?

Log in

No account? Create an account
mai 2019   01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31


Existential Bias - Aka, the germ of life. Aka, in philosophy, the, "vital impetus," (i.e., "life force"). Could be known as the, "fetal impetus," in physiology or in Catholic dogma. According to me, my term, the, "existential bias," refers to a being's creation in space in time which necessarilly wills to continue to be. This may be the intrinsic volition of a subatomic particle, a planet, or a living creature, such as a bacteria or a person. A being will choose options which maximises possibilities for its possible futures for being, preserving a worldline, or timeline, through entropy. This systemic and sometimes psychically transcendent-like will is a phenomenon in my philosophy of "entropism," and can be involved or concerning the ethical choices made in my sub-philosophy of, "existential transcendentalism." (See earlier post... http://madman101.livejournal.com/1370695.html). The existential bias is related to INERTIA in classical physics, which can also be converted into MOMENTUM and ACCELERATION, (or deceleration). In psychology, it is reasponsible also for choices or volitions of the EGO, cravings of the id, and demands of the stomach, and can do as much good as it does bad in society, and it merely works towards keeping the person alive, (needs), which can be mutated into the obtaining of objects of selfish wants, addictions, sadistic behaviour, etc. This is why it has been wrongly construed that SELFISHNESS, per se, out of context, in and of itself, is supposedly a "virtue" and can therefore discipline and regulate a market full of selfish players. But virtue, nor morality, nor economic rationality, does NOT logically follow from the fact that beings desire to continue to exist. Rather, these aspects MUST involve additional factors, and hopefully, higher existentially transcendent choice, or the ability to put the Commons above selfish wants. The right to exist does not, in a sane society, in itself grant the right to privatise, violate, marginalise, destroy, or otherwise limit the rights or freedoms or existences of other individuals, or the integrity of the social Commons. At the very least, a public philosophy, morality or religion is religion is required to keep rampant existentialism, under whatever banner, from being given limitless reign, as it becomes none but a false virtue, a will-to-power convinced that only its OWN might shall make RIGHT. Nor do the logics of death hold such moral authority in any smaller society of individuals, as in the intercourse between neighbours. However, apparently, in most social bonds and behaviour, there may be some small degree of the paradoxical "logics of death," (see upcoming post). The power of that degree rises during dysfunctional trends in society or economics, and therefore, en masse, the society looses direction towards a functional future, thus being undermined by the gross selfishness of its individuals, or, in finance, "the danger of collective action," (reptilian, violation of, & tragedy of, the Commons). With the onus of control externalising, as externalised costs are forced upon helpless-feeling players yet seeking more and more CONTROL, many individuals they are caught in a kind of Prisoner's Dilemma, or Zero-Sum Game, as wants only become more and more forceful addictions or obsessions, at the expense of others. However, in its nascent form, the Existential Bias," is not intrinsically bad or destructive - it simply maintains, sometimes even within an altruistic, Common society, that ultimately, self-defense is not a crime. Nor should it be writ to be called a crime. Nor should privacy be writ to be taken away - for it is privacy which allows existential choice and transcendence, i.e., fulfillment of needs, rational or ethically right needs, and dreams for the future(s), singular and collective.

Germ of Death - original sin - Could be also be referred to as the, "fatal impetus." Related to #paradoxical learning, and to the #logics of death, in my psychological or sociological ideas. SEE UPCOMING (hopefully brief) POST FOR MORE ON THE, "GERM OF DEATH," or, "original sin." You, personally, may take a variable stance regarding, "original sin," (and, FORGIVENESS, denial, acceptance, etc.), all the way from deeming that it absolutely does exist in our world, (or universe), to it absolutely does NOT exists. Either extreme is a fundamentalism. Either view, or any view in between, is entirely up to you. What you believe is your own business, choice and right as a being in nature.

Physicology - So, I've been wanting to figure out a way of setting new tag classifications that can allow for ideas where the physiological, the psychic, the psychological, and PHYSICS, may overlap, mainly in my own thinking. I didn't want to call the tag, "entropism," because that assumes that new research in science is all my own thinking. I was considering the classification, ("physio", or physio-psych, physio-physics, etc., subsets), but how would I keep distinct, e.g., topics of actual psychology, or physics, or biology, which had nothing to DO with my ideas, and which did NOT overlap?!?!? So, I came up with a new term, which I feel has the potential to become very important in science and philosophy, etc., which, in itself, implies the overlap of the various ideas and disciplines, in such concepts as psychic & quantum entanglement, and so on. It is, "Physicology." I can use this to describe the overlaps, i.e., syntheses, within my own thought, or of various disciplines, as known publicly, or as interpretted by me. (It also sounds like, "ECOLOGY" - bounce bounce!) This will allow me to use the conventional tags of, "psychology," "physics," "physiology," etc., as well, mainly for conventional topics. The best site for topics relevant to Physicology is phys.org.

Scryptiks - New term. Upon hearing the enlightened boneheads now asserting themselves, saying that the evidence is CLEAR regarding to the accused Boston bommers, which is a load of self-deluded shit, no doubt convinced that it is instead divine, non-tinfoil, "critical thinking," I decided that I must invent a derogatory name for these arrogant, naive fools. Bully wanna-be's in sheeple's clothing, convinced that they are objectivist scientists, (when they are actually ruled by emotion and comfortable vanity). (Objectionists!) So, I squashed together, "skeptics," and, "cryptics," and people who GENERALLY GO BY THE SCRIPT THAT IS PRESENTED TO THEM BY THE "BENIGN" AUTHORITIES, THEIR POLITICAL PARTY, and/or THE CORPORATE MEDIA. They are as occultish and irresponsible as the worse deluded right-wing conspiracy theorist. There is little true backing or reason to their assertions. They are unusual, as if from an alien planet. They are also CREEPY. They are like zombies walking. And they are false, but self-described, "skeptics," that hold no water, (other than that for the Alphas on their team). Additionally, neener neener. Finally, I added the special, "K," at the end, to say that they are obtuse in a Kafkaesque way and are also, most likely, FLAT-OUT WRONG. However, this k may get dropped and replaced by a c, through the course of history which have o control over since I am not a god, sorry but I really am not. Please believe.

I am just a common genius, just like all of you.

Previous Entry  Next Entry