The former seems like a common sense philosophical position, the latter sounds more like depression than a philosophical position, I think. — bloodninja
For a start, how did you come to the conclusion that beyond satisfying our hunger and the need for proper temperature and shelter, that human actions are nothing more than self-deception or pretending to do something meaningful? That we have a propensity for 'hope', or an urge to explore what's beyond, or even philosophize could be very well be on par with satisfying our biological need for food.
I refuse to believe that human efforts and activities are, at best, a bullshit refinery that runs twenty-four hours a day to keep our mind at peace. — Caldwell
How can that be a deception? It is not a proposition, and only propositions can be deceptions. People either value things because they can't help but do so or they choose to value them. Either way, there is no proposition, so no scope for a deception.
Are you suggesting that people tell themselves they value a particular goal, when they don't really? That would be a self-deception, but how could we ever guess whether somebody was doing that? — andrewk
It's that they place value on goals in the first place. Nothing is really determined. We don't have to be motivated by anything, but we CHOOSE to. we conjure goals to work towards, but unlike other animals, we have no determined reason to work towards anything. A bird cannot help but do its thing, we can. We choose to conjure up motivation. — schopenhauer1
interesting discussion. Just wondering how it is possible to choose preferences? I feel it is more accurate to articulate preferences as something we are thrown into by way of our moods and our self-understanding. — bloodninja
The difference between human beings and other animals in relation to this matter, is not that we place value on goals, but that we identify value, and we name it. So all the animals you describe in their activities act accordingly because they place value on the various things and so carry out those acts because they value them. Human beings recognize this as holding "values", and name it as such. Some of us, like you, want to create an artificial separation between human beings acting because they value something, and animals acting because they value something. That is self-deception. — Metaphysician Undercover
This mattering is basic and is not chosen. — bloodninja
You can only speak for yourself here. Maybe you feel you are deceiving yourself, but you can have no idea whether others are. Neither can I or anybody else.The deception is believing the goals are anything but self-imposed — schopenhauer1
If there is a choice, it would be so binary as to be improper to conflate with human goals which are linguistically based and with a much higher degree of freedom of choice. — schopenhauer1
There are plenty of examples of fathers who chose not to play that role. — schopenhauer1
It may be culturally-derived. — schopenhauer1
My opinion is that a young person who loves animals, dreams of being a vet and studies really hard to qualify to enter the vet degree at uni, then works really hard in the aim of getting into a really good vet practice, is not deceiving themself at all. They dearly want something, and they strive to achieve that something. — andrewk
That psychological self is always a biological or social construction. It arises embedded in a living context that determines its nature. — apokrisis
But the irony is that that image of the human condition is itself a social construction - a product of a particular time in the development of the theories of physics, coupled to the romantic reaction that image of nature engendered. — apokrisis
Whether it is culturally derived or not is irrelevant as far as mattering is concerned. You never choose mattering. Think about it phenomenologically. — bloodninja
By this I mean that we have to deceive ourselves that what we are doing is meaningful — schopenhauer1
I contend that we do choose mattering. We choose to care. — schopenhauer1
So when we make decisions, we are making it on a species level? I don't compute. — schopenhauer1
However, who actually MAKES the choice? It is not the species, but the individual... — schopenhauer1
But how are the individuals not responsible for choices of motivation? — schopenhauer1
it is still the individual who takes upon whatever role or goal to work towards. — schopenhauer1
I am not disputing that. What I am questioning is what support you have for the belief that everybody is deceiving themself. I don't think the average animal-loving vet student has an opinion, or cares, whether their goal is given or created. They just want to achieve it. The same goes for short-term mundane goals like 'I want to go for a bike ride'.Again, the motivation is not given, it is created. It need not be a long-term goal. It can be very mundane goals. — schopenhauer1
we are in a constant state of having to believe that any move or decision is one even worth making. — schopenhauer1
Now we can imagine cutting ourselves off from our fellow humanity so entirely that we become your atomistic individual, alone in its cosmic sea of burden and futility. Indeed, there is whole genre of culture where you can learn to take precisely that attitude. You can find "yourself" among the like-minded by sharing the right texts and manuals.
But at the end of the day, you can't escape the reality that being socially constructed comes first. If you want to construct some absolute kind of psychological individualism, that is going to come after the fact. And considered sanely, what could be the point? — apokrisis
I am not disputing that. What I am questioning is what support you have for the belief that everybody is deceiving themself. I don't think the average animal-loving vet student has an opinion, or cares, whether their goal is given or created. They just want to achieve it. The same goes for short-term mundane goals like 'I want to go for a bike ride'.
I want to go ride my bike now for half an hour or so. And I will. Do you believe I am deceiving myself? How so? — andrewk
Why is this any more interesting than being in a constant state of needing access to food? — Jake
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.