How about via solar powered drone? ;) who cares if it’s been done before, pretty sure Descartes said something along the lines of there being nothing so profound and original that it’s not been said by one philosopher or another before. It’s like all those fucking plutocrats who think they are one of a kind when the goal of making money has quite frankly been done to death and is so second millennia yknow?

Sure not everything is great, but you can make it better. — Mark Dennis

As I mentioned in my other response. The problem is when your actions toward 'making it better' are the very things the next generation finds constitute 'not everything is great'.

Maybe I’m a bit less ‘hippy’ though. The term ‘love’ seems a bit overused and ambiguous for my liking.

Okay I see, understood.

Alright, Sir Righteous. Seems you know exactly what you're talking about. /s — Swan

A little too uncompromising was I? Maybe so. I think I am just losing patience with philosophizing by way of equivocation. Start with a premise X, then start arguing as though X means Y. Pessimism is not a "broad" term. It literally means, 'tending to see the worst.' The normative denotation is already built in to the term and it is negative. So optimism vs. pessimism? Easy choice.

Maybe I’m a bit less ‘hippy’ though. The term ‘love’ seems a bit overused and ambiguous for my liking. — I like sushi

Yea. I didn't mean it in a hippy sort of way, though.

I mean that we’ve been stuck in a world (humanity), for a long time, where ethical ideas and law have taken away human choice and responsive social activity.

Forming ethical ideas and law IS a form of responsive social activity though?

Morality and ethics is largely the study of value theory. Unless I meet a human that values absolutely nothing then I’ll not believe there is no such thing as ethics and morality because all life seems to keep going on valuing things. I mean, even rocks have the value of their own being without being aware of it. That rocks exist is a fundamental value statement in and of itself because it’s intrinsically more than nothing. 0 vs 1.

You right now are getting something you value out of engaging in discussion. You even value the idea that there is no morality, yet you are valuing.

Now, you could be right to say that if what we call reality is a computer simulation in some larger universe that it may be that this “real” universe has no morals or value. However, this is pretty implausible because it implies that the computer simulation we may be in is purely abstract and not based on anything that exists in that reality, which wouldn’t really match up with the fact that our video games try to emulate parts of reality and the ones that are mostly abstract (because they cannot be purely abstract) are usually more simplistic than the ones we base on reality. Take gravity for example; if this is a simulation, where did the idea for gravity come from? Is there a gravity like force in a larger universe that is the inspiration for the simulations gravity?

Yet if we can know we are in a computer simulation we can know two things, that the beings there who made the simulation value computer simulations, and that they value.

Now I’m not sure I buy simulation theory; however the idea that value doesn’t exist is mathematically incorrect as we are all beings greater than 0.

Sometimes "morality" refers to rules and rule following.

Can you see how that if I command you to value birds (when you don't of your own sentiment), then your actions will be hollow, and you'll likely drop it when you realize I have no power over you?

Morality is often for show, as Jesus is said to have pointed out.

Can you see how that if I command you to value birds (when you don't of your own sentiment), then your actions will be hollow, and you'll likely drop iy when you realize I have no power over you?

An interesting perspective. So for this we will hypothetically say that you are my teacher. Which I actually do identify you as because I don’t believe in a student teacher relationship, only ever teacher - teacher because people cannot interact without teaching the other about themselves.

So you my teacher have commanded me to value birds, (I love birds haha) one day I realise that you have no power over me. Have I stopped valuing you?

...I don't know, I'm a little worried. I live in a waterfront community (Virginia) and it's very evident tides have risen. Some docks and streets are flooding at high tide where they haven't flooded before. And some people are spending money raising their docks. And much of Tangier Island/Chesapeake Bay is under water now.

I hear Florida is worse... . The direct cost impact will certainly be associated with Government backed FEMA flood insurance claims (which to get a mortgage everyone is required to have in a flood zone or otherwise purchasing any waterfront property).

That’s awful! Are you safe right now? I think we need to maybe have conversations about where people can definitely not survive climate change and that is coastlines for sure. :/ apparently the bay here (Boston) flooded yesterday with heavy rain during high tide. Moving to Chicago soon.

As a species we're wired to deny that we're ever fucked - especially by our own wishful negligence. Except for fringe types, homo insapiens refuses to be pessimistic enough to grapple en mass with the hazards trending (above) and so they'll go on 'amusing themselves to death' until they're begging to die rather than watch each other's babies starve or slowly waste away from thirst in briny drowned cityscapes. The optimistic cunts who wage wars feeding masses of other optimistic cunts down abattoirs of convenience, profit or ruin always do so again because THIS TIME IT WILL BE DIFFERENT; the latest and greatest war to come: surviving the "climate change" (near?)extinction event. AND THIS TIME, FOR US, IT WILL BE DIFFERENT ... for fuck's sake.

This is pretty raw and real.. Are you okay? Nobody is saying, this time it will be different. At least I’m not, there will always be a next fight to move onto... but we’re probably not going to be around for those. The thing is though in some way the future is always different, I mean we made up a system to track the time and log phases of when light is and isn’t hitting us. its ridiculous to think that most humans celebrate their birthday every year when in reality the day never really came back.

This is where we’d say that narrow pessimism is crippling, because when in the midst of tough situations there is always someone who freaks out and says “we are all going to die” and it’s easy to be that guy because given enough time you’re always proven right. That’s not the same as saying “we are all going to die right now by this tragedy” and you don’t know that.

I mean, you need to think about it like this; those elites at the top who are benefiting from all this. They want you to be narrowly pessimistic so you don’t raise a finger to them.

I will tell you something though, everyone reaches a point where biology takes over and the self saving optimism kicks in. You see it in people who run away from tsunamis. Their mind knows it’s a lost cause but the body still spurs you to run away as if you have a chance. However, for the ones only a short distance from higher ground, they have a chance. There will always be survivors. Banding together sooner rather than later is better than doing nothing at all and fighting your bodies survival mechanisms in reality is a form of suicide.

...oh thank you kindly Mark for your well wishes! No, we are good for now, it's just at high tides combined with, as you say, heavy rain events. I kinda hate to move because of all the nature and beauty here/feels very spiritual to me (I live on the historic Chickahominy River-you know the Chickahominy Indians/Pocahontas married first Colonist John Rolfe/Williamsburg Colony, etc. etc.).

Anyway, you are certainly used to colder temps which is fine, not to mention you not having any sea- level/elevation concerns in parts of Illinois. Though I'm assuming Chicago is at risk?

I applaud you for the thread. I think too, we need more public awareness of the issue. Politically, the Global (participation) challenges are real... .

https://news.wttw.com/2018/10/10/what-global-warming-could-mean-lake-michigan

While shore levels aren’t being cited as a worry here, it is not all sunshine and roses. Bacteria levels will need to be addressed, introduction of warm water fish. At the moment though, if the water contamination can be curbed, the lake states will be a source of fresh water for awhile.

Realistically though, retirement and setting up shop in Siberia is from what I can make out of my research, is probably going to be one of the best places to be for survival. While other places are becoming too hot, Siberia will be becoming lush fertile farmland. Although, the melting permafrost also has the potential to release ancient bacteria and viruses although I need to do more research on that to figure out if that fear is legitimate.

Thank you kindly for your well wishes too! Please keep safe as you can.

Thank you for the article Mark....this issue is very far reaching...awareness is key.

Thanks again.

A little too uncompromising was I? Maybe so. I think I am just losing patience with philosophizing by way of equivocation. Start with a premise X, then start arguing as though X means Y. Pessimism is not a "broad" term. It literally means, 'tending to see the worst.' The normative denotation is already built in to the term and it is negative. So optimism vs. pessimism? Easy choice. — Pantagruel

Sure, but I've composed no argument, only presented an alternative to your (shallow) dependency on the equivocate definition of pessimism that is devoid of any explanation of what pessimism is in the context of the discussion.

Pessimism does not have a "broad" definition or a "broad term" - definitions and terms are not required to philosophize but analyzed to what extent they are useful in the particular context - I find your definition of 'pessimism' insufficient and more psychological than it is philosophical - reflecting further we see that 'pessimism' isn't just "expecting the worse" - but comes about from a reasonable observation, examination, and evaluation of particular/unique circumstances (of reality) & cost/benefit analysis - not just an emotional reaction to ongoing state of affairs nor is it necessarily reached by some negativity bias as you are trying to pass off.

It's just like that one discussion months ago from people trying to make "hate" merely an emotion - where I pose the distinction between 'hate' and 'hatred' & other meaningless words that need to be redefined - (which isn't just an emotion - I dislike bananas), but doesn't explain the manifestation of it in the form of someone's identity & requires 'foundation' to be put into practice - and/or an institutionalization of some sort, some rapport to seem superficially interesting from something like 'disgust' or any other emotion in the book; yeah people that claim to dislike Asians may or may not be 'racists' - or even the lack the power to be so, but sure, Asians make them emotionally uneasy, so what?

Go back and read my post and you'll see what I'm talking about.

I see that you are taking liberties with the unambiguous concept of pessimism. If you want to create some ad hoc, doctored up definition of some emotive/motive state that is fine, just don't call it pessimism. It derives from the latin meaning "the worst." An optimist actively looks for the best, a pessimist actively looks for the worst. Those definitions are adequate and complete in and of themselves. As to why people are pessimistic, that indeed may be up for grabs, but the simple fact of "being pessimistic" is what it is. You are conflating the causes and the results of pessimism with the state of being pessimistic.

So, all you can cough up from that post is another appeal to 'clear' 2+2=4 definitions? You do not want to reflect or discuss?

Well I have nothing else to say, then.

@Swan @Mark Dennis

In Soviet Russia pissing contest stops you. Now.

Optimism and pessimism are both inherently goal-directed, i.e. they both inherently transcend the existing context towards some future state of affairs. One is optimistic that things can be improved; one is pessimistic that things cannot be improved. Therefore both optimism and pessimism natively move towards some future state of affairs. Since optimism is melioristic (things can be improved) I opt for optimism, always. Either way, the fundamental orientation (choice) is sufficient to address the opening question as is.

My stipulations:

• Optimism is the expectation that things won't get any worse; and (somehow) things will get better. (Re: nostalgic)

• Pessimism is the expectation that things won't get any better; and (somehow - let me count the effin' ways) things will get worse. (Re: entropic)

• Realism Absurdism is the recognition that things will resist - or hurt / kill especially when neglected - requiring struggle no matter what is expected of or believed/not believed about them. (Re: adaptive; objective)

"... masses of other optimistic cunts ..."
—180 Proof

This is pretty raw and real.. Are you okay? — Mark Dennis

Cheerful af. And you - optimistic? :shade:

So you my teacher have commanded me to value birds, (I love birds haha) one day I realise that you have no power over me. Have I stopped valuing you? — Mark Dennis

I don't know. Was there a point you were trying to make?

:cool:

Optimism is the expectation that things won't get any worse; and (somehow) things will get better. (Re: nostalgic)

• Pessimism is the expectation that things won't get any better; and (somehow - let me count the effin' ways) things will get worse. (Re: entropic)

Isn’t generally saying “things” making this a bit too general? I don’t really think it is a case of we should only feel optimistic and we should always be pessimistic toward everything. Can a person not be optimistic that turning the key will start the car but pessimistic that it will make it out of the street at the same time?

To me, adaptive pragmatism demands evaluating what you should and shouldn’t be pessimistic or optimistic about. I can be optimistic about my ability to act to make better a pessimistic view of the future. As opposed to being irrationally optimistic about the future despite all the evidence of why you shouldn’t be optimistic about it. Our outlooks aren’t always uniform for every single thing.

Well first I’d just like to know where exactly you heard that Jesus said Morality is often for show? Where is that written exactly?

Forget the bird example let me ask something a little simpler. Is it a rule to value things or do we make rules around our values?

Why command that I don’t kill the bird? Does the teacher value the life of the bird?

Isn’t generally saying “things” making this a bit too general? — Mark Dennis

:roll:

Yeah sorry that was poorly written. My point is, saying we should be optimistic/pessimistic about things is quite non specific. Context and nuance is helpful

Well first I’d just like to know where exactly you heard that Jesus said Morality is often for show? Where is that written exactly? — Mark Dennis

It's in the NT. He accuses the Pharisees of making a show of morality. I'm not quite motivated enough to give you a citation.

it a rule to value things or do we make rules around our values? — Mark Dennis

You can't be made to value something. You can only be made to put on a show.

Why would we need to make rules around our values?

Oh you mean Matthew 23. He didn’t accuse them of making a show of morality.

Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples:

2 The Pharisees and the teachers of the Law are experts in the Law of Moses. 3 So obey everything they teach you, but don’t do as they do. After all, they say one thing and do something else.

4 They pile heavy burdens on people’s shoulders and won’t lift a finger to help. 5 Everything they do is just to show off in front of others. They even make a big show of wearing Scripture verses on their foreheads and arms, and they wear big tassels[a] for everyone to see. 6 They love the best seats at banquets and the front seats in the meeting places. 7 And when they are in the market, they like to have people greet them as their teachers.

- Matthew 23 v1-7

Simply put, Jesus is saying the Pharisees are hypocrites because they teach morality according to the laws of Moses but act immorally and against the laws of Moses.

You can't be made to value something. You can only be made to put on a show.

Why would we need to make rules around our values?

I don’t know about that, biology does a good job of making us value air, food, water etc. Maybe I’m faking it though, maybe I don’t really need food or water or air?

Well for example, you don’t make a rule “don’t kill” unless you value life in some way. Ethics is the study of value theory. I don’t really know how to put this any more simply for you.

Oh you mean Matthew 23. He didn’t accuse them of making a show of morality. — Mark Dennis

That's one scripture. You left out the part about white-washed tombs. The so-called Woes of the Pharisees are an important component to Jesus' message. Understanding that the Pharisees were legalistic but hollow sets the stage for his big ethical revolution.

To relate it to climate change, imagine someone who makes a show of insulating her house, but the office building she works in is practically a refrigerator in the summer due to air-conditioning. This isn't hypocrisy as in: "I'm professing it, but not doing it." This is a person who pays attention to details, but misses the bigger picture. In the same way, Jesus is supposed to have criticized the Pharisees for paying close attention to the way they washed their hands, but failed to pay attention to compassion and justice.

That isn't the point I was making, though. I was talking about nihilism.

I don’t know about that, biology does a good job of making us value air, food, water etc. Maybe I’m faking it though, maybe I don’t really need food or water or air? — Mark Dennis

You separate yourself from your biology? That's a neat trick.

Well for example, you don’t make a rule “don’t kill” unless you value life in some way. Ethics is the study of value theory. I don’t really know how to put this any more simply for you. — Mark Dennis

I don't think anyone alive made the rule "don't kill." We just follow it when it suits us. Sometimes we value life, sometimes we don't.

Truly becoming nihilistic isn't something everybody is going to do. It's not a way of thinking I'd recommend (or warn against for that matter.) It just comes.