laklak wrote:Well, to be fair he'd probably get arrested if he followed through...

on stage, that is.

Thommo wrote:
I'm glad we agree that daily tasks may or may not provide satisfaction. Where exactly does that get your argument?

People who learn how to find satisfaction in performing daily chores/tasks are less likely to self-harm or commit violence.

People who learn how to find satisfaction in performing daily chores/tasks are more like to think and act rationally.

People who think and act rationally are more likely to strengthen the community.

wisedupearly wrote:

laklak wrote:

wisedupearly wrote:

Didn't Jimmy Buffet make a whole lot money by not following his own advice?

A flat out shitton. Now he's building entire communities where retiring boomers can go live the Margaritaville lifestyle, eat in Margaritaville restaurants, wear Margaritaville flip-flops, and go on vacation to Margaritaville resorts. Evidently doing that increases their self-respect and sense of community (look up Parrothead clubs, they do a lot of charity work). And I'm sure Jimmy's self-respect is just fine, too. Value and meaning have little to do with it, what with it being just opinions.

My philosophy can also be summed up as "Fuck it, Dude, let's go bowling". You pays your money and you takes your choice.

The text in the video said "Why don't we get drunk and screw"? Well clearly singing to massive audiences is exactly the opposite of getting drunk and screwing.

Singing to massive audience is part of the process of getting to the drink and screwing bit. Contrary to popular belief, drunk and screwing don't happen all on their own.

wisedupearly wrote:

Thommo wrote:
I'm glad we agree that daily tasks may or may not provide satisfaction. Where exactly does that get your argument?

People who learn how to find satisfaction in performing daily chores/tasks are less likely to self-harm or commit violence.

People who learn how to find satisfaction in performing daily chores/tasks are more like to think and act rationally.

People who think and act rationally are more likely to strengthen the community.

Those are all claims, which could be investigated empirically*, yes. What of it?

*Assuming some kind of definition for terms like "think rationally" and "strengthen the community" were provided, which they haven't been so far here.

"rational. ... Rational comes from the Latin word rationalis, meaning reasonable or logical. If you're rational, you do things based on logic, as opposed to impulse or whimsy. The original meaning in English was of something endowed with the ability to reason."
think rationally = mental process based on logic, as opposed to impulse or whimsy

Community: "a group of people living in the same place or having a particular characteristic in common."
To strengthen a community = to increase the stability and happiness of a group of people by decreasing the level of negative actions/attitudes.

Thommo wrote:
Those are all claims, which could be investigated empirically*, yes. What of it?

I see it as being rational (reasonable?) to say that the states described are highly desirable to both the individual and thus the community. As such, we should confirm what is possible and the degree of improvement achieved (if any).

Rational comes from the Latin word rationalis, meaning reasonable or logical. If you're rational, you do things based on logic,

Um logic has little to do with the real world..you can construct wonderful consistent flights of logic with no relevance to the real world.

You want evidence based....

Macdoc wrote:
You want evidence based....

I have the evidence of my experience. But clearly that will not impress/convince the skeptics.
rationalis is also associated with reasonable. Has a much more heuristic connotation.

Reproducible. For example most see the answer to the universe....but not all.

Then you must chase down the whys and how many. Very empirical ...little of logic.

Macdoc wrote:Reproducible. For example most see the answer to the universe....but not all.
We know the answer is 42 but not why.

Then you must chase down the whys and how many. Very empirical ...little of logic.

What is OUR big problem, in your opinion? Not enough logic?

What is OUR big problem, in your opinion? Not enough logic?

not sure about the collective OUR but inability to affect effective policy based on evidence looms large.

wisedupearly wrote:
I have the evidence of my experience. But clearly that will not impress/convince the skeptics.

Well no. If you were rational and skeptic, you'd appreciate that anecdote is very poor evidence and that is all you're offering.

wisedupearly wrote:"rational. ... Rational comes from the Latin word rationalis, meaning reasonable or logical. If you're rational, you do things based on logic, as opposed to impulse or whimsy. The original meaning in English was of something endowed with the ability to reason."
think rationally = mental process based on logic, as opposed to impulse or whimsy

Community: "a group of people living in the same place or having a particular characteristic in common."
To strengthen a community = to increase the stability and happiness of a group of people by decreasing the level of negative actions/attitudes.

wisedupearly wrote:

Thommo wrote:
Those are all claims, which could be investigated empirically*, yes. What of it?

I see it as being rational (reasonable?) to say that the states described are highly desirable to both the individual and thus the community. As such, we should confirm what is possible and the degree of improvement achieved (if any).

Ok, thanks for those.

Let's see where this gets us, by means of a simple example, summed up in a few questions.

(i) How much satisfaction do I take from performing daily chores/tasks at present?
(ii) How could I learn how to find more satisfaction in performing daily chores/tasks? And if this is not by an established method, why should I think this method will work?
(iii) How would I know if I had learned to take more satisfaction from performing daily chores/tasks?
(iv) The same questions as (i) - (iii) for the separate claim of acting rationally.
(v) How do I find out how stable and happy my community is? How do I find out what the rate of negative actions/attitudes is?
(vi) What are the additional, unforseen and unintended consequences of imposing this programme of societal change?
(vii) If any or all of this works, why should I believe it has anything to do with Socrates?

These are the sorts of questions that occur to me. There is no shortage of people claiming to have diagnosed societies' problems, and there is no shortage of people claiming to have found the solutions. On a daily basis I am assailed by information about far more concrete and well defined problems (like the Northern Ireland border) and I find that the vast majority of claims about simple solutions are implausible, or actively debunked. Obviously it's much easier to debunk a more specific solution that relates to a more specific claim (like reunifying Ireland, as I've had suggested to me quite recently).

Another example: Forced marriages are something I would definitely put in your category negative attitude/action. There are people who would solve this problem by banning all Muslims from entering Britain. There are people who would solve this problem by banning all people from certain countries (Pakistan, Bangladesh, Somalia and a few others) from entering Britain. There are people who would forcibly eject Muslims from the country. All of those solutions, could, theoretically work. They might, theoretically, solve the problem of forced marriages. However, they are all absolutely unthinkable because of the additional consequences, they are monstrously racist, they would cause trauma to families, to law abiding people, it would dispossess them of their homes, their rights, their property, their nationality, it would tear society apart, it would cause violence as people defended them from tyranny, it would be unspeakably and unthinkably worse in intruding into the space of negative attitudes/actions. It might be unlikely that your ideas would be in this category, and it certainly doesn't seem like they would to the same extremity, it's an illustration of why my questions are, to me, more than mere confected difficulties, but are real questions that I would need satisfactory non-cursory answers to if I were to take your suggestions seriously.

There are an awful lot of ways that a conjecture can fail to be borne out in reality. So whilst I acknowledge that you may believe your conjecture, what I require is evidence, otherwise I (and I speak for no other) will not be persuaded.

What is so rational about posting merit-less claims on a website where everyone secretly thinks you're a fucking idiot? What is so rational about being fodder for a bunch of bored intellectuals with an over-inflated sense of self-importance? And then, when rational opposition is presented by said intellectuals, their rationality and logic are dismissed in lieu of retaining a flawed world view?
What is so rational about creating a thread with the blatantly obvious goal of reinforcing one's own ill-conceived, irrational and incoherent world view that in no way comports with objective reality?

Of course, these are all philosophical questions and not directed at any one individual!

PensivePenny wrote:What is so rational about posting merit-less claims on a website where everyone secretly thinks you're a fucking idiot? What is so rational about being fodder for a bunch of bored intellectuals with an over-inflated sense of self-importance? And then, when rational opposition is presented by said intellectuals, their rationality and logic are dismissed in lieu of retaining a flawed world view?
What is so rational about creating a thread with the blatantly obvious goal of reinforcing one's own ill-conceived, irrational and incoherent world view that in no way comports with objective reality?

Of course, these are all philosophical questions and not directed at any one individual!

Comports with objective reality! The consanguineous provenance of our mutual Weltanschauung is all but confirmed.

Stop it Cito! You know I hate having to look up words. You, you... intellectual you!

PensivePenny wrote:Stop it Cito! You know I hate having to look up words. You, you... intellectual you!

I'm no intellectual. I am, however, a voracious aggregator of pithy aphorisms and acerbic remonstrances.

And pretty good at stringing together words into .... um....sentences!

wisedupearly wrote:
I have the evidence of my experience

Single person perspectives do not constitute evidence because they cannot be confirmed
Your experience is based upon subjective interpretation which could be less than reliable