Standing up.
Why would anyone allow another to dictate their direction?
Why would anyone surrender their personhood to another?
Why would anyone rather exist on their knees instead of living on their feet, even if it means death?
Why would anyone sheepishly follow another without putting their own effort forth to reach an opinion?
Why would anyone give up the opportunity to spit in the devils eye and laugh?
Why?
fear
apathy
ignorance
some possible reasons
i hope it helps :wink:
Hawk the devil wants to know why you think it is so damn funny to spit in his eye when god is a much bigger tit than he ever was . .
Quote from: rubickspoop on July 06, 2009, 09:23:30 AM
fear
apathy
ignorance
some possible reasons
i hope it helps :wink:
comfort vs discomfort too.
Love or compassion
Quote from: MMIX on July 06, 2009, 10:16:53 AM
Hawk the devil wants to know why you think it is so damn funny to spit in his eye when god is a much bigger tit than he ever was . .
Barf
Quote from: Hawk on July 06, 2009, 02:39:08 AM
Standing up.
Why would anyone allow another to dictate their direction?
Why would anyone surrender their personhood to another?
Why would anyone rather exist on their knees instead of living on their feet, even if it means death?
Why would anyone sheepishly follow another without putting their own effort forth to reach an opinion?
Why would anyone give up the opportunity to spit in the devils eye and laugh?
Why?
As much as it's pleasant to think otherwise, all meatbags are not created equal.
Worthwhile questions to ask anyone, though.
Quote from: Hawk on July 06, 2009, 02:39:08 AM
Why would anyone allow another to dictate their direction?
trust in that person
QuoteWhy would anyone surrender their personhood to another?
respect or reverence for the other
QuoteWhy would anyone rather exist on their knees instead of living on their feet, even if it means death?
love of those that would also die
QuoteWhy would anyone sheepishly follow another without putting their own effort forth to reach an opinion?
apathy, lack of confidence
QuoteWhy would anyone give up the opportunity to spit in the devils eye and laugh?
self-preservation
Quote from: MMIX on July 06, 2009, 04:30:07 PM
Quote from: Faust on July 06, 2009, 02:18:25 PM
Love or compassion
? relevance . . .
see what cram posted.
basically everything in the first post could be linked to having a kid
Quote from: Faust on July 06, 2009, 11:33:49 PM
Quote from: MMIX on July 06, 2009, 04:30:07 PM
Quote from: Faust on July 06, 2009, 02:18:25 PM
Love or compassion
? relevance . . .
see what cram posted.
basically everything in the first post could be linked to having a kid
True enough. Cram must have put some thought into his reply. Dying for someone is much easier than living for them, isn't it?
Depends on the persons mentality. Just like fetishes there people out there who will go for anything.
Some people feel fulfilled by living for someone else.
Quote from: Faust on July 06, 2009, 11:47:42 PM
Depends on the persons mentality. Just like fetishes there people out there who will go for anything.
Some people feel fulfilled by living for someone else.
It's hard to notice what all is a matter of personal preference or ideology. The first paragraph of this excerpt that Cain posted elsewhere might help.
Quote from: Cain on July 07, 2009, 10:50:56 AM
Quote from: ZizekFor me, ideology is defined only by how the coordinates of your meaningful experience of the world, and your place within society, relate to the basic tensions and antagonisms of social orders. Which is why for me no attitude is a priori ideological. You can be an extreme materialist, thinking that economic development ultimately determines everything; then you are truly ideological. You can be a fanatical millennialist religious mystic, and you are, in a certain way, not outside of ideology. Your position can be that of perfectly describing the data and nonetheless your point is ideological.
For example, I would like to use the wonderful model of Lacan. Let's say that you are married and you are pathologically jealous, thinking that your wife is sleeping around with other men. And let's say that you are totally right, she is cheating. Lacan says that your jealousy is still pathological. Even if everything is true it is pathological, because what makes it pathological is not the fact that is it true or not true, but why you invest so much in it—what needs does it fulfill? It's the same with the Jews and the Nazis. It is not a question that they attributed false properties to the Jews; the point is why did the Nazis need the figure of the Jew as part of their ideological project?
Quote from: yhnmzw on July 07, 2009, 04:47:45 PM
Quote from: Faust on July 06, 2009, 11:47:42 PM
Depends on the persons mentality. Just like fetishes there people out there who will go for anything.
Some people feel fulfilled by living for someone else.
It's hard to notice what all is a matter of personal preference or ideology. The first paragraph of this excerpt that Cain posted elsewhere might help.
Quote from: Cain on July 07, 2009, 10:50:56 AM
Quote from: ZizekFor me, ideology is defined only by how the coordinates of your meaningful experience of the world, and your place within society, relate to the basic tensions and antagonisms of social orders. Which is why for me no attitude is a priori ideological. You can be an extreme materialist, thinking that economic development ultimately determines everything; then you are truly ideological. You can be a fanatical millennialist religious mystic, and you are, in a certain way, not outside of ideology. Your position can be that of perfectly describing the data and nonetheless your point is ideological.
For example, I would like to use the wonderful model of Lacan. Let's say that you are married and you are pathologically jealous, thinking that your wife is sleeping around with other men. And let's say that you are totally right, she is cheating. Lacan says that your jealousy is still pathological. Even if everything is true it is pathological, because what makes it pathological is not the fact that is it true or not true, but why you invest so much in it—what needs does it fulfill? It's the same with the Jews and the Nazis. It is not a question that they attributed false properties to the Jews; the point is why did the Nazis need the figure of the Jew as part of their ideological project?
I need further clarification please.
Quote from: Hawk on July 10, 2009, 02:24:25 AM
...
Quote from: Cain on July 07, 2009, 10:50:56 AM
Quote from: ZizekFor me, ideology is defined only by how the coordinates of your meaningful experience of the world, and your place within society, relate to the basic tensions and antagonisms of social orders. Which is why for me no attitude is a priori ideological. You can be an extreme materialist, thinking that economic development ultimately determines everything; then you are truly ideological. You can be a fanatical millennialist religious mystic, and you are, in a certain way, not outside of ideology. Your position can be that of perfectly describing the data and nonetheless your point is ideological.
For example, I would like to use the wonderful model of Lacan. Let's say that you are married and you are pathologically jealous, thinking that your wife is sleeping around with other men. And let's say that you are totally right, she is cheating. Lacan says that your jealousy is still pathological. Even if everything is true it is pathological, because what makes it pathological is not the fact that is it true or not true, but why you invest so much in it—what needs does it fulfill? It's the same with the Jews and the Nazis. It is not a question that they attributed false properties to the Jews; the point is why did the Nazis need the figure of the Jew as part of their ideological project?
I need further clarification please.
The illusion of "I" seems to take on, at least at some level, the property of self-destructive behaviour patterns which do not directly benefit the individual - actions which make no sense at a surface level reading of evolutionary forces.
It being easier to move forwards than sideways, we have a tendency to assume that we do what we do because on some level, it "is" in our best interests. If our species is very lucky, we will never run out of fresh examples of this fallacy.
The price of liberty (seems to be) eternal vigilance, etc.