
I think there is some truth to it, but you are skirting around the core,IMO. There are two types of people, there are people that base everything based on their situation and the situation of those around them. This type of person is capable of any level of greyness in thinking as you put it as the reasoning is purely based on personal benefit. The other type of person is concerned with the macro level of things, and decisions and views aren't as much about their particular situation so much as the rightness and wrongness of the decision when applied universally. That's it in a nutshell. The first type, will be willing to give up things, rights, responsiblity, or take things, as long as they view it as a benefit. The second type, will not unless it seems like it is fair. This type will often be seen as cold because they brush aside individual pain and accounts in making decisions in order to benefit the whole. The grey type will be seen as compassionate as they will change their views based on the individuals around them. My view is about 80%+ of people fall into the first category, but it's a selfish viewpoint, because they truly only care about what directly effects them. I think that is where the problem is, we are nation of feelers, we don't care how it effects someone in Oregon, if we are in New York. We as a nation just want what we think we deserve, that is a very destructive view. You ultimately aren't owed anything other than a fair system for you to work towards acquiring what you want. That's my view. In a nutshell, the grey thinkers, are adults with the thinking capacity of children, run by emotion, and animal base instincts. Hardly the type of people that should be ruling a nation. Yet Bush, is a prime example of that, extreme liberal thinkers are also filled with that thinking, that is why it does not matter, if Repubs, or Demos run and win, because they are driven by this same MEMEME, and Mine, thinking. So, there you have it. Incidently IMO, only about 10 or so posters on this board don't fall into the childrens category. And some are more left thinking and some more right thinking. It's a concern with Large level thinking that distinguishes the two. This is why incidentally I think this country is screwed no matter what, in the most basic terms if you think about everything in terms of individuals you know, and that is the basis for your vote, you're the problem.Because that is the exact mindset the CEO has, that is the mindset the President has, that is the mindset the Fed has. Literally no one is concerned with the rules. Only what they get. Cluster fuck.

pahunkboy -> RE: duality and multiplicity (10/6/2008 2:18:05 PM)
which leads to the question; is it time for proportional voting? (Or some other voting system methodology)

NeedToUseYou -> RE: duality and multiplicity (10/6/2008 2:25:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy which leads to the question; is it time for proportional voting? (Or some other voting system methodology) No, I think we are in a situation just like in Animal Farm. The pigs are in control, they rewrite the rules, they gain the benefit, we are a nation of pigs(like the book uses). Etc.... However, in my belief the only way to get people to realize hard rules, unmoving foundations rules are actually good, is for them to witness the full out consequence of this ME ME ME mindset. I think it is a cycle that must be played out, as simple as that. Then you can build something better again and hopefully hang on a little longer to a hopefully better foundation next time. In the end I think the problem is our nature, and the consequence is the cycle.

pahunkboy -> RE: duality and multiplicity (10/6/2008 2:40:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NeedToUseYou quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy which leads to the question; is it time for proportional voting? (Or some other voting system methodology) No, I think we are in a situation just like in Animal Farm. The pigs are in control, they rewrite the rules, they gain the benefit, we are a nation of pigs(like the book uses). Etc.... However, in my belief the only way to get people to realize hard rules, unmoving foundations rules are actually good, is for them to witness the full out consequence of this ME ME ME mindset. I think it is a cycle that must be played out, as simple as that. Then you can build something better again and hopefully hang on a little longer to a hopefully better foundation next time. In the end I think the problem is our nature, and the consequence is the cycle. I am the type that if everyone is at the grocery store, I am not. I tend to do the Opposite of what the crowd does. So- we are all individuals, I would guess the CM crowd is less typical. So with any crises event- or community situation, the function of the lone individual to survive. Maybe even enhance ones life. If that is selfish fine. I agree on the running its course. I liked George Orwell back in High School, and his work is even more true today. I also like "Future Shock". Here is a hint. When there is a big snow storm to happen say at 7pm. Best time to go for groceries? 7:30pm. [things will be picked out..., but still works] OR go to a convenience store. Both of these worked for me in the past. Now we face new events.... so the tactics to use.... to maintain a household. It comes to mind the evacuations in FL. The after the storm, oodles of people need supplies and are in line for it. duh!

NeedToUseYou -> RE: duality and multiplicity (10/6/2008 2:46:48 PM)
I'm not against individualism, I'm against Individualism in regards to government treatment. If it seemed like I'm advocating socialism or something I'm not necessarily, or personally, I'm advocating a hard set of rules, and application thereof. What a person does beyond that is there business, and I have no problem with that.

Alumbrado -> RE: duality and multiplicity (10/6/2008 4:23:00 PM)
Perhaps it isn't so much a matter of concrete right or wrong, as it is that humans as a species are hardwired to see things in terms of superordinate or subordinate relationships...which tends to promote black and white, 'Us vs. Them' dualism, as a means of understanding one's place in the pecking order. It is certainly possible to train one's self out of thinking and even reacting that way, but I suspect more people make that claim than successfully do the work.

NeedToUseYou -> RE: duality and multiplicity (10/6/2008 5:59:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Alumbrado Perhaps it isn't so much a matter of concrete right or wrong, as it is that humans as a species are hardwired to see things in terms of superordinate or subordinate relationships...which tends to promote black and white, 'Us vs. Them' dualism, as a means of understanding one's place in the pecking order. It is certainly possible to train one's self out of thinking and even reacting that way, but I suspect more people make that claim than successfully do the work. possibly, and to add I don't think it is entirely possible to ever think "we" all the time even when appropriate, but it is a good goal to have in mind, and if more tried, I think it would solve many problems. If I'm giving the impression that I'm claiming perfection in these things, I'm not, I just recognize the goal, that is far from perfection, but the first step nonetheless. I'd still take a bag of money if I found it, just being honest, even if I knew it was robbed from a bank. So, I might not be the best guy to be a bank guard. LOL. But I'd build something helpful with it, I'm sure of that.

slaveboyforyou -> RE: duality and multiplicity (10/6/2008 6:18:58 PM)
Your seperation of people into two opposing groups is dualistic in and of itself. I myself see some things as complex with allowances for "shades of gray." However I see some issues as very much a choice between right and wrong.

LadyEllen -> RE: duality and multiplicity (10/7/2008 2:14:58 AM)
True enough SBFY - it is a simplified version of the world though; I would expect most people to fall somewhere between these two extremes and share characteristics of each side to greater or lesser extent. But there still remains the polarising effect of those two extremes I think, which tend to drag people towards the extremes and out of the centre ground. E

Hippiekinkster -> RE: duality and multiplicity (10/7/2008 2:33:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subtee It seems to me it's unlikely to be overcome as the life experiences that inform both the dualistic people and the multiplistic people will be so varied, even if the place they come to view the world is very similiar. For example, the multiplistic people may have arrived at their world view because of a personal tragedy and the resultant ability to empathize with others - even if others' circumstances which prompt empathy are grossly different from their own experience. Tee, I don't understand what you are saying (or trying to say).

MadAxeman -> RE: duality and multiplicity (10/7/2008 4:41:50 PM)
If I may, an example of that might be one person believing in free healthcare and another having an opposite view until having to care for someone who becomes disabled and discovering the huge expense and lack of support structure.

Page: [1]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125