Thread: Your hobbies outside of computers

Originally Posted by Nominal Animal

I've always hated learning by rote, and felt it is a total waste of effort -- the same goes for believing anything just because someone says so, no matter their "authority". Everything interesting has been discovered via questions, so believing something without questioning it feels just utterly worthless and stupid to me, on the visceral level.

This essentially defines me too. I almost always question so-called "common knowledge" and authoritative knowledge mostly because it is intrinsic to me this urge to understand the underlying principles and not because I rebel against authority or wisdom. I not only despise the idea of conformism, but -- and this is probably an even greater distaste -- I abhor being fed up the nose with some idea, concept or principle without any attempt at explaining it to me the whys and the why nots.

And some people cannot understand that questioning the validity of something generally accepted as true is a better way to understand the reasons behind that thing than just asking about them. By challenging the Truth with all sorts of obstacles and what ifs, we force its validation. But if we just ask why something is the way it is, we are not forcing its validation. We are simply asking for someone to write down the principles again -- which we already know all about. So it also annoys me greatly when someone gets all flustered up when someone else questions Truth.

But I'm also usually always searching and investigating exceptions to the Rules. I feel these are the most valuable as not only a means to understand why a certain rule exist, but also how it should be properly applied. And this shows probably nowhere better than in our profession; I shouldn't use floats for mathematical calculations? Of course I can!

Originally Posted by Nominal Animal

The downsides, starting from the genetics, up to deficiencies in social and communications skills, are a major issue. In particular, propagation of these downsides to another generation is definitely, completely out of the question. I wouldn't inflict these even to my worst enemy, and I happen to like kids.

The written word -- and the internet by extension for having given us the ability for instant written communication -- is a strong liberator for some people having to deal with lack of social or communication skills. Or so I think. Certainly not for everyone -- and certain social difficulties may remain a problem, like symptoms of withdrawal, or the results of depression, where the internet may actually be not a remedy but a poison. But generally speaking I always felt freer and more relaxed in the way I deal with people over here than I sometimes do out there.

Originally Posted by Nominal Animal

That is also why any condescending or patronizing or superior attitude in anything I write, is honestly a communications failure on my part.

Or a interpretation failure on the other part. We both were involved together in something similar just recently. And after your reply, I looked back at the your post that got a under my skin and I could no longer could see what was that I was complaining about.

Originally Posted by MutantJohn

Man, I've never felt more like a social butterfly O_o

I'm just a social butt. Err... *flies away*

Originally Posted by Mario F.

The written word -- and the internet by extension for having given us the ability for instant written communication -- is a strong liberator for some people having to deal with lack of social or communication skills. Or so I think.

This is true of myself at least.

There is also the consideration that I only have ever met 2-3 people in real life that pursue the same intellectual goals as me (that's total lifetime count). In fact almost all the people I've ever met just don't seem to have any pursuits at all. It's always a refreshing thing to see people with interests, doubly so when they align with my own.

Originally Posted by MutantJohn

This part is interesting to me. What do you mean when you say "herd"?

Think High School clicks. Also check out Stanford Prison Experiment. Herd mentality is a powerful factor in human behavior. It doesn't always have a negative influence (it enforces both bad and good things arbitrarily). Sometimes, like in the prison experiment there will be a "feedback loop" where a group is isolated and it leads to more extreme behaviors though.

Despite it not being all bad, I don't see it as a good thing because of the arbitrary nature of the ideas being enforced. You can see this at play with almost all ideologies, nations, clicks, ect. There is always some group of people who isolate themselves from dissenting opinion and before you know it they're drinking the Kool-Aid (a reference to when buying into a groups mentality leads their destruction).

Originally Posted by MutantJohn

This part is interesting to me. What do you mean when you say "herd"?

The Wikipedia article on herd mentality is pretty descriptive.

Higher brain functions, like rational thinking, just seems to shut down and people go full auto on hind-brain. No rational thought, just social cues and base instincts. The intelligence of the herd is roughly the intelligence of its stupidest member, divided by the size of the herd.

Just think about it: people have died because others trampled them to death in their desire to exchange pieces of paper for stuff they don't need, or really want. Only a herd stampedes.

Originally Posted by Alpo

It doesn't always have a negative influence

In my opinion, anything that inhibits rational thought is by definition negative influence. As social animals, social pressure can be a good thing, but it does not necessarily have anything to do with herd mentality.

Originally Posted by Nominal Animal

In my opinion, anything that inhibits rational thought is by definition negative influence. As social animals, social pressure can be a good thing, but it does not necessarily have anything to do with herd mentality.

That is sort of my thinking as well. Not that it's morally wrong, just not preferable at least. It reminds me of this question from a philosophy lecture uploaded on YouTube:

"If you had the choice to be an extremely happy animal, or a moderately discontented human being, which would you be?".

I mean the animal could be very happy, but without any self awareness, does it really amount to being able to experience things? It seems relevant when asking if it's good to allow instinct to rule our actions/thoughts, so I thought I would pass it along. (Plus thinking about it that was has helped me a few times when feeling bad and stuff ).

Originally Posted by Alpo

"If you had the choice to be an extremely happy animal, or a moderately discontented human being, which would you be?".

A non question, really. Some concepts cannot be addressed in such simplistic terms. It's the type of questions that will always have only wrong answers or a rights answer, depending on how you rock your boat. I usually refuse to get into such... puerilities.

The fallacy of the question reside on whether we can conjugate an animal with the feeling of happiness, as you well pointed out. This is yet a source of debate (although I would go against your notion that animals don't have self awareness). But there's yet another more fundamental lie in that question; The idea that happiness is something you choose.

"You can be happy if you really want to", and other variations on the same theme, is about the most insidious lie you can hear and a source of much unhappiness.

>> What is the complex conjugate of a nominal animal?
dESCRETE pLANT?

gg

Originally Posted by Mario F.

It's the type of questions that will always have only wrong answers or a rights answer, depending on how you rock your boat.

That is sort of the point, it's a philosophical question. It doesn't have an objective correct answer, just subjective ones.

Originally Posted by Mario F.

But there's yet another more fundamental lie in that question; The idea that happiness is something you choose.

Getting in an argument over this would lead to frustration, I choose not to do so. :P

Originally Posted by Mario F.

"You can be happy if you really want to", and other variations on the same theme, is about the most insidious lie you can hear and a source of much unhappiness.

The most insidious lie? Well again it's sort of subjective, but I can think of several other real life examples of lies off the top of my head that have lead to mass death, genocide, ect.