Adaptation

[Cramulus]

Pragmatic:

1.Practical, concerned with making decisions and actions that are useful in practice, not just theory

Useful for what?

Good luck reconciling art or fun with practicality. 

in both art and fun, one must utilize methods to accomplish one's goal.

so what method is best?

pragmatism! take a little of philosophy A, mix it up with technique B, apply it using method C...

pragmatism means taking the bits that work and discarding the bits that don't. This sounds useful regardless of what you use it for. Art, fun, religion, sex, programming, whatever.

I think the only time it'll betray you is if you need your position to be pure for some reason and you can't afford to sacrifice parts of the system.

[Kai]

I also want to point out that emotions and fun aren't irrational, if they match the circumstance.

Spock was completely irrational in keeping calm under all circumstances. He wasn't exactly pragmatic either.

[Triple Zero]

Spock also pronounces "atom" in a funny way, and he once bought a camera with a crappy lens because it had a shitload of megapixels.

[Roaring Biscuit!]

Pragmatic:

1.Practical, concerned with making decisions and actions that are useful in practice, not just theory

Useful for what?

Good luck reconciling art or fun with practicality. 

It is practical for me to be happy.  I'm a real pain when I'm not.

Fixed


@CRAM:  YEEEEESSSSSSSSSSS!

One thing in particular has struck me about this idea, one thing that I really like, is that it doesn't necessarily require an internal consistency.  Like JN pointed out, useful is pretty hard thing to define.

Something else to point out, is that as well as borrowing from other religions, there is also the idea that some aspects of those religions may be more or less applicable in certain situations.

Also, Pragmagic Universalism

[Cramulus]

I feel like this fits in well with incompleteness theory


no one model can be correct all of the time

therefore to achieve maximum correctness, pick and choose from different (often conflicting) models


"Buffet-Style Methodology"

[Triple Zero]

I feel like this fits in well with incompleteness theory


no one model can be correct all of the time

therefore to achieve maximum correctness, pick and choose from different (often conflicting) models

If you're talking about Godel's Incompleteness, that's not quite how it works. At least, the bit after your "therefore" isn't.

I personally haven't (yet) found a way to include Godel into many real-life situations, even though I tried. A lot

If you weren't talking about Godel, ignore this post

[Cramulus]

I was just pointing out

no one model can be correct all of the time

[Triple Zero]

well, that seems to be correct, nearly all of the time

[Adios]

I was just pointing out

no one model can be correct all of the time

Well, to aviod the trap you will have to be, i dunno, adaptable.

[The Johnny]

Well, i dont much know about Spock, other than seeing the recent Star Trek movie in a bus, so i cant say...

In regards to pragmatism, i considered it in the context of politics, which maybe its just a fraction of what it can actually be or just a subset... for example, i was thinking it from the traditional perspective of what is "useful" which is money/production, so in that sense i thought of it as irreconciliable - but now i see what you mean.

Fun might not be irrational all the time, but i do think that emotions are irrational, im not sure what you mean by "matching the circumstance".

[Cosmic Joker]

Well, i dont much know about Spock, other than seeing the recent Star Trek movie in a bus, so i cant say...

In regards to pragmatism, i considered it in the context of politics, which maybe its just a fraction of what it can actually be or just a subset... for example, i was thinking it from the traditional perspective of what is "useful" which is money/production, so in that sense i thought of it as irreconciliable - but now i see what you mean.

Fun might not be irrational all the time, but i do think that emotions are irrational, im not sure what you mean by "matching the circumstance".

I think you could easily make the argument that if art and fun raised productivity it would be pragmatic for governments/business to promote them.

I presume an example of emotions "matching the circumstances" would be my justified fear of being sliced into tiny pieces causing me to move out of the way or a runaway shredder.

[The Johnny]

I think you could easily make the argument that if art and fun raised productivity it would be pragmatic for governments/business to promote them.

Tell that to sweat-shops and factory owners  . They are "useful" for emotional health, but not much other than that.

I presume an example of emotions "matching the circumstances" would be my justified fear of being sliced into tiny pieces causing me to move out of the way or a runaway shredder.

Emotion at its root is irrational, although it is true that it can prompt rational decisions, just as it can prompt irrational ones - such as freezing up and getting torn to shit by said shredder.

[Triple Zero]

Well, i dont much know about Spock, other than seeing the recent Star Trek movie in a bus, so i cant say...

In regards to pragmatism, i considered it in the context of politics, which maybe its just a fraction of what it can actually be or just a subset... for example, i was thinking it from the traditional perspective of what is "useful" which is money/production, so in that sense i thought of it as irreconciliable - but now i see what you mean.

Fun might not be irrational all the time, but i do think that emotions are irrational, im not sure what you mean by "matching the circumstance".

I think you could easily make the argument that if art and fun raised productivity it would be pragmatic for governments/business to promote them.

Yes, but that'd be the wrong way around, eh? Government/business productivity is a means, not an ends.

[Adios]

I think you could easily make the argument that if art and fun raised productivity it would be pragmatic for governments/business to promote them.

Tell that to sweat-shops and factory owners  . They are "useful" for emotional health, but not much other than that.

I presume an example of emotions "matching the circumstances" would be my justified fear of being sliced into tiny pieces causing me to move out of the way or a runaway shredder.

Emotion at its root is irrational, although it is true that it can prompt rational decisions, just as it can prompt irrational ones - such as freezing up and getting torn to shit by said shredder.

I fully disagree that emotion is irrational. Is loving a newborn irrational? Is loving your spouse irrational? Is a piece of music making you feel good irrational?

[Kai]

Well, i dont much know about Spock, other than seeing the recent Star Trek movie in a bus, so i cant say...

In regards to pragmatism, i considered it in the context of politics, which maybe its just a fraction of what it can actually be or just a subset... for example, i was thinking it from the traditional perspective of what is "useful" which is money/production, so in that sense i thought of it as irreconciliable - but now i see what you mean.

Fun might not be irrational all the time, but i do think that emotions are irrational, im not sure what you mean by "matching the circumstance".

I think you could easily make the argument that if art and fun raised productivity it would be pragmatic for governments/business to promote them.

I presume an example of emotions "matching the circumstances" would be my justified fear of being sliced into tiny pieces causing me to move out of the way or a runaway shredder.

Yeah. There's nothing irrational at crying at the death of a relative or friend, for example, or getting angry when someone has intentionally wronged you, or feeling exuberance at reaching a significant goal in your life. IMO, it would be irrational NOT to feel those things. Neither is fun not pragmatic. Pragmatism is simply whatever works to reach a goal.

How efficient will the optimization be if I'm never enjoying myself, never having fun? And then the question would be, is your goal in life to be emotionless and unfun? Why?

I presume an example of emotions "matching the circumstances" would be my justified fear of being sliced into tiny pieces causing me to move out of the way or a runaway shredder.

Emotion at its root is irrational, although it is true that it can prompt rational decisions, just as it can prompt irrational ones - such as freezing up and getting torn to shit by said shredder.

I know it's easy to spit that line out, but can you describe your reasoning? ETA: my thought is no, you're guessing the password.