?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Semiformalishmaybe

Mental Plans

I realise that I've said something on my OkC profile that's maybe better said here (my profile there is pretty philosophy-heavy, which I think is pretty reasonable because if someone isn't into continual mental development, I probably wouldn't get along with them). Yeah, I kind of go nuts over there in writing little essays on the thousands of questions they have to help people find better matches; I am overflowing with opinions and judgements, yay. Anyhow, if/when I start dating again, I expect to take all that stuff back down (monogamy plus being on a dating site seems pretty halfhearted to me), so I'll list and expand a bit on the principles here.

Eight ideas that form a basis for the not-deeply-philosophical part of my worldview:

  1. Avoid or subvert unhealthy things, e.g. fast food, pop, advertisements, TV.
  2. Be very careful with your loyalties. Do not be loyal to nations or political parties. Do not idolise anyone at all. Hold only your ideals high.
  3. A good understanding of the self involves accepting a number of unpleasant truths. Do so with grace. Accept criticism. Be wary of praise (it leads to ego, is often a path to manipulation, and breeds mental dependence on praise that blocks the kind of mental independence thinkers should have)
  4. We're all in it together as a species. Not everyone agrees on the public good; we should all work to both define and advance it. Excessive individualism is damaging to the individual and to society.
  5. A focus on material things distracts people from important things like art, culture, nature, personal relationships, and reflection. Economics may be necessary for a number of worthwhile things in society, but they are not the point of society or human life.
  6. Humour is important to sanity. The ability to laugh at oneself is precious. This goes moreso for movements; anytime a movement criticises too much, it is likely obsessive and rotten even if its cause is just.
  7. In the vast majority of issues and problems, there are no simple, unitary answers. Occasionally there are, but usually there are instead numerous reasonable approaches. When there are numerous reasonable approaches, staunchly defend that multiplicity against those attempting to build a mental consensus on one solution (consensus on action can be reasonable, consensus of perspective is dangerous). I think this is the end form of my initial (inherited from my father) contrarian intuitions.
  8. Seek a wide variety of ideas (even those that conflict with each other) that provide analytical power in understanding people, things, and events from many angles. Use those ideas, if possible, to create separate and competing "philosophical agents" within oneself, and engage in inner debate as second nature in order to try to build a perspective as much wider than that of non-internally-multiple people as is possible within one single-bodied person. Have an inner Muslim, inner Christian, inner Judaist, inner Libertarian, inner this and that and everything else, and let the debates never end.
Things I'm planning to write about (or considering):
  • A comprehensive analysis of the Geek Feminism Wiki, which gets a number of things right but also has significant brain-damage in how it shapes dialogue
  • Various philosophical/moral proposals that some parts of me have proposed that I'm trying to evaluate
  • Exploration of and criticism of masculinity and femininity, and a sketch towards the good place they're both distracting us from
  • Principles of pluralism under Enlightenment Liberalism (as opposed to multiculturalist Liberalism)
  • More detailed critique on why I think that men-should-cross-the-street-to-avoid-women-under-some-circumstances proposal is rubbish and even suggesting it makes one an ass
  • Freud and the Spearhead - Expanding on my analysis of why some conservatives take joy in driving inefficient, polluting cars as a cultural marker into why and how the Spearhead (and other masculinist sites) advocate against civilised values, and how we can effectively shatter that spearhead.
  • Theory of layered levels of advancing civilisation (expanding on the tension between Machiavelli's virtu and Freud's repressions-serving-society)
  • Celebration of dialogue and its expansion as mediated by modern social tools (yes, you should discuss politics and religion in public; shatter that tabboo)
  • Outlines of what it means to identify as a philosopher, and why people should identify as such more primarily than being green, feminist, liberal, socialist, or any other good things they might consider identifying as.

Comments