Erratic Response to Acquired Info
Why is it that people insist on being different and separate themselves from others to define themselves individually? Quite honestly, this kind of self-interest seems selfish and self-absorbed, an attempt to justify a life alone in a world of cruelty, unfairness, yada-yada.
New conveniences define our life because we are just too lazy to get up off our butts to do things. Those in the agricultural community still understand the virtue of patience, though for us city-folk, we want things now and not later. And when we don't get things our way we sue or whine or pray. What a waste of time to do so out of selfishness and our want for things.
Paradoxically, everyone is an individual and a part of a community. I know I am repeating myself, but relationships are the only way we can give ourselves meaning and purpose. Everyone maintains their own core values, which adapt and change with experience throughout life. Though our western scientific-oriented society attempts to achieve true objectivity, when objectivity is never a reality in a world of subjective human beings with relative ethics. As evidenced with Galileo, Darwin, Newton, the power of science does affect the realm of values. Fundamentalist Christianity is the living proof. But can science really answer all of humanity's questions?
Further, as a 'whiner,' (a person who does not propose solutions, but likes to complain) usually there is no argument for change/action, just complaint -- something characteristic of our culture, which inadvertently conforms to culture rather than departs from it. So what is whining about? We as human beings are culture makers to orient our living and give our lives meaning. Rebellion is conformity to a certain community.
Perhaps a look into anthropology with first understanding the self and its biases might shed more light onto cultural norms and patterns. Existentially, the self is where a person can start to understand. For instance, John knows that he is a homosexual, child-loving, fundamentally religious, with core values that permeate all of his thinking. After obtaining this knowledge of self he can identify his bias and present a more objective approach to a study. But nothing is entirely objective.
Looking inward does not always help others or identify cultural or political problems. Active, rather than passive, relationships among people and one's experience reveal problems in a political or socioeconomic system. The Hebrews called those with "eyes" the prophets. But then that was only with the spirit of God present. How should we explain prophecy in the West where science seeks to rule, to conform, to objectify reality, everything?
Personally, and with some bias, reductionism does not sit well with me, because it does not effectively answer questions in the realm of values. Thus physics and biology are limited by the very method they use for truth. Anthropology and sociology both seek to answer questions concerning people, their cultures, their socioeconomic systems, their values, how they give themselves meaning, but cannot answer why people need meaning or purpose without some interpretive freedom. [These social sciences cannot be predictive tools because of the adaptation and plasticity of culture, and cannot foresee drastic pardigm shifts.]
Reflecting on different epistemologies, no matter how convincing or unconvincing shapes the way I think. When I read someone's theory I ponder it within the realm of my experience, my values and my facts and reformulate ideas based upon my experience that I believe to be factually more consistent than others in light of my values.
To focus inwardly without being informed is ludicrous. Further, to look inwardly being misinformed or without understanding personal bias is ludicrous and leads to the whining conformity of our culture. But even further, looking inwardly without regard for others is even more ludicrous.
New conveniences define our life because we are just too lazy to get up off our butts to do things. Those in the agricultural community still understand the virtue of patience, though for us city-folk, we want things now and not later. And when we don't get things our way we sue or whine or pray. What a waste of time to do so out of selfishness and our want for things.
Paradoxically, everyone is an individual and a part of a community. I know I am repeating myself, but relationships are the only way we can give ourselves meaning and purpose. Everyone maintains their own core values, which adapt and change with experience throughout life. Though our western scientific-oriented society attempts to achieve true objectivity, when objectivity is never a reality in a world of subjective human beings with relative ethics. As evidenced with Galileo, Darwin, Newton, the power of science does affect the realm of values. Fundamentalist Christianity is the living proof. But can science really answer all of humanity's questions?
Further, as a 'whiner,' (a person who does not propose solutions, but likes to complain) usually there is no argument for change/action, just complaint -- something characteristic of our culture, which inadvertently conforms to culture rather than departs from it. So what is whining about? We as human beings are culture makers to orient our living and give our lives meaning. Rebellion is conformity to a certain community.
Perhaps a look into anthropology with first understanding the self and its biases might shed more light onto cultural norms and patterns. Existentially, the self is where a person can start to understand. For instance, John knows that he is a homosexual, child-loving, fundamentally religious, with core values that permeate all of his thinking. After obtaining this knowledge of self he can identify his bias and present a more objective approach to a study. But nothing is entirely objective.
Looking inward does not always help others or identify cultural or political problems. Active, rather than passive, relationships among people and one's experience reveal problems in a political or socioeconomic system. The Hebrews called those with "eyes" the prophets. But then that was only with the spirit of God present. How should we explain prophecy in the West where science seeks to rule, to conform, to objectify reality, everything?
Personally, and with some bias, reductionism does not sit well with me, because it does not effectively answer questions in the realm of values. Thus physics and biology are limited by the very method they use for truth. Anthropology and sociology both seek to answer questions concerning people, their cultures, their socioeconomic systems, their values, how they give themselves meaning, but cannot answer why people need meaning or purpose without some interpretive freedom. [These social sciences cannot be predictive tools because of the adaptation and plasticity of culture, and cannot foresee drastic pardigm shifts.]
Reflecting on different epistemologies, no matter how convincing or unconvincing shapes the way I think. When I read someone's theory I ponder it within the realm of my experience, my values and my facts and reformulate ideas based upon my experience that I believe to be factually more consistent than others in light of my values.
To focus inwardly without being informed is ludicrous. Further, to look inwardly being misinformed or without understanding personal bias is ludicrous and leads to the whining conformity of our culture. But even further, looking inwardly without regard for others is even more ludicrous.
posted by Timcom at 8:40 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home