The world of ideas versus the world of the senses

[sky]

The world of ideas versus the world of the senses

Our senses are our connection to the real physical world.

Our impression of the physical reality comes through a layer of abstraction which is our nervous system and brain.

The world of ideas can be based on experiences with the physical world but can also come from communication.

The world of ideas is layers of abstraction away from physical reality yet often feels like reality.

The world of ideas can be strongly influenced by others.

Communication has changed rapidly and incoming communication has increased in its intensity.

Many ideas communicated to us by others are intended to disturb, convince, motivate and persuade.

Ideas exist which are not in congruence with the physical reality.

Many ideas exist but are false.

As communication intensifies, the self may need to filter or block some communicated ideas.

The self may need to test ideas to verify their truthfulness.

One way to escape the intensity of communication is to focus on the physical reality as we sense it.

Mindfulness meditation, both while still and while active focuses on the senses and their perception of physical reality.

A focus on the body through massage, fitness, health, wellness and sensuality can bring truth to one's life by concentrating the mind on physical reality.

Creating a walled garden, protected from constant communication, creates an environment of tranquility where one can focus on the physical reality.

One must find a balance between getting enough information through communication with the outside world, and finding peace and tranquility in a place protected from communication.

As communication intensifies, the need for a walled garden to protect the self increases.

These are just some crazy ideas that I have, and wonder if anyone else thinks about this in a similar way.

[jennypenny]

As communication intensifies, the self may need to filter or block some communicated ideas.

This one is so hard for me. My instinct is to absorb as much as possible, but the sheer breadth of information we're bombarded with is overwhelming. I know that I process more if I take in less. Still, I struggle daily with deliberating slowing my intake.

[7Wannabe5]

In "Learning to Die in the Anthropocene: Reflections on the End of a Civilization", Roy Scranton suggests that it is our ethical responsibility as rational adults to consciously buffer and give due consideration to the stream of information to which we are subject before passing it on to others. If we react rather than respond, or act like live wires of transmission rather than engaging in intelligent cognition, we will contribute to the mob madness that will worsen the manner or pain of the death of our civilization.

I think this can be achieved by either simply choosing not to pass on "the news' to others or by pausing and adding counter-weight or contrary twist before passing it on. Throwing it to next person like a hot potato while whistling like a kettle being ranked least helpful behavior. So, as you suggested, removing yourself from the stream would also obviously limit transmission. However, I must say this is making me think about walking around a hospital garden or kneeling in the empty chapel while a loved one is dying. Good practice, but under circumstances one would never hope for.

[sky]

Some information is important. Some is vital. Some is enlightening.

How does one recognize which information is useful?

Most people pride themselves on their freedom and independence. I want to be the one who decides what is important for me. Yet in the avalanche of incoming communication, do I have to open every piece of junk to find gold?

I used to be able to discriminate by media. The programming and advertising on TV went bad, so I got rid of TV.

Now, all media is full of ads and fakes and propaganda. I don't think the answer is shutting it all off, except perhaps for someone who is an addict.

I wonder how hard it would be to program an ai machine to look through the net on a daily basis and find things that are useful to me.

[7Wannabe5]

This might sound like a silly suggestion, but you might try the "just right book" method librarians teach to young children. Read approximately 1 page of the book or article, and put up one finger every time you hit upon a word or reference you don't recognize. If you put up 0 or 1 fingers, the source is too easy for you. If you put up 5 fingers (or more), the source is too difficult for you. 2,3 or 4 fingers is "just right" level. The level of difficulty itself will serve to filter the source.

A meme or news presented as it occurs is always going to be 0 or 1 fingers only, because nobody will have had time to perform complex analysis or in depth research. I worry about bias, but I find that if I look at a number of lists of best sources or best books, and then note overlapping recommendations, that is a good way to proceed.

[Riggerjack]

As communication intensifies, the self may need to filter or block some communicated ideas.

Everyone has an agenda. Everyone. Me, too. An agenda isn't bad, we need to have a reason to be motivated to talk about distant lands and their experiences. But recognizing that agenda is oddly lacking. Even here, when we get to arguing about a subject, someone will link an article, someone else will critique that article, and then someone will come back and cite the author as though being the author makes one an expert. Or maybe I am just naturally distrustful.

So rather than filter for content, I find I'm best served by searching out and pairing opposite agendas. The same story covered by fox or huffpo will sound different, have different bad guys or complicating factors, but reading both of them gets me a good feel for what is agreed upon, and what isn't. When both huffpo and fox agree that coal mining in town X is dying, but fox thinks it's because of regulations, and huffpo because the Koch brothers are concentrating their evil influence elsewhere; I know that coal mining is dying in town X, and can look to the price of coal, and local geography to know why.

Narrative is to help the gullible feel informed, it has nothing to do with the story, and everything to do with helping you accept the next dose of narrative.

[Papers of Indenture]

"I too am an Epicurean"

[sky]

The Epicurean response to the daily annoyances of society is to surround oneself with friends and live somewhat protected in a garden, seeking one's own quality of life rather than full participation in society. This means that it is important to regulate access to one's life and thoughts, limiting negative inputs. The goal is happiness through tranquility.

Some additional strategies to protect the self from information overload and propaganda:

Gratitude: focus on things you are grateful for each day. This bypasses the impression of impending doom and feeling that everything is bad and getting worse that propaganda is trying to force on people.

Socializing in the real world: Be together with friends and in groups for conversation, activities and social bonding. The value of real world friendships is far greater than virtual text, updates and upvotes.