[coberst]

Hey! Get an Intellectual Hobby

My experience leads me to conclude that there is a world of difference in picking up a fragment of knowledge here and there versus seeking knowledge for an answer to a question of significance. There is a world of difference between taking a stroll in the woods on occasion versus climbing a mountain because you wish to understand what climbing a mountain is about or perhaps you want to understand what it means to accomplish a feat of significance only because you want it and not because there is ‘money in it’.

I think that every adult needs to experience the act of intellectual understanding; an act that Carl Sagan describes as “Understanding is a kind of ecstasy.”

This quotation of Carl Rogers might illuminate my meaning:

I want to talk about learning. But not the lifeless, sterile, futile, quickly forgotten stuff that is crammed in to the mind of the poor helpless individual tied into his seat by ironclad bonds of conformity! I am talking about LEARNING - the insatiable curiosity that drives the adolescent boy to absorb everything he can see or hear or read about gasoline engines in order to improve the efficiency and speed of his 'cruiser'. I am talking about the student who says, "I am discovering, drawing in from the outside, and making that which is drawn in a real part of me." I am talking about any learning in which the experience of the learner progresses along this line: "No, no, that's not what I want"; "Wait! This is closer to what I am interested in, what I need"; "Ah, here it is! Now I'm grasping and comprehending what I need and what I want to know!"

When we undertake such a journey of discovery we need reliable sources of information. We need information that we can build a strong foundation for understanding. Where do we find such reliable information? We find it in the library or through Google on the Internet or combinations thereof.

I have a ‘Friends of the Library’ card from a college near me. This card allows me, for a yearly fee of $25, to borrow any book in that gigantic library. Experts in every domain of knowledge have written books just especially for laypersons like you and I.

I often recommend to others that they get an intellectual hobby. The following is the essence of my message.

Hobbies are ways in which many individuals express their individuality. Those matters that excite an individual’s interest and curiosity are those very things that allow the individual to acquire self-understanding and understanding of the world. Interests define individuality and help to provide meaning to life. We all look for some ideology, hobby, philosophy or religion to provide meaning to life.

Not many of us have discovered our full potentialities or have fully explored in depth those we have discovered. Self-development and self-expression are relatively new ideas in human history. The arts are one means for this self-expression. The artist may find drawing or constructing sculptures as a means for self-discovery. The self-learner may find essay writing of equal importance.

I recommend that each person who does not presently have some similar type of hobby develop the hobby of an intellectual life. We could add to our regular routine the development of an invigorating intellectual life wherein we sought disinterested knowledge; knowledge that is not for the purpose of some immediate need but something that stirs our curiosity, which we seek to understand for the simple reason that we feel a need to understand a particular domain of knowledge.

[Alex carnavas]

Coberst you present very valid points in two parts of this essay. I do agree with you that 'humanity' 'society' or even simple individuals do need to take up an intellectual "hobby."

Furthermore Carl Rogers also presents a valid point stating "not the lifeless, sterile, futile, quickly forgotten stuff that is crammed in to the mind of the poor helpless individual tied into his seat by ironclad bonds of conformity! I am talking about LEARNING"

I again agree with you that we should look for a "meaning" to life through self expression and creativity and not through -no offense to anyone of course- false prophets and faceless gods.

However my question to you is this: If not for the ignorance what would drive our curiosity onward looking to expand our knowledge?

This post has been edited by Alex carnavas: 13 October 2009 - 07:44 PM

[coberst]

Alex carnavas, on 13 October 2009 - 08:44 PM, said:

However my question to you is this: If not for the ignorance what would drive our curiosity onward looking to expand our knowledge?

The more one learns the greater grows their domain of recognized ignorance. The domain of our recognized ignorance never shrinks; it grows exponenially with every question we ask and every answer we study.

[Alex carnavas]

I see. Knowledge is a infinite road that can take us beyond the fringes of sanity, to the deepest holes on this earth, or even to a point where we no longer need to look towards the heavens for answers to the simple yet very complex questions to our existence wouldn't you agree?

Also something i forgot to mention: Its been well documented and im sure proven that toddlers all the way to adults (even though in adulthood most never realize it) mimic what the people around them are doing thus learning to walk, and speak. So if we learn so much from one another what example does that set to the youth when they see men/women/children on the news being murdered by a drunk or the war in Iraq? Or mans obsession with global economic domination? If we want to make a difference in the world which you seem to want to do trying to influence people to think independently we must not go after the adults but rather the youth. The governments been doing that for years. Look where its got them.

[Fitter]

Alex carnavas, on 14 October 2009 - 07:54 PM, said:

I see. Knowledge is a infinite road that can take us beyond the fringes of sanity, to the deepest holes on this earth, or even to a point where we no longer need to look towards the heavens for answers to the simple yet very complex questions to our existence wouldn't you agree?

Also something i forgot to mention: Its been well documented and im sure proven that toddlers all the way to adults (even though in adulthood most never realize it) mimic what the people around them are doing thus learning to walk, and speak. So if we learn so much from one another what example does that set to the youth when they see men/women/children on the news being murdered by a drunk or the war in Iraq? Or mans obsession with global economic domination? If we want to make a difference in the world which you seem to want to do trying to influence people to think independently we must not go after the adults but rather the youth. The governments been doing that for years. Look where its got them.

Actually, you don't have to look too hard to find enough "good news" to counter and balance the "bad news" that is force fed to us through the media, day in day out. It may not be so simple to attribute evil in this world to a self-perpetuating cycle of monkey-see monkey do...
Take that in conjunction with the fact that wars, murder and even drunkenness is portrayed in a bad light in life and the media, points to a deeper set of associations within the psyche. All in all, just because we see it, does not mean we want to do it.

Knowledge is power, that much is true, but power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. The governments of the world generally have the masses where they want them... in a state of treated and manipulated information and dis-information. It's all in the delivery and generally all calculated down to the last, smallest point; evident in the way all the bad news on a TV news show is usually rounded off with a small item of a feel-good factor nature. Leave the people with a morsel of happiness so that they wont be too weighed down with all the bad they've just been fed ! In England, the important news is rounded off with sport and the weather forecast... the great British conversation standby !
The problem one would encounter with "going after the youth" as you put it, is that one has to be so much more careful to not be accused of indoctrination, inculcation or manipulation. The youth are easily led, and that's not always a good thing, is it ?

And who is to say that the civilization we hold so dear is not only based on that complex multi-tiered system of knowledge and control, but depends on it to survive ?

F

[Alex carnavas]

Hm.. I see where your coming from fitter. Though ill choose to focus upon that last bit you said "And who is to say that the civilization we hold so dear is not only based on that complex multi-tiered system of knowledge and control, but depends on it to survive ?" The people that iv'e known thus far have shown to be very 'captivated' shall we say by the world, and the way its being led. They would rather be fed lies for the rest of their lives than bare witness to the truth, or even remotely begin to acknowledge the FACT that the world is pretty F***ed up.

The media is also obviously manipulated and you paint a very good picture i never thought of it in that light.

Also "All in all, just because we see it, does not mean we want to do it." This statement is mostly wrong for a couple simple facts. You said this yourself: the youth are easily swayed and manipulated by whatever the media is stimulating them to believe -i should know i still attend high school- , and that most people want two things from life: Money, and power. Monkey see monkey do?

[Mr Walker]

coberst, on 14 October 2009 - 08:40 PM, said:

The more one learns the greater grows their domain of recognized ignorance. The domain of our recognized ignorance never shrinks; it grows exponenially with every question we ask and every answer we study.

Agreed. It is like the surface area of bubble or ballon. As the volume of knowledge within the bubble increases, so to (probably exponentially) do the points of contact on the surface of the bubble, where we recognise contact with a much greater unknown.
A small bubble (Of limited knowledge) only has contact with a small part of the unknown, but as the bubble expands (even if it almost encompasses every possible piece of knowledge) that surface interface simply keeps getting bigger.

[Fitter]

Alex carnavas, on 15 October 2009 - 10:41 AM, said:

Hm.. I see where your coming from fitter. Though ill choose to focus upon that last bit you said "And who is to say that the civilization we hold so dear is not only based on that complex multi-tiered system of knowledge and control, but depends on it to survive ?" The people that iv'e known thus far have shown to be very 'captivated' shall we say by the world, and the way its being led. They would rather be fed lies for the rest of their lives than bare witness to the truth, or even remotely begin to acknowledge the FACT that the world is pretty F***ed up.

The media is also obviously manipulated and you paint a very good picture i never thought of it in that light.

Also "All in all, just because we see it, does not mean we want to do it." This statement is mostly wrong for a couple simple facts. You said this yourself: the youth are easily swayed and manipulated by whatever the media is stimulating them to believe -i should know i still attend high school- , and that most people want two things from life: Money, and power. Monkey see monkey do?

I guess we will have to agree to disagree on the "All in all...." statement. Personally, I have been fond of sci-fi movies since I was a child, but I neither want to join NASA, nor pull on a Star Trek costume and re-decorate my house to look like the deck of the Enterprise ! But therein lies the backbone to the society that we have today. Some people do ! I believe that all those people whom you recognise as being happily oblivious to the way the world really operates are not there as a result of the world, but rather as a vital component that has made society.
Society needs variation, not just to enable a measure to be taken of what is worthwhile, what is poor and what is mediocre, but to survive. Without a scale of minds in every possible variation, the type of civilization that we recognise would not be possible. I believe that variation has to permeate every aspect of civilized life and takes many forms and multi-forms; to get back to the OP, even down to the relative intelligence, intellect and ability of each and every citizen. There has to be a classed society if you like, and Utopia has to be only ever a goal to reach for, never achieved.
It's the original necessary evil.

Look what happened to the Golgafrinchans.

F

[coberst]

National governments in the West have advanced from Monarchies to Republics. Societies have moved from rule by a monarchy aided by the aristocracy, to rule by a plutocracy subject only to ratification by the citizens of the republic.

It seems that, like the poor, we constantly have with us a privileged class. Is it possible to organize a well functioning democracy that does not support a privileged class?

Let me give you my definition of privileged class.

Fifteen years ago there was a humorous saying about George Bush the elder, which went something like this, “George Bush was born on third base and thought he had hit a triple”. My definition of a privileged individual is one who was born on “third base”.

Evidently many assume that the privileged classes are those who have higher IQs or some kind of natural endowment. I do not consider this to be privilege. The privileged are those who, by birth, are endowed with great wealth thereby being placed into a position of power and prestige without any meritorious effort on their part.

Can a democratic society function effectively if no individuals are allowed to inherit great wealth?

[Alex carnavas]

Fitter, on 16 October 2009 - 09:17 AM, said:

I guess we will have to agree to disagree on the "All in all...." statement. Personally, I have been fond of sci-fi movies since I was a child, but I neither want to join NASA, nor pull on a Star Trek costume and re-decorate my house to look like the deck of the Enterprise ! But therein lies the backbone to the society that we have today. Some people do !

I believe that all those people whom you recognise as being happily oblivious to the way the world really operates are not there as a result of the world, but rather as a vital component that has made society.
Society needs variation, not just to enable a measure to be taken of what is worthwhile, what is poor and what is mediocre, but to survive. Without a scale of minds in every possible variation, the type of civilization that we recognise would not be possible. I believe that variation has to permeate every aspect of civilized life and takes many forms and multi-forms; to get back to the OP, even down to the relative intelligence, intellect and ability of each and every citizen. There has to be a classed society if you like, and Utopia has to be only ever a goal to reach for, never achieved.
It's the original necessary evil.

Look what happened to the Golgafrinchans.

F

hahahahaha star trek
well you present a very good point fitter in that society and everything else that exists in nature needs a variation from microorganisms all the way to tigers and lions to whatever else perpetuates the cycle of life and death. But in that variation that you state lays the problem! What would happen if there where too many boar in an area such as Florida, down here its open season on them because theres simply too many! Im not saying we should go hunt people obviously. But theres too many unthinking ignorant ones.

This post has been edited by Alex carnavas: 16 October 2009 - 10:52 AM

[Alex carnavas]

coberst, on 16 October 2009 - 11:16 AM, said:

Can a democratic society function effectively if no individuals are allowed to inherit great wealth?

There obviously needs to be a great number of people appointed to running such a vast number things, but that does not mean we should allow said people such absolute power -absolute power corrupts i remember you sating- and control to do as they please. When they have everyones head open inserting their own ideas thoughts and control into them controlling the masses -metaphorically of course- then theres a problem. Guess what ? THERES A PROBLEM.

[Fitter]

coberst, on 16 October 2009 - 10:16 AM, said:

National governments in the West have advanced from Monarchies to Republics. Societies have moved from rule by a monarchy aided by the aristocracy, to rule by a plutocracy subject only to ratification by the citizens of the republic.

It seems that, like the poor, we constantly have with us a privileged class. Is it possible to organize a well functioning democracy that does not support a privileged class?

Let me give you my definition of privileged class.

Fifteen years ago there was a humorous saying about George Bush the elder, which went something like this, “George Bush was born on third base and thought he had hit a triple”. My definition of a privileged individual is one who was born on “third base”.

Evidently many assume that the privileged classes are those who have higher IQs or some kind of natural endowment. I do not consider this to be privilege. The privileged are those who, by birth, are endowed with great wealth thereby being placed into a position of power and prestige without any meritorious effort on their part.

Can a democratic society function effectively if no individuals are allowed to inherit great wealth?

Do you intend the contradiction in this post...?

'Privileged' is defined as "a special advantage, immunity or benefit not enjoyed by all"
The etymology of 'privileged class' would therefore come from the hereditary endowment of wealth or power, that much is true. However, the original wealth and power was historically won by the ancestors of those who inherit it. Would it be just or fair to deny the descendants their birthright, simply because it is greater or of more value than someone else's ? (In England, Inheritance Tax is one of the most unpopular taxes incurred today.)
By the same token, the surviving monarchies actually have very little personal wealth and wield even less, if any, executive power. This is a common misunderstanding made by those who do not live in a monarchy. The wealth, property, titles and position of monarchs are merely custodial. The Queen of England could not, for example, sell Yorkshire and retire to an island in the Bahamas.

By contrast, we still live in a world where the son of a steel worker can grow up to be a US$8.5 billionaire, an actor of Irish descent can become President of the most powerful country in the world, a teenage match seller can grow up to be 4th on the worlds rich list and a university drop out can have his computer product in the homes of nearly everyone on the planet. All are self made men. None of these had their wealth, power or influence given to them. For them, it was hard work and acumen, they didn't need to inherit.

Alex carnavas, on 16 October 2009 - 10:50 AM, said:

everything else that exists in nature needs a variation from microorganisms all the way to tigers and lions to whatever else perpetuates the cycle of life and death. But in that variation that you state lays the problem! What would happen if there where too many boar in an area such as Florida, down here its open season on them because theres simply too many! Im not saying we should go hunt people obviously. But theres too many unthinking ignorant ones.

You answer your own question here Alex carnavas. If there is an over abundance of one particular variation in any system, and an ability to do something about it, then that something is invariably done. Depending on perspective and conspiracy belief, one could argue that for our society it happened in 1918 and again in 1936. The next one would then be overdue... Have you really thought through why enough food is not sent to the starving in Africa ? Or why HIV is so proliferous there ?

Alex carnavas, on 16 October 2009 - 10:57 AM, said:

There obviously needs to be a great number of people appointed to running such a vast number things, but that does not mean we should allow said people such absolute power -absolute power corrupts i remember you sating- and control to do as they please. When they have everyones head open inserting their own ideas thoughts and control into them controlling the masses -metaphorically of course- then theres a problem. Guess what ? THERES A PROBLEM.

I disagree. Not that there's not a problem, there is; just not for everyone. If we four free thinkers here know that there's a problem, and are content just to post on a forum talking about it rather than doing something about it, then we are as culpable as those that are doing the controlling. Do we only have ourselves to blame ?
Our inaction must point to our acceptance of the situation.

F

[Alex carnavas]

Fitter, on 17 October 2009 - 12:01 PM, said:

I disagree. Not that there's not a problem, there is; just not for everyone. If we four free thinkers here know that there's a problem, and are content just to post on a forum talking about it rather than doing something about it, then we are as culpable as those that are doing the controlling. Do we only have ourselves to blame ?
Our inaction must point to our acceptance of the situation.

F

Sorry iv'e been away for a while.

And no F im not content to post my displeasure on an online forum, or wherever else.

[Fitter]

Alex carnavas, on 25 October 2009 - 12:51 AM, said:

Sorry iv'e been away for a while.

And no F im not content to post my displeasure on an online forum, or wherever else.

Good for you. What are you doing, or plan to do about this then ? Personally, I like things the way they are. I believe that all those drones are essential to the survival of our culture and civilization. They promote standards and desires far in excess of that which would be achieved if everyone were the same.

Just imagine it... Everyone sat around in togas eating grapes and discussing the meaning of life.. How boring..

F

[Alex carnavas]

Fitter, on 26 October 2009 - 01:36 AM, said:

Good for you. What are you doing, or plan to do about this then ? Personally, I like things the way they are. I believe that all those drones are essential to the survival of our culture and civilization. They promote standards and desires far in excess of that which would be achieved if everyone were the same.

Just imagine it... Everyone sat around in togas eating grapes and discussing the meaning of life.. How boring..

F

Hm.. grapes are delicious.. Nah your right haha

Though if your happy with an economy in shambles and destroying finite resources and exploiting children for labor then yours, and my views vary greatly.