5
October 1, 2006 at 6:43am
by Ian Great link from Jorn to a Wikipedia page on Cognitive Biases. Doesn’t include the “halo effect”, but plenty of variations on that and a lot more besides. Naturally I think it’s a good page, but I’m not biased, no honestly …
Flight To New Reason
And the wall of death is lowered in Times Square.
No-one seems to care,
They carry on as if nothing were there.
The wind is blowing harder now,
Blowing dust into my eyes.
The dust settles on my skin,
Making a crust I cannot move in
And I'm hovering like a fly
Waiting for the windshield on the freeway.
When taking stock I noticed that I started this Blog 2 days after September 11th 2001.
The lines of thought here had been keeping me awake at nights long before 9/11 woke the world. Nothing in this Blog has anything directly to do with those events, but I'm not alone in being awoken to the power of the Blog by their information aftermath. Perhaps in some small way the idea that western rational arrogance, which dogs progress in so many aspects of life, can be influenced by my puny efforts to bring alternative philosophies into the mainstream. Many greater people than I have tried before and failed over three millennia, so I'm not holding my breath. If 9/11 brings anything new to this ancient debate, apart from its awful significance, it is the fact that the antidote to classical logic is sure as hell not a flight from reason.
That way lies only evil.
The words "creative destruction" can never again be used lightly.
The Lights Went Out On Broadway.
There's something solid forming in the air,And the wall of death is lowered in Times Square.
No-one seems to care,
They carry on as if nothing were there.
The wind is blowing harder now,
Blowing dust into my eyes.
The dust settles on my skin,
Making a crust I cannot move in
And I'm hovering like a fly
Waiting for the windshield on the freeway.
Fly On A Windshield.
Copyright Peter Gabriel 1974
The Lamb Lies Down on Broadway.
© 2010 Psybertron Asks.
Moonlight theme by Blaze New Media
Powered by WordPress
5 Comments
#1. alice again 10.02.2006
this is a great link and kind of relates to my comment above.
There are links upon links and it will take some long time to get through it all.
Bottom line, we’re all phoneys, but we’re all phoneys so it’s OK.
#2. Ian 10.03.2006
Phoney’s is an odd choice of word Alice, as if there existed more perfect beings.
I’d say we’re all real … humans that is.
Better to work with reality than some non-existent idealisation I’d say.
#3. alice again 10.03.2006
ooops, certainly didn’t mean to infer a more perfect being. What would perfect be anyway?
I do agree that phoney is an odd choice of word, but I still think it applies. It’s just that we are never what we seem to be to ourselves or others.
#4. alice again 10.04.2006
just watched a video linked by sam which features dawkins. He calls the brain a simulator. And so now I have found a word to replace phoney (kinda close, you have to admit) we are simulators… simulating a reality which allows us to function.
#5. alice again 10.04.2006
ok, here I go again, trying to refine my idea. In your first comment you say i might be supposing a more perfect being. what I am supposing is that there is such a thing as reality. pure reality. what I am saying is that because of the way we are constructed we can’t ever get there, experience it…whatever.
Many have alluded to this phenomemon. Paul’s “looking through a glass darkly”, plato’s cave,…maybe even dennett’s cartesian stage?
not that we shouldn’t try to get closer, mind you, which is what science and maybe buddism try to do.
Leave a Comment