Posts Tagged ‘naivete’

From hysterical to hilarious in only 961 lifetimes

December 11, 2014
  • Life is meant to be… whatever it is. I understand the functionality of an idea like “your life is meant to be calm, not distressed.” However, there may be an unexamined paradox in the post here:

    “Free will and choice are only appearances…made up to be enjoyed. As soon as there is identification with a someone who has free will and makes choices, suffering ensues…because the entire focus of attention becomes about getting what’s wanted and avoiding what’s not wanted.

    Life is meant to be easeful and joyful…a timeless dance with no dancer in particular.”




    Does the activity of focusing on getting “whatever one focuses on getting” always produce suffering? Not at 
    all. It is nonsense when stated so imprecisely. Of course… nonsense can also be useful…!

    If we are trying to avoid something (such as to avoid suffering by focusing on how life was meant to be calm and joyful, but not hysterical or upset), then does that produce suffering? Yes- it could produce suffering… for the idea of “attempting to totally avoid suffering” is understandable but perhaps naive.

    What if we accept that suffering might happen on occasion? What if we respect it and welcome it instead of being hysterical in a terror about possible future suffering and saying “I choose love over fear because love is better than fear and therefore I am never afraid?”

    A lot of things that “spiritual people” say are hilarious. Some of them do not seem to like that idea. They “just do not get it” … Or not yet.

    As for “identifying as a someone who has free will,” yes that CAN be the basis of agonizing and many related hysterias. However, the language of “I have free will” can be used without ANY of the hysteria or agonizing.

    To [the author of the above post], if you have “reached the opening,” it is not evident to me in your words. Someone recently told me that they “had a serious problem.” I thought it might be more of a seriousness problem.


  • “Everyone should always be playful” is not playful. It is
    … still the movement of agonizing.

    I recently labeled a few groups of people: naive fools (who have no idea of their naïveté), then arrogantly sincere cowards (who pretend or at least hope not to have any naïveté or fear or “anything negative” because of the depth of their terror), and then finally the courageous clowns. I personally have never met a naive fool myself, but I am sure that they exist because it says so in the holy book of the United Empires of the Surface of the Earth.


Naive Fools, Courageous Clowns, and Sincerely Hysterical Cowards

December 11, 2014

All humans begin completely naive. They believe what they are told- like about Santa Claus or US history or the idea of a living parasitic demon called cancer that can possess people and kill them.

As for the idea that there is a way to completely “cure” all naïveté, that may also be naive. Presumptions (and expectations) are part of cognitive functioning. Yes, they can lead to disappointment and so on- and eventually will- but that is only a problem for someone who is so unstable (such as economically unstable) that all expression of disappointment is deemed to be “life-threatening.”


We begin as naive fools. Then, some of us may notice that and so then try to fool other naive people in to believing that they are not ever naive (and maybe even never were).

In fact, we can get quite terrified that others may notice that we are naive, because then they might take advantage of us. We throw tantrums about other people’s naïveté. We could call those tantrums “hysteria” (Or even terror or shame or distress or panic or cowardice)… in contrast with the relaxed naïveté of the newborn or infant.


Finally, there is a stage of courage about the simple fact of naïveté. We can be attentive, but we can never cure humanity of naïveté, and any individual that can recognize patterns can on occasion be tricked (fooled, presumptively mistaken). We can be imprecise- but that is distinct from being so hysterically terrified that we construct sincere pretenses in order to attempt to deny any naïveté (or to distract from our own by pointing at someone else’s).

Note that it is also hysterical to say “I should have never been naive so how can I prevent all naivete in the future? It may be possible to withdraw from possible dangers toward safety- like turning off the TV or moving away from “the old gang.”

With courage, we can admit the simple reality of naïveté and admit our fears about being taken advantage of (plus our preferences for safety and prosperity and so on). While arrogant cowards are chanting their slogans about “saving the world from fear,” the courageous know that the cowards are simply avoiding their own shame about their own naïveté. They are distracting themselves from logic with their mantras of idealism.

With courage, we can be attentive to the contrasting possibilities of naïveté and prudence. We can be responsible for focusing on prudence and being cautious of naïveté.

“Please define geniune naivete.”

June 28, 2014
Naivete is to be introduced to ideas from other people and generally recognize the ideas, but without comprehension. Then, with presumptive trust in the accuracy of whatever one has been trained to presume, one goes about encountering reality….
a reality that includes experiences and information that may directly conflict with certain presumptions- or at least my naive understanding of them
In many cases, my own naivete can be passed to others (or the naivete of others can be passed to me). I mean the specific presumptions, like the Theory of Gravity.
The Theory of Gravity has long been established to be false. It has 2 big isses that I know of. Gravity is real, though, but the old theory ABOUT it is just imprecise.
issue 1: data from space establish that the equation for gravity is WAY off. That is why the theory of “dark matter” was concocted to preserve the unraveling theory of gravity.
issue 2: The “gravitational constant” has been shown to change over time. In other words, “gravity” is a mislabeling of some other attractive force
(as in electrmagnetism)
However, the theory is useful. If someone understands that the theory and equation are imprecise, then they are not naive about it. They can use it with an understanding that it is presumptive.
When one does not yet have the linguistic distinction “presumptiveness,” then one’s entire cognitive processing is “fundamentally naive.”
Naivete is, simply put, unrecognized presumptiveness. No big deal really.

What is unusually valuable about me?

November 5, 2013

What is unusually valuable about me?

 

English: Comparing precision and accuracy. (a)...

English: Comparing precision and accuracy. (a) is neither precise nor accurate. (b) is precise and accurate. (c) is precise but inaccurate. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 

Seek first to understand. This is far more valuable than to be understood.”

 

 

After decades of sincere naivete, I am now unusually perceptive. As for my capacity to produce either clarity or confusion in others, I can do either one quite well.

 

I expect there to be some clarity already as to the immense value of having highly accurate perceptions. When driving a car, it is better to have a clean windshield than a windshield covered with raindrops or fog or dust or mud. You already know that, right?

 

However, what about the value of influencing other people’s perceptiveness? If I can assess how perceptive someone is, then I may be interested in altering their perceptions. I could contribute to the accuracy of certain perceptions or reduce the accuracy of certain perceptions. I could also notice their presumptions (including false presumptions or misperceptions) and then either ignore, extend or reduce certain presumptions.

 

Accuracy and precision example

Accuracy and precision example (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 

 

Someone might think: “but all people SHOULD contribute to everyone else’s clarity!” I was programmed to share that presumption. How realistic is it?

 

In contributing to “everyone else’s” clarity, when would I stop? How would I select which people and which issues to focus on first?

 

What if I am not totally clear about something? What if I question my own perceptions and presumptions? Exactly how much time should I devote to researching and mastering a subject before I pause my research in order to contribute to someone else’s clarity?

 

 

The reality is that sometimes I may value contributing to a particular person’s clarity in a particular way (or otherwise influencing their perception about some issue that I consider to be a priority). An entire group of people might even be my exclusive priority for influencing their perceptiveness.

 

Also, some people are going to be more interested in interacting with me (relative to them interacting with other people). Further, everyone who is open to interacting with me is going to have their own priorities of specific issues that are of interest and value to them.

 

 

 

I am an avid researcher. I love to understand things- and certain things in particular.

 

The things that I have studied have included three broad categories. First is things that other people told me to be interested in (like in school or in a job). Second is things that I was not personally very interested in, but that I predicted would be interesting to other people (like in order to attract the interest and approval of others socially). Last would be things that no one told me to be interested in, but I just naturally found fascinating (even if some other people had actively discouraged me from exploring those topics).

 

I Like 'Smooth' Men (1946) ... 4 Steps to Grea...

I Like ‘Smooth’ Men (1946) … 4 Steps to Great Listening – Jumping to conclusions. (January 9, 2013 / 27 Tevet 5773) … (Photo credit: marsmet546)

 

Among the jobs that I have done, I have been an instructor preparing students to do well on college entrance exams. I did that for most of the 1990s (most of that time working for a nationwide leader in the industry).

 

For just a few months in the year 2000, I also was a math teacher at a public high school that was basically a “second chance” school for students that had not been thriving in a regular public school setting. So, I got a lot of exposure to different levels of motivation among the various people I was instructing.

 

 

The most committed people were typically people who were entering graduate school (such a law school or an MBA program). They had personally paid around a thousand dollars to be part of my class.

 

Less committed in general were the “high school kids” who were entering college. Their parents were paying a thousand dollars for them to be in that class, not them directly. Some of them clearly considered the class to be an infringement on their teenage social life.

 

Even less committed were the “second chance” students. They might not simply be unmotivated, but even directly resistant. They might be terrified of getting frustrated with math because of past experience, so they may actively rebel, avoid, distract, withdraw, and so on.

 

'Helplessness' from 'The Expression of Emotion...

‘Helplessness’ from ‘The Expression of Emotions in Man and Animals’ London 1872. Charles Darwin (1809-1882) (Photo credit: National Media Museum)

 

Representation of high precision and low accuracy.

Representation of high precision and low accuracy. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I am quite a good math instructor (and private tutor). One reason is that I understand math better than most people. Students who learn from instructors who do not know math very well are more likely to get frustrated.

 

Mathematics is about analyzing some information to compute one or more solutions. One unusual thing about math is the idea of multiple solutions (especially in a school setting in which students have been programmed to expect to be confronted with multiple choice or true/false responses).

 

Math problems not only can be solved in a variety of ways, but multiple solutions may be equally valid. For instance, a simple algebra problem might be “find the square root of 9: x^2 = 9.” Most people will immediately say 3.

 

3 is correct, but it is an incomplete answer. The precise answer is that both 3 and -3 are the square rootS of 9.

 

 

Is this example important? Not in particular. However, it is an example of something that mathematicians tend to know better than most people: there can be more than one valid solution to a particular computation or issue.

 

Some people might find that confusing. Mathematicians probably would not.

 

For instance, there is only one way to make a square that is 9 square feet in area. However, how many ways are there to make a rectangle with an area of 9 square feet? The answer is infinite. Not only could a rectangle be 2 feet by 4.5 feet or 9 feet by 1 foot, but many other dimensions.

 

To say “a square with an area of 9 square feet” is very precise because a square is a very specific kind of thing. However, to say “a rectangle with an area of 9 square feet” is not as specific.

 

Representation of high accuracy and low precision.

Representation of high accuracy and low precision. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 

Why do I mention this? Because, oddly enough, some mathematicians often understand language better than almost all other people.

 

A “shape” with an area of 9 square feet is even less specific than a “rectangle” that is 9 square feet in area. The shape could be a circle or a rectangle or an oval or a hexagon. “Shape” is an extremely broad linguistic category (while square and circle are very specific).

 

 

So, different people will have different understandings of how language works. Those who are confused about the nature of language will be much less able to experience accelerated learning than those who are clear that language involves sets of categories of varying precision.

 

But what is the function of language itself? It is simply for directing behavior (as in governing or mind control).

 

How is behavior directed? Through influencing not only perception itself, but also the interpretative models for relating to whatever is perceived. In other words, behavior is directed by influencing people’s values as well as their perceptions.

Not only can their perceptions be programmed, but their values. By programming both perceptions and values (priorities), it is possible to influence masses of people in regard to how to be patriotic consumers and loyal taxpayers: what to eat, what to wear, what music to buy, when to borrow money, how to invest your time wisely, who to vote for, and so on.

 

C23742-34, President Reagan having a photo tak...

C23742-34, President Reagan having a photo taken with Arnold Schwarzenegger at the Republican National Convention in Dallas, Texas. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Public values are systematically influenced by PR firms (the public relations industry), mainstream media, public schools and of course religious institutions. The public’s values are conceptual presumptions). In order to direct these conceptual presumptions, perception itself can be influenced through distraction, diversion, deception, and emotionally-charged drama.

 

Theatre can be used to influence values and perceptions. The theatrics can be a totally fictional drama, like in a movie or at a live performance by professional wrestlers. Or, the theatrics can be presented as sincere, like a political controversy in which actors like Arnold Schwarzenegger and Jesse Ventura present the public with scandalous topics which the mainstream media sensationalizes.

 

In addition to presenting a confusing array of contradictory perspectives, the mainstream media also selects particular topics to value as a priority. Then, there is the “alternative” media which is of course still regulated by governments and funded by biased sponsors.

 

 

President George W. Bush meets with California...

President George W. Bush meets with California Governor-Elect Arnold Schwarzenegger in Riverside, Calif., Thursday, Oct. 16, 2003. White House photo by Eric Draper. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Is there such a thing as an unbiased sponsor? No. By sponsoring any particular something, they are demonstrating their bias.

 

So, is there such a thing as an unbiased media? No.

 

The ideal of an unbiased media is a fantasy promoted in certain cultures/religions. The idea of an unbiased media is like the idea of a video camera that is not pointing in a certain direction or angle.

 

 

Every camera angle has an angle. Every media production has specific content presented in a specific way.

 

You cannot have a math problem without numbers. Likewise, you cannot have a mass media production without an editorial spin or bias.

 

 

Vice President Dick Cheney meets with Gov. Arn...

Vice President Dick Cheney meets with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger for the first time at the White House. Vice President Dick Cheney meets with California Gov.-elect Arnold Schwarzenegger in the Vice President’s West Wing office Oct. 30, 2003. This is the first meeting between Vice President Cheney and Mr. Schwarzenegger since the state’s historical recall election Oct. 7, 2003. White House photo by David Bohrer (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

You also cannot communicate without directing attention to a particular focus in a particular way (from a certain perspective). All uses of language have the potential to produce an influence.

 

Communication can support pre-existing perceptions and values or it can question them or even directly challenge them. Further, language can be used in ways that go beyond what someone has previously considered or studied.

 

 

Why should any of this be important to you? Maybe it won’t.

 

I mentioned “sincere naivete” very early in this presentation. Maybe you are interested in identifying topics which you already value, but about which you recognize that you might be sincerely naïve in some way (without even knowing it of course). So, one possible interest for you could be to explore the entire topic of sincere naivete: why could it be important, how can it be recognized, and what can be done about it? (As a quick note, anything that you find frustrating could be a clear sign of sincere naivete, as in a false presumption that you do not even recognize as being presumptive.

 

Groundbreaking Research (Feb. 1st, 2004) ...it...

Groundbreaking Research (Feb. 1st, 2004) …item 1b.. Coburn, Contreras, BSU address racist comment made by FSU student (Sep. 6, 2013 10:33 AM) …item 2.. The Cure – Mixed Up (1990) Full Album — “A Forest (Tree Mix)” … (Photo credit: marsmet53)

Another interest for you now could be the subject of public relations: how to produce certain perceptions, values, and behavior in a targeted audience. You might also be specifically interested in how public relations has been used to promote certain false presumptions and naïve sincerities in your own systems of values and interpretations.

 

A rather broad focus would be the power of language itself. In contrast, a very specific focus could be something that is inspiring to you, but that you are interested in sharing with me (or a small group of like-minded individuals) so as to invite the contribution to you of clarity and precision and effectiveness in your exploration of your spontaneous interests and inspirations.

 

Schwarzenegger, Air Wick, poodle in pillows - ...

Schwarzenegger, Air Wick, poodle in pillows – toilet at Hobba (Photo credit: avlxyz)

 

I welcome your questions, comments, invitations, and requests. Not only can I explain things in new ways that you may greatly value, but I can demonstrate principles to you and show you how they may be valuable in ways that you do not already recognize. I can even guide you in applying those principles yourself.

 

I recommend that you also briefly specify why I might be interested in investing my time in communicating with you. In case you were wondering, I value cash as well as contractual promises to provide me cash upon your reaching a specific target in increased revenues for you. By the way, if you are not already open to dramatically increasing your financial capacity, are you willing to at least be open to the increased practical freedom that comes with increased access to financial resources?

 

stages of adaptive appreciation

October 14, 2011

The above audio contains a lot more clarification and information than the text below.

First, people begin innocent. Then, they are trained in how things should be and so become naively presumptive, though that is adaptive relative to the first stage.

Then, if the presumptive way does not work very well, some slight revisions are made in regard to the updated idealism of how things really should be, and now the reformed and refined presumptiveness becomes arrogance (as in self-righteousness). Again, that may be adaptive relative to the prior stage- using a more adapted model of presumptiveness.
Next, after perhaps a few distinct idealisms have been tried and have all failed to correspond to reality, a cynical perfectionism may develop. This is a reaction against all forms of presumptiveness, all models. This is a criticism against all forms of what allegedly should be. This can be called hypocrisy, for it is presuming that presumptiveness about how things should be is what should not be, which implicitly presumes that an innocent naivete is all that should ever be. Again, that may still be more adaptive than prior stages.
However, once that does not work well either, then humility and grace may eventually develop. Then there is an appreciation possible for every stage: naive innocence, naive presumptiveness, arrogant presumptiveness, arrogant cynicism, and humility.
These stages of adaption can be regrouped in to three distinctions: innocence, perfectionism, and humility. Perfectionism includes naive presumptiveness, arrogant presumptiveness, and arrogant cynicism.
We can even look at these as stages of appreciation. Initially, everything is equal. Then, various priorities and values are identified, learned and refined. Then, there is an appreciation for all models and all values and all priorities- just one at a time.
In other words, all of the models and presumptions are recognized as similar in that they are just models and presumptions. In any particular case, one or more models may be most relevant or useful. There can be an appreciation for each model as unique and for all models as only being models. There can be an appreciation for the creation of new models and discarding of old ones and naively or arrogantly clinging to certain ones or rejecting certain others.
Humility and appreciation may be two words for a single adaption. We might even call it “maturity.”

%d bloggers like this: