LPW (Last Post Wins) v5
#2721
Posted 11 December 2018 - 11:02 AM
Next time you betray yourself, come to me and I'll give you a hug. uwu
#2722
Posted 12 December 2018 - 09:37 PM
#2723
Posted 13 December 2018 - 12:11 AM
A betrayal is a violation of a trust or promise; you can trust yourself or make promises to yourself, and you can violate that trust or promise. (Though completely violating your trust in yourself would seem to be a pretty wretched place to be—though it certainly happens, usually involving addiction or similar—violating promises made to oneself would be the much more common case).
Arguably, since we're just messy neural networks, this could be as simple as nueral subnet A reaching a different conclusion from neural subnet B; i.e. that just because you're one person does not mean you are of one mind on a topic (literally).
Alternatively the same grey matter might react differently at a different time, possibly with different stimuli, creating dischord between the decisions made at times A' and B'.
My point is, humans are not fully consistent rational agents; of course they can betray themselves.
#2724
Posted 13 December 2018 - 05:56 PM
imo theres no self to betrayal. you can betray another, who will look at you badly, and say youre a untrustworthy person. Self is always defined by others. And man is devolving from a social animal.
#2725
Posted 13 December 2018 - 09:19 PM
And I can certainly betray myself, look at myself badly, and say I'm an untrustworthy person. I mean, it's not advised or healthy, but I've done it before.
Or are you just going to throw all self-reflection, all meta-cognition, and other introspection out the window? :/
Edited by pokari, 13 December 2018 - 09:26 PM.
#2726
Posted 14 December 2018 - 05:13 PM
even self reflection and introspection requires projecting the thoughts of others, so it's two levels of indirection - you thinking of the general opinion of what the general opinion would be, and how you fit within that general opinion (or not )
and not everyone is capable of doing two levels of referencing. for example our president can't, and so he has no concept of self. literally.
Edited by Feishy Pit Boar, 14 December 2018 - 05:16 PM.
#2727
Posted 14 December 2018 - 08:22 PM
#2728
Posted 15 December 2018 - 09:19 AM
Oof
#2729
Posted 15 December 2018 - 10:04 AM
Somewhat related, we don't really think of the struggles of all the people around us everyday before judging them, hmm
#2730
Posted 20 December 2018 - 08:02 PM
Take the U.S. stock market crash that led to the great depression 100 years ago—the way I was taught it in grade school, you'd think it was inevitable and everyone was blind for not seeing that their house of cards was going to collapse, but of course just like today I'm sure there were a hundred people predicting a hundred different things about the economy, and only in retrospect was anyone ever really convincing.
Or take the start of WWII; it's written in the history books that things got so bad in the beginning because everyone kept trying to placate Nazi Germany rather than launch a counter-offensive after it took the first couple countries, which sounds like a really stupid thing to do—but that ignores all the uncertainty there would have been at the time; they couldn't as summarily say "well of course Hitler is hell-bent on world domination, what were you expecting" because they couldn't know that; everyone would have been guessing and second-guessing his motives at the time. Furthermore, even though we take it as given, we don't know thay things would have been "better" had the war started earlier; maybe that would have resulted in a half a century of small skirmish wars in Europe instead.
I could go on, but the point is, the spark notes version of history isn't really describing history—it's describing the stories, with clean plots and well-paced climaxes and clear conclusions, that we tell each other about what happened. Real human life is much much muckier than that, and being in the thick of it is very different from being in a story.
I'm using the big examples of course but even on a very personal level, the corruption of information as "stories" seems to be pretty essential to the human condition; take for example how different people's recollections of the same event often diverge so wildly over time—that seems to be in part because we tell ourselves "stories" about what happened.
I'm not sure to what extent it's a memory-compression technique, or else part of our rationalising day-to-day events into things that fit into our world-views, but humans just can't seem to help themselves from shaving all the edges off of events until it's story-shaped, and then those simplified shapes are all we ever pass on to each other.
#2731
Posted 21 December 2018 - 10:06 AM
#2732
Posted 22 December 2018 - 04:08 AM
#2733
Posted 23 December 2018 - 09:56 AM
#2734
Posted 23 December 2018 - 10:53 AM
Memes have an interesting relationship to excitement. They are not themselves exciting—in fact by nature they are repetitive and so should be boring—yet they are often closely associated with enthusiasm, and are often used in the employ thereof.
#2735
Posted 24 December 2018 - 09:28 AM
#2736
Posted 25 December 2018 - 02:56 AM
Deep-frying is great, but I don't know that I've ever thought of it as fun... owo
(Except deep-fried ice-cream. That's kind of intrinsically fun on account of how delightfully improbable it seems.)
#2737
Posted 25 December 2018 - 08:20 AM
Oof
#2738
Posted 25 December 2018 - 08:33 AM
#2739
Posted 25 December 2018 - 03:35 PM
#2740
Posted 25 December 2018 - 08:12 PM
I don't get it, I went out to eat, and it was crowded (all according to plan ofc) and it wasn't all that great. Then I slept for 5+ hours and had a really good dream.
Wait, so what don't I get here? nvm