Daunting at best, for one is not just trying to calm the mind. One is quite literally attempting to erase/nullify/annihilate the world. — Constance

To annihilate the world in this sense would mean erasing our internal model of the world. Clearly, that's not the case and practice is more like temporarily bypassing particular neural networks, perhaps strengthening some and weakening others in a more permanent way.

How? — Agent Smith

Well, he makes sense in many absurd ways. Take death for instance, we’re all bound to die one day so what actual difference does it make if we die 10 minutes from now or ten years from now. It makes sense that there is no difference, absurd as that may be. Or take Sisyphus for another instance, we can imagine him happy, absurd as that may be.

Does Camus make sense? Absurdly, yes.

Just finished reading The Stranger, incidentally, and it did in fact make perfect sense to me, though I felt that Meursault, the main character the tale, was absurdly contrived.

Perhaps the State is all that holds them from returning to some state of nature, like beasts. — NOS4A2

No, not like beasts. "Civilized" societies are more bestial. Statehood only took hold, it should be noted, in places where it could not be escaped.

I feel they have the "duty" of lying... — javi2541997

I feel it’s my responsibility to try looking for the truth and see issues from all sides, challenging as that can be at times.

Our debate started because you said I cannot prove with facts or arguments that media tend to manipulate us in order to get some benefits for some. — javi2541997

I would never disagree with that. Many many forms of media try to manipulate us with the intent to benefit some and not others. I asked you who and how. Eventually, it became clear that the how is by lying and the who is anyone who lies. Politicians lie in order to manipulate others. This has nothing to do with the integrity of the press.

Nevertheless, you defended that there are some media that act with integrity. Then, you put CNN reporting Donald Trump’s lies as an example. — javi2541997

I said that politicians lying has nothing to do with the integrity press. If CNN, or anyone really, went to a press conference with Trump and he told a lie, would it show a lack of integrity to publish what he said? No, because it would simply be publishing what he said. Would it show a lack of integrity to fact-check what he said? It certainly would if the fact-checking was not factual. Would it show a lack of integrity to not fact-check what Trump said? That depends on the nature of the individual or group reporting, what their principles are and what their audience's expectations are. For example, if Breitbart started faithfully fact-checking everything that Trump said their audience would dramatically shift. They would quickly lose Trump supporters and perhaps gain some Trump critics. Nothing would prevent Breitbart from doing that, though it would no doubt be devastating to their bottom line.

Newspapers and News Networks are in business to make money and they will therefore cater to their audience.

I still think media should be impartial, objective and avoid persuading people. — javi2541997

It's not clear if you mean that their right to free speech should be curtailed or if this is just wishful thinking, like casually saying that you don't think that people should lie.

You are using CNN as an example of integrity. — javi2541997

No, I wrote: “Trump is suing CNN because they frequently reported on his lies, particularly his Big Lie.”

… what about Fox News? They are always be a media support Donald Trump. — javi2541997

Should they be forced to do otherwise?

you, that don’t like Donald Trump, say that CNN is good press because they are uncovering all Donald Trump’s shit. — javi2541997

Again, I wrote: “Trump is suing CNN because they frequently reported on his lies, particularly his Big Lie.”

I did not say whether or not frequently reporting on Trump’s lies was a good thing.

You’re essentially saying that you can control people by lying to them. That has nothing to do with the integrity of the press. Indeed, Trump is suing CNN because they frequently reported on his lies, particularly his Big Lie.

Shouldn’t news networks be allowed the freedom that you have?
— praxis

Absolutely. But... are they really free? — javi2541997

So far you have neglected to explain how they are not free. You claim that politicians control newspapers and journalists but fail to explain how they control them. Is it by bribery or blackmail? Do gangs of armed thugs force them to do whatever politicians want? You also mention “ghost writers” who work for “powerful groups”. This is all meaningless without facts or anything substantive to support your claims.

If a news outlets wants to hire ghost writers they are free to do so. I’m not aware of any laws against hiring ghost writers. Ghost writers can also be easily fired, unless they have a strong union or something.

So you don’t know who they are or how they control the news and yet have no problem with defaming Breitbart on a public forum. Shouldn’t news networks be allowed the freedom that you have?

Anyway, getting back to the topic, I think that @introbert may have been attempting to introduce the concept of presentism to the issue, thought better of it, and then wisely chose to abandon the discussion. Presentism is the uncritical adherence to present-day attitudes, especially the tendency to interpret past events in terms of modern values and concepts.

Back in the day slavery and genocide were a-okay, or so say the anti-presentists. Everyone was doing it, and doing it was legal. It wasn't a-okay with those enslaved or in the process of being slaughtered, of course, and in fact we modern folk still value freedom and life. Imagine that, after two hundred years of progress and change, people still value freedom and life. The more things change the more they stay the same, it seems, doesn't it?

hooker costume — Merkwurdichliebe

Where do you live where streetwalkers can afford an outfit like that?

If you control the press then it’s no longer free though, right?
— praxis

Exactly and both political parties are guilty. — javi2541997

Maybe an example will help clarify what we are each trying to convey. Are you familiar with the Breitbart News Network? It's an American far-right syndicated news, opinion, and commentary website. You seem to be suggesting that a far-right party controls Breitbart. Who would that be exactly and how do they enforce their control?

If you control the press then it’s no longer free though, right?

If it’s serving then why is Trump grumpy about it?

Wait, what? Trump was defeated? I thought he “lost” because of voter fraud.

So the press should be firmly regulated by the government? :grimace:

Trump sues CNN for saying mean things about him.

I guess mere words matter after all, aye @NOS4A2 ? :lol:

I don't know you well enough to say something that might be understandable to you… — introbert

I’m fluent in English, if that’s helpful for you to know about me.

What most interests me is the part where you touch on “only now being looked at in a negative light”. What’s that about? Can you please elucidate on that?

the possession of artifacts held by colonial powers of colonized peoples are only now being looked at in a negative light — introbert

Your meaning is not clear. Could you please rephrase this for added clarity?

I think the topic here is over thought.

It ain’t over till the fat lady sings. — Deus

It's hard enough to take this seriously without half-baked jokes being thrown into the mix.

What is her art? She is a musician right? Does she always make music about such a topic? Is she particularly political? — I like sushi

I gave my impression of her as a performer or brand, if you will.

When Trump sells James Madison's crystal flute after the next American civil war, Lizzo's playing of the flute will have added to its selling value. — Nils Loc

That's a good point. Rather than defiling the object as some claim, Lizzo actually raised its value, and I would guess that it also, by design, raised awareness of treasures that the Library of Congress holds. How many Americans knew that there are crystal flutes, much less that Jimmyboy owned one and it could be seen at the Library of Congress? Few, I think.

I am not quite sure why I should care at all about this? — I like sushi

I think the question is what Lizzo's art stands for versus what the art of the crystal flute stands for.

I think it's undeniable that Lizzo's art stands for the empowerment of the marginalized, to some degree at least. She's a large woman, for instance, and unabashedly celebrates her shape. In some sense she is asking us to see beauty where we typically do not. That's what worthwhile art does.

The flute was made by Claude Laurent, a Parisian watchmaker and mechanic, in honor of Madison’s second inauguration. Apparently, the crystal flute is a novelty item and Lizzo is the first to have played the instrument so it's not revered for its performance quality.

I suppose the flute most distinctively stands for, by mere association/ownership, a particular founding father of the nation, James Madison. What does Madison stand for? Certainly not wokeness. Does that mean that the flute stands for anti-wokeness? It does, because people like Ben Crocker and Ben Shapiro are essentially saying that it does and those who are oblivious may follow their lead. It is their choice to claim what the flute stands for.

That’s weird.

He's actually alright. — Baden

:scream:

A website where Jordan Peterson is featured. :snicker:

A hyperactive DMN (default mode network) is not conducive to well-being, I think, and the simple solution is to engage in activities that deactivate the DMN, such as meditation, long walks on the beach, dropping acid, or whatever. It helps to relax.

And to be clear, I think a ritual may necessarily be social in nature.
– praxis

Not necessarily. Seppuku was a samurai ritual used when someone committed a big act of dishonour or disrespect. The act itself was accomplished in the pure loneliness. Most of the people found out what happened whenever they discovered the corpse. — javi2541997

In order to be non-social wouldn't a ritual need to be unique and developed by an individual and have no connection to others? Assuming that rituals help to strengthen social bonds, values, norms, and the like, what would the point of a personal ritual be?

Can’t someone just go through the motions of a ritual and another participant, in the same ritual, have a deeply meaningful experience?

And to be clear, I think a ritual may necessarily be social in nature.

I am a bit suspicious of calling every social interaction a ‘ritual’ for the reason I mentioned above (ie. Viewing everything as ‘Art’). I think that is just a lens we can use whereas a ‘ritual’ is not really about viewing the world. — I like sushi

I don’t think that you can get away with dispensing the lens view simply because a ritual may be deeply meaningful to one participant and completely meaningless to another participant. Maybe that’s what distinguishes a ritual from a shared activity, the depth of meaning it invokes.

If there are social services that can adequately take care of this man I don’t imagine it would take a lot of time to connect with them, but perhaps for some reason it does.

I mentioned Cheerio Ellen Boxes without any reference to sexual orientation, but to looks only. — Eros1982

Ellen is what some gay people look like. Is that not okay with Eros?

power and money are dominating politics. — Eros1982

Funny how that works!

Gay couples have never reproduced so we can make no change in the birthrate. — Bitter Crank

He didn’t think that through so well, as appears to frequently be the case.

Maybe Eros1982 holds the leftist view that sexuality IS constructed (rather than an essential feature), so that models produce whatever result that comes about -- male/female/gay/straight... — Bitter Crank

Eros keeps prattling on about norms and tradition, and that reveals a conservative nature, so either he/she is woefully ignorant or is trying to deceive and failing miserably.

no kid knows if Ellen is a gay or not..... but they can really get confused with a picture of Ellen looking like a boy and dressing like a man.

The more such pics they see every morning (when they eat their cereals), the more acceptable to them. — Eros1982

Google just informed me that a 2022 Gallup poll concluded that 7.1% of adult Americans identified as LGBT. It is a fact that there are gay people in the West, Eros. It would actually confuse children to deny these kinds of facts.

The question is, why do you want to deny these kinds of facts?

Claiming that I said things against gays is just a bad lying habit you have to get rid of... if philosophy really interests you. — Eros1982

If you're not bigoted against gay people then why would you have a problem with a gay model?

But your conclusion that I am prejudicial to gays does not follow from my argument that kids may be in need of models which lets say show feminine features in girls. — Eros1982

You wrote about how difficult it must be for children to grow up in a world with gay people, essentially. Gay people have always existed. It’s a fact of life and not some kind of modern ‘liberal’ invention.

It is beyond idiotic to claim that there is a lack of feminine models in Western culture, so you’re either a moron or you’re being dishonest.

You are suggesting that there’s a flaw in my reasoning but don’t say what it is. This is another instance of dishonesty by you.

Ellen is famously gay and you think she’s a bad model, therefore I conclude that you must be prejudiced against gay people.

Incidentally…

In all ancient cultures… — Eros1982

Again you appeal to tradition for legitimacy and this expresses a conservative slant. I don’t think that you are being honest in this topic.

I don't know.... but imagine how difficult must be for children growing up in a world where their cereals boxes have the image of a woman looking like a boy and dressing like a man (I am not inventing it, check Cheerio Ellen Boxes). — Eros1982

So you are clearly prejudiced against gay people. Who else are you prejudiced against?