Quizzes & Puzzles24 mins ago
Ideology Is The Enemy Of Reason
55 Answers
True or false?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by naomi24. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Recognising the sequence is crucial to an understanding of consciousness.
One must first exist. Then and only then can consciousness arise by virtue of those beings which possess the means and process that gives rise to consciousness. To then acquire an awareness of ones own consciousness becomes possible provided by an awareness and the realisation of ones own conscious experience . . . all of which presupposes that one exists to be conscious of in the first place.
Before there can be any consciousness of existence there must first be an existence to be conscious of.
One must first exist. Then and only then can consciousness arise by virtue of those beings which possess the means and process that gives rise to consciousness. To then acquire an awareness of ones own consciousness becomes possible provided by an awareness and the realisation of ones own conscious experience . . . all of which presupposes that one exists to be conscious of in the first place.
Before there can be any consciousness of existence there must first be an existence to be conscious of.
@mibn2cweus
// ; the presupposition that existence is dependent upon that which can only be derived by virtue of existence.//
This part-sentence contains the word existence twice and the word consciousness not at all. Was that what you intended to write or am I just failing to comprehend the concept you are trying to convey?
// ; the presupposition that existence is dependent upon that which can only be derived by virtue of existence.//
This part-sentence contains the word existence twice and the word consciousness not at all. Was that what you intended to write or am I just failing to comprehend the concept you are trying to convey?
Hypognosis
@mibn2cweus
// ; the presupposition that existence is dependent upon that which can only be derived by virtue of existence.//
This part-sentence contains the word existence twice and the word consciousness not at all. Was that what you intended to write or am I just failing to comprehend the concept you are trying to convey?
13:37 Wed 14th Oct 2015
The full sentence was -
"The 'primacy of consciousness' is a common basis for many failed ideologies; the presupposition that existence is dependent upon that which can only be derived by virtue of existence."
Many ideologies are based on the presumption that some form of disembodied intelligence created existence as out of 'thin air' without the benefit of the existence out of and from which the faculties of awareness, knowledge and creativity arose. The presupposition that some form of preexisting consciousness gave rise to the very existence from which it arose is logically absurd.
That the primacy of existence is such a self-evident fact that it might seem too ridiculous to be worth mentioning belies the fact that so many ideologies do not take it into account . . . a creator god being perhaps one of the most exemplary examples.
@mibn2cweus
// ; the presupposition that existence is dependent upon that which can only be derived by virtue of existence.//
This part-sentence contains the word existence twice and the word consciousness not at all. Was that what you intended to write or am I just failing to comprehend the concept you are trying to convey?
13:37 Wed 14th Oct 2015
The full sentence was -
"The 'primacy of consciousness' is a common basis for many failed ideologies; the presupposition that existence is dependent upon that which can only be derived by virtue of existence."
Many ideologies are based on the presumption that some form of disembodied intelligence created existence as out of 'thin air' without the benefit of the existence out of and from which the faculties of awareness, knowledge and creativity arose. The presupposition that some form of preexisting consciousness gave rise to the very existence from which it arose is logically absurd.
That the primacy of existence is such a self-evident fact that it might seem too ridiculous to be worth mentioning belies the fact that so many ideologies do not take it into account . . . a creator god being perhaps one of the most exemplary examples.
@mibn
Thanks.
My simplistic understanding of what I think theists believe is that, at first, God had his own existence... in the void. Got bored of that (or, as with the great Green Arklesiezure, sneezed) and magics the 3 dimensions plus time out of nowhere, along with about 10^80 proton-mass worth of energy (is it 10^82, if you count dark matter?).
Or tweak that and extend time back into the void. This cheat would cater for the "dodgy starter motor" universe, where it takes a few failed cycles to get big G just so. Provided the spatial dimensions are thouroughly sucked back into the singularity, no trace of the failed starts will be found in the eventual universe: they join the long list of unproveables.
Thanks.
My simplistic understanding of what I think theists believe is that, at first, God had his own existence... in the void. Got bored of that (or, as with the great Green Arklesiezure, sneezed) and magics the 3 dimensions plus time out of nowhere, along with about 10^80 proton-mass worth of energy (is it 10^82, if you count dark matter?).
Or tweak that and extend time back into the void. This cheat would cater for the "dodgy starter motor" universe, where it takes a few failed cycles to get big G just so. Provided the spatial dimensions are thouroughly sucked back into the singularity, no trace of the failed starts will be found in the eventual universe: they join the long list of unproveables.
The clever have used reason as a tool to instil ideology into the less mentally agile for centuries, thereby having the means and reason to control their thoughts and actions to enrich and empower themselves.... Now take that sentence and switch the words reason and ideology... What is the kin difference. Chose your own system belief, if it feels wrong, it probably is.
@naomi
I would very much like the answer to the question to be as binary as that but I reckon that it isn't.
If 'reason' is used as a token for 'science' then any ideology which seeks to suppress scientific enquiry (eg Galileo vs. Vatican) is, indeed, its enemy.
Not all ideolgies do that and many do their best to make it thrive.
I cannot think of any ideologies which make science their central plank but that would be the exception case in which the ideology is expressly the friend of reason.
The reason I say the whole thing is non binary is that ideologies are built on reasoning of a sort. They may be warped or evil, by our standards, but self-righteousness means even evil-doers think they are doing the right thing and will deem the rest of the world's powers of reasoning to be 'degenerate'. Wordplay there between reasons and reasoning. "Because they ruined our XY&Z" is a reason; "Not all A are B" is reasoning.
I would very much like the answer to the question to be as binary as that but I reckon that it isn't.
If 'reason' is used as a token for 'science' then any ideology which seeks to suppress scientific enquiry (eg Galileo vs. Vatican) is, indeed, its enemy.
Not all ideolgies do that and many do their best to make it thrive.
I cannot think of any ideologies which make science their central plank but that would be the exception case in which the ideology is expressly the friend of reason.
The reason I say the whole thing is non binary is that ideologies are built on reasoning of a sort. They may be warped or evil, by our standards, but self-righteousness means even evil-doers think they are doing the right thing and will deem the rest of the world's powers of reasoning to be 'degenerate'. Wordplay there between reasons and reasoning. "Because they ruined our XY&Z" is a reason; "Not all A are B" is reasoning.
-- answer removed --
Oh great. Once again, Naomi won't spell out the detail of the contradictions, for the benefit of ignoramuses like me and Theland expects everyone else to do the working out, so I will learn nothing from that, either.
Forcing atheists to read the very thing they aren't interested in, though? I guess your lucky you're immune from religious intolerance legislation because it's not a religion.
Forcing atheists to read the very thing they aren't interested in, though? I guess your lucky you're immune from religious intolerance legislation because it's not a religion.
@Theland
my time is not at all valuable, actually. I have chronic fatigue and a sleep disorder, so I'm more or less unemployable.
My memory capacity is, however, very valuable to me and I have long since reached the Homer Simpson point, where I cannot memorise anything new without risking the loss of knowledge I still consider useful or precious. I am not entirely closed-minded but whatever the fresh stuff is, it had better be good.
my time is not at all valuable, actually. I have chronic fatigue and a sleep disorder, so I'm more or less unemployable.
My memory capacity is, however, very valuable to me and I have long since reached the Homer Simpson point, where I cannot memorise anything new without risking the loss of knowledge I still consider useful or precious. I am not entirely closed-minded but whatever the fresh stuff is, it had better be good.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.