News:

PD.com: Worse than that time when I conjured a handkerchief from that deaf kid's ear.

Main Menu

like things that are cool, hate things that suck

Started by Cramulus, September 20, 2013, 03:16:39 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Cramulus

"Beavis and Butthead like things that are cool, and hate things that suck."



Saw that description on netflix and it made me laugh, and I'm still processing why.

It's like a zen koan. It sounds so dumb! Why? Is it because B&B's dialog is so stupid, when you try to summarize it, it sounds even stupider? Like trying to describe the oft mundane plot of Seinfeld, "It's a show about nothing." Or when somebody asks me what I did today, and it doesn't make a great narrative, I say, "Ah nothing much."

And that line fascinates me because it's also a description of so many conversations I have. We're all collectively processing the news, pop culture, whatever thing comes down the reality tunnel into the perceptual field. Most processing happens on the first circuit of consciousness. Either you eat it (cool) or you run away from it (sucks). Approach or avoid. We add a lot of data to that decision but at its core it's very basic.

I heard that the kernel of inspiration for Beavis and Butthead was a moment when Mike Judge was eating lunch in a mall food court, and he was listening to these two teenagers talking, and they sounded so stupid, so utterly moronic, that he had to draw a cartoon about them----and the rest is history.

And meanwhile, I'm sitting in a living room having a spirited debate about Obama Drones Syria NSA etc etc etc, and what do I have to say about it? If you boil it down, I'm either saying "that's cool" or "that sucks".
                     




And in parallel

                      A student once asked his teacher, "Master, what is enlightenment?"

                      The master replied, "When hungry, eat. When tired, sleep."




it sounds really dumb, and yet---                  does it need to be complicated?






IN CONCLUSION
maybe beavis and butthead     (read: us)
are enlightened masters     (read: cool)
but maybe     (hang on)
they are shitheads     (read: sucks)

Mesozoic Mister Nigel

"I'm guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk," Charles Wick said. "It was very complicated."


Cain


Cramulus

#3
Yeah, it's like

Your "Reactive Mind" is the robot-like part of you that just reacts to stimulus. I think that if such a thing as free will exists, it only happens when you can hush that part of you that is programmaticly sorting the world into "approach" and "avoid" boxes.

That's part of zen too, quieting the judgmental part of you which insists on labeling everything as good or bad and just trying to see things as they are.

AFK

Quote from: Cramulus on September 20, 2013, 04:30:20 PM
Yeah, it's like

Your "Reactive Mind" is the robot-like part of you that just reacts to stimulus. I think that if such a thing as free will exists, it only happens when you can hush that part of you that is programmaticly sorting the world into "approach" and "avoid" boxes.

That's part of zen too, quieting the judgmental part of you which insists on labeling everything as good or bad and just trying to see things as they are.


This reminds me of the months following the dissolving of my marriage.  The "Reactive Mind" of course was all, "she's bad, evil, heartless, etc., etc".   


however when i was able to get to a place where I could quiet that part of my mind, all of this stuff became readily apparent.  The ACTUAL reasons and evidence of why things went the way they did.  And i have to say, it was awesome and. big relief really.  It brought me a lot of clarity I wouldn't have had if i had continued to label and obsess on that "reactive mind" level.
Cynicism is a blank check for failure.

Q. G. Pennyworth

Who still needs to get rid of their reactive mind?


rong

I believe some people think it's cool to like things that suck.  And that's not cool.
"a real smart feller, he felt smart"

Bu🤠ns



Interesting....

I suppose one could say that Facebook encourages this reactive mind.


The Johnny


Yes, everything can be boiled down to "that's cool" or "that sucks" but... the difference resides in the criterions one utilizes to define each of them - it can involve things like critical thinking, examining an idea against what reality shows and experimentation - or it can be something so basic as instincts and what is convenient in a short-sighted manner.
<<My image in some places, is of a monster of some kind who wants to pull a string and manipulate people. Nothing could be further from the truth. People are manipulated; I just want them to be manipulated more effectively.>>

-B.F. Skinner

Mesozoic Mister Nigel

Quote from: The Johnny on September 21, 2013, 03:58:22 AM

Yes, everything can be boiled down to "that's cool" or "that sucks" but... the difference resides in the criterions one utilizes to define each of them - it can involve things like critical thinking, examining an idea against what reality shows and experimentation - or it can be something so basic as instincts and what is convenient in a short-sighted manner.

Yes, I was going to say that the reaction may boil down to "that's cool" or "that sucks", but the processes we use to arrive at that conclusion come in varied levels of complexity, and additional complexity is piled on when/if we re-evaluate our original conclusion from time to time. In addition, there is a vast shaded middle area, that of "that might suck/be cool but I'm not really sure".
"I'm guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk," Charles Wick said. "It was very complicated."


P3nT4gR4m

The world would be nowhere near as cool if you took away all the bits that suck

I'm up to my arse in Brexit Numpties, but I want more.  Target-rich environments are the new sexy.
Not actually a meat product.
Ass-Kicking & Foot-Stomping Ancient Master of SHIT FUCK FUCK FUCK
Awful and Bent Behemothic Results of Last Night's Painful Squat.
High Altitude Haggis-Filled Sex Bucket From Beyond Time and Space.
Internet Monkey Person of Filthy and Immoral Pygmy-Porn Wart Contagion
Octomom Auxillary Heat Exchanger Repairman
walking the fine line line between genius and batshit fucking crazy

"computation is a pattern in the spacetime arrangement of particles, and it's not the particles but the pattern that really matters! Matter doesn't matter." -- Max Tegmark

Lord Cataplanga

Quote from: Mean Mister Nigel on September 21, 2013, 05:52:29 AM
Quote from: The Johnny on September 21, 2013, 03:58:22 AM

Yes, everything can be boiled down to "that's cool" or "that sucks" but... the difference resides in the criterions one utilizes to define each of them - it can involve things like critical thinking, examining an idea against what reality shows and experimentation - or it can be something so basic as instincts and what is convenient in a short-sighted manner.

Yes, I was going to say that the reaction may boil down to "that's cool" or "that sucks", but the processes we use to arrive at that conclusion come in varied levels of complexity, and additional complexity is piled on when/if we re-evaluate our original conclusion from time to time. In addition, there is a vast shaded middle area, that of "that might suck/be cool but I'm not really sure".

Most of the time I feel like I do a snap judgement like "that sucks" and only afterwards think "why do I believe it sucks? there must be a reason..."

When that happens, no matter what the complexity of the process I use to "arrive" at that conclussion, it's already too late, too easy to rationalize.

From the lesswrong sequences:
Quote from: http://lesswrong.com/lw/jx/we_change_our_minds_less_often_than_we_think/I realized that once I could guess what my answer would be—once I could assign a higher probability to deciding one way than other—then I had, in all probability, already decided.  We change our minds less often than we think.  And most of the time we become able to guess what our answer will be within half a second of hearing the question.

How swiftly that unnoticed moment passes, when we can't yet guess what our answer will be; the tiny window of opportunity for intelligence to act.  In questions of choice, as in questions of fact.