|
|
#1 |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 256
|
I have a strong desire to comprehend stuff
I claim that comprehending is a hierarchy and can usefully be thought of as a pyramid. At the base of the pyramid is awareness that is followed by consciousness, which is awareness plus attention. Knowing follows consciousness and understanding is at the pinnacle of the pyramid. Two aspects of this comprehension idea deserve elaboration: consciousness and understanding. When I was a youngster, probably seven or eight, my father took me with him when he drove to a local farm to pick corn for use in the café the family managed. We drove for a significant amount of time down local dirt roads to a farm with a field of growing corn. We went into the fields with our bushel baskets and filled them with corn-on-the-cob. Dad showed me how to choose the corn to pick and how to snatch the cob from the stalk. On the drive home I was amazed to observe the numerous fields of corn we passed on the way back to town. I can distinctly remember thinking to myself, why did I not see these fields of corn while we were driving to the farm earlier? Today I have an answer to that question. I now say that on the way to the farm I was aware of corn-on-the-cob but on the way back home I was conscious of corn-on-the-cob. There was a very significant difference in my perceptions regarding corn-on-the-cob before and after the experience. We are aware of many things but conscious of only a small number of things. We were aware of Iraq before the war but now we are conscious of Iraq. There is a very important distinction between awareness and consciousness and it is important for us to recognize this difference. To be conscious of a matter signifies a focus of the intellect. Consciousness of a matter is the first step, which may lead to an understanding of the matter. Consciousness of a matter is a necessary condition for knowing and for understanding of that matter. Consciousness is a necessary but not sufficient condition for knowing and understanding to take place. When discussing a topic about which I am knowledgeable most people will, because they recognize the words I am using, treat the matter as old stuff. They recognize the words therefore they consider the matter as something they already know and do not consider as important. Because they are aware of the subject it is difficult to gain their attention when I attempt to go beyond the shallowness of their perception. The communication problem seems to be initially overcoming their awareness and reaching consciousness. Understanding is a long step beyond knowing. Understanding is the creation of meaning. Understanding represents a rare instance when intellection and emotion join hands and places me in an empathetic position with a domain of knowledge. When I understand I have connected the dots and have created a unity that includes myself. I have created something that is meaningful, which means that I have placed that domain of knowledge within my domain that I call my self. I understand because I have a very intimate connection with a model of reality that I have created. It is that eureka moment that happens rarely but is a moment of ecstasy. As Carl Sagan says “understanding is a kind of ecstasy”. When I read I almost always read non fiction. I have tried to read fiction and to learn from reading what is considered to be good literature. However, my effort to read good literature fails because I thing that learning by reading good literature is a very inefficient means for gaining knowledge and understanding. I claim that I can acquire more knowledge in one hour by reading non fiction than I can while reading good literature for ten hours. That is, I claim that learning by reading non fiction is ten times more efficient than learning by reading fiction, i.e. good literature. Do you agree that acquiring knowledge by reading non fiction is ten times as efficient as from reading fiction? |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
smoke wheat hail satin
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: LA baby
Age: 32
Posts: 5,703
|
are you a bot?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
sideways 8
|
Go cry emo kid.
Edit: Id take this serious if you wrote this yourself. |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
smoke wheat hail satin
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: LA baby
Age: 32
Posts: 5,703
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
FFR Player
|
I FEEL YOU, COBERST
I HAVE A STRONG DESIRE TO COMPREHEND STUFF, TOO
__________________
Last edited by Tokzic: Today at 11:59 PM. Reason: wait what |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
smoke wheat hail satin
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: LA baby
Age: 32
Posts: 5,703
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 | ||
|
This is a custom title.
|
Quote:
Even if you end up reading a book that isn't considered good literature, if you enjoy it what does it matter? To answer your question (not that it matters): Yes, but who cares? Also, Quote:
Oh wait, since you recognize what I'm typing you're going to consider it unimportant. Suddenly you make a whole lot more sense. The question is: How can you assume that everyone else thinks like you? It's a very one dimensional way of thinking and incorrect unless you assume that everyone else is just a manifestation of your own thoughts, or something like that. Isn't it self-defeating to assume that everyone thinks like you and that you can learn/comprehend new stuff?
__________________
Last edited by bluguerrilla; 10-16-2007 at 05:23 PM.. Reason: I know he doesn't care... I expect someone else to respond to my post. |
||
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
smoke wheat hail satin
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: LA baby
Age: 32
Posts: 5,703
|
blu, learning by experience is probably ten times more efficient than reading non-fiction, which, doing some math, makes it one-hundred times as efficient as reading fiction. nothing can beat experience; this is clear.
i don't know how old you are, coberst, but perhaps you're referring to the educational fiction that the school system thinks is important and consequently rams down our throats. can't help you there, sorry. other than that, if you can't learn from fiction and you think that non-fiction is at least ten times as beneficial to your acquisition of knowledge and your desire to comprehend, then the solution is simple. don't read fiction. at all. you're thinking too hard. |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 | |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 256
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 | |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 256
|
Quote:
This hobby, self-learning, has become very important to me. I have bounced around from one hobby to another but have always been enticed back by the excitement I have discovered in this learning process. Carl Sagan is quoted as having written; “Understanding is a kind of ecstasy.” I label myself as a September Scholar because I began the process at mid-life and because my quest is disinterested knowledge. Disinterested knowledge is an intrinsic value. Disinterested knowledge is not a means but an end. It is knowledge I seek because I desire to know it. I mean the term ‘disinterested knowledge’ as similar to ‘pure research’, as compared to ‘applied research’. Pure research seeks to know truth unconnected to any specific application. I think of the self-learner of disinterested knowledge as driven by curiosity and imagination to understand. The September Scholar seeks to ‘see’ and then to ‘grasp’ through intellection directed at understanding the self as well as the world. The knowledge and understanding that is sought by the September Scholar are determined only by personal motivations. It is noteworthy that disinterested knowledge is knowledge I am driven to acquire because it is of dominating interest to me. Because I have such an interest in this disinterested knowledge my adrenaline level rises in anticipation of my voyage of discovery. We often use the metaphors of ‘seeing’ for knowing and ‘grasping’ for understanding. I think these metaphors significantly illuminate the difference between these two forms of intellection. We see much but grasp little. It takes great force to impel us to go beyond seeing to the point of grasping. The force driving us is the strong personal involvement we have to the question that guides our quest. I think it is this inclusion of self-fulfillment, as associated with the question, that makes self-learning so important. The self-learner of disinterested knowledge is engaged in a single-minded search for understanding. The goal, grasping the ‘truth’, is generally of insignificant consequence in comparison to the single-minded search. Others must judge the value of the ‘truth’ discovered by the autodidactic. I suggest that truth, should it be of any universal value, will evolve in a biological fashion when a significant number of pursuers of disinterested knowledge engage in dialogue. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Very Grave Indeed
|
So nowhere in there did you actually address a single one of the points you were "responding" to except the "I don't know how old you are" where you still didn't actually say so, just indirectly implied "I'm pretty old"
I've seen two or three variants of the crap you just posted, you put it into every single thread where someone mentions age of posters, or education of posters. I have a question for you, lets see if you'll address it: "Coberst, given that in this forum, you've been seen to totally disregard pretty much every rule of this forum, been seen to simply -ignore- reasonable objections to your claims, to -ignore- questions people ask about your claims, how can you possibly say " I suggest that truth, should it be of any universal value, will evolve in a biological fashion when a significant number of pursuers of disinterested knowledge engage in dialogue" with a straight face? You aren't engaged in dialogue, you're engaged in ivory-tower preaching to people you've stated you think you are more educated than, have a greater understanding than, and are simply trying to put you down instead of worship you and your knowledge from on high. You're a hypocrite of the first order, Coberst. |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 | |
|
smoke wheat hail satin
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: LA baby
Age: 32
Posts: 5,703
|
Quote:
by the way guys, you can literally google his thread titles, and they come up in a few other forums - i.e. his 'Thinking is part of reality' thread can be viewed here: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...39&an=0&page=0 notice how a lot of people generally disagree with his postings elsewhere. how peculiar. i have a feeling he may be a copy/paster...but i have yet to find his source. EDIT: maybe he isn't a copy paster...my search was fruitless. sometimes his claims seem so...artificial. like, when i read them, there is no emotion in it. anyone else get this vibe? Last edited by foilman8805; 10-17-2007 at 08:26 PM.. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 | |
|
Very Grave Indeed
|
Quote:
I guess being mostly teens, we as a userbase care less if a 70 year old might think we're stupid for pointing out that what he says makes no sense. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 | |
|
FFR Player
|
I disagree with the previous statement saying we don't learn from fiction. Guess why most fiction books are written?... to convey a message the author feels as important in the form of writing. That is teaching and as such, we can learn from it. Just from my own experience in my relatively short life, I can say that I've learn quite a bit from fiction books.
~Tsugomaru
__________________
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
FFR Hall of Fame
|
Coberst is a giant joke to show the meaninglessness of metaphysics
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Little Chief Hare
|
Metaphysics? Are you sure you don't mean the meaninglessness of varieties of Philosophy and Psychology which rely on Logical positivism and the Analytic/Synthetic distinction?
Coberst doesn't seem to be entirely consistent. I honestly don't know that he could be a joke about much of anything unless it is very general. I think it is more likely an expiriment of sorts to determine peoples reactions. Probably a trivial experiment as well, much like Eon8. Last edited by Kilroy_x; 10-18-2007 at 11:53 PM.. |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|