• Comment Policy
  • (Theoretically) Frequently Asked Questions
  • My Recommendations
  • Re: Ideafication
  • RSS
Ideafication

Ideafication

Steve: Futurist, Political Commentator, & Philosopher
Google

Tag Archive: Psychology


Reserve the Right to Judge

Filed Under: Philosophy by admin — Leave a comment
May 15, 2012

There’s a phrase often heard, usually spoken by a person just recently insulted. “You have no right to call me that!”, or any other phrase claiming there has been some kind of rights violation which occurred when person A describes person B in some manner they personally deem inappropriate. It is important to note that it is thought of as inappropriate, because I have yet to witness an interaction where a stranger compliments or otherwise judges someone in a positive light and the person receiving this judgment plays the lack-of-rights-to-do-that card.

Is it some sort of socially-synthesized safeguard against insults and hurtful words, meant to make the accuser feel just as bad as the accused? Is it just a natural reaction, or something people actually think is granted them by some outside source? Whatever it may be, it seems to be used quite often, especially from hecklers at stand-up shows.

Why am I even addressing this? Judgment is good! When made vocal or written, it allows everyone to understand what is thought of, felt, and perceived by other people, which is a perspective which would otherwise be near impossible to acquire. Even the most poorly thrown together judgments based on little to no facts or evidence serve a role in the exchange of ideas, because when the misinformed remain silent, you can’t really tell who needs what information.

If you are insulted by someone, consider how they would arrive to their conclusion! Is their statement true? Perhaps you should change your behavior? Maybe they haven’t seen the whole picture? It’s okay to be mad at them, but letting them and everyone around know that you feel that you deserve to only hear nice things about yourself is unrealistic, full of undeserved ego, and sometimes the source of more insults.

Lastly, I know someone is going to think bigotry is going to be some sort of exception, so I’ll cover that, too. Although an awful thing, it’s important that these ideas are heard as well. The only way a sexist, racist, homophobe, or other bigoted person gets through life easily is if they keep it to themselves. If that happens, their ideas will never be challenged, and they’ll stubbornly remain misguided for life.

Tags: Behavior, Bigotry, Homophobia, Insult, Judge, Judgement, Psychology, Racism, Rights, Sexism, Social
Comment

Wants, Needs, and a Mix of Both

Filed Under: General Thoughts by Steve — 1 Comment
January 11, 2011

Often when I discuss rights or want versus need with someone, I get someone that thinks they have some exact want/need difference figured out, and tries to hack away at anything I say because having something set in stone like that helps them not have to think so much (which means my position is stressing them out, I suppose).

Fallout New VegasAn example which will be very clear to people that think this way: A kid claims that he needs the new video game that just came out. The adult in this situation is trying to get his/her shopping done, and partially incorrectly says “no, you don’t need it” in an attempt to quickly end the potential arguement. The parent doesn’t need to get it for them, but there is a need here. The child is thinking ahead to what is going to happen as far as play time goes in the foreseeable future. That plastic robot keeps falling over and isn’t any fun, and his best friend is out of town for two weeks. In order to maximize the level of fun they can have, they need a source of fun that will last, and the new video game appears to be the best thing to do that with. The kid will likely become frustrated because what the parent said was false when applied to the child’s line of thought.

However, this is not to say one want or need is more valuable than another want or need, nor is it claiming otherwise. (Obviously this is a case-by-case sort of thing.)

People want to live (or not, sometimes), and, at least from what I’ve experienced, generally people seem to think “if it’s required for survival, it’s a need”. If someone is about to die of natural causes (to be clear, not starvation or thirst) or is about to kill themselves, they don’t “need” to eat or drink. You could say the latter needs therapy, but that’s condition-based (the condition being if surviving is better for them given their situation or if they’ve had a prolonged stage of irrationality, causing them to reach poor conclusions) and the person not in the near-death situation probably didn’t think about that; they’re just casting their own judgment on the situation as if they were absolutely certain they knew what was best (it’s good to want to help, but you’re not the center of reality). Perhaps they needed a friend, and therapy would just make them feel like they’re even more of an outcast; someone saying they need therapy in order to not kill themselves would have been wrong in this case. If someone (that wants to live, in this example) needs an operation they can’t afford in order to live, they need more money to get the operation, but they don’t need to get that money from a particular place; they may want it from a preferred source, though.

Something can be a want and a need at the same time, too (most needs are, actually). I suspect the average person wants more things. If an average person has a lot of friends that have a lot more than he/she does, they may develop a feeling inferiority and would need more things to get rid of this feeling that affects their mental health, but the person claiming the difference between need and want is directly survival-related would likely argue otherwise. When someone is held hostage, the hostage holder may have all they need for survival before the hostage situation even took place. They make demands, all of which are things they want. Depending on the situation, you may need to give them these things to resolve the situation even though these things aren’t needed by the hostage holder. Who knows if the hostage holder had the intent to make it a life-or-death situation, so you can’t even tell if you needed to do anything to save the hostages.

Needs are almost just wants with a reason attached; pretty much any “I want it because…” I can think of can easily be turned into “I need it in order to…”. Don’t assume what you think are needs should be a standard everyone must to submit to.

Tags: Debate, Definition, Irrational, Need, Psychology, Rational, Survival, Touchy Subjects, Want
Comment

Happiness

Filed Under: Personal, Philosophy, Psychology by Steve — 1 Comment
November 10, 2010

I’ve written a lot of things here that could come off as negative, or could make someone come to a realization that makes them disappointed in some way. I’ve periodically been asked if I’m ever happy (Usually by people that disagree with everything I say, but I digress). Someone smarter asked me if being happy is even rational. Until that question, I had no intention of writing something like this but now, clearly, I am.

The question was pretty simple, but when I began to think about it, I began thinking “Wow, no. Being happy isn’t the most rational thing one could be.” but that didn’t seem right at all. That made me unhappy!

Abraham Lincoln, Reasonable Man

Abraham Lincoln was a reasonable man, but you don't see him grinnin' like an idiot!

Some of you may be wondering at this point “Why did you think being happy wasn’t rational?”. To begin, you must realize being happy is a chemical state of mind. The only difference between pain, happiness, and drug induced feelings are amounts and types of chemicals. Sure, a drug that causes absurd levels of “happy” may be seen as over-doing it, but what if you took just enough of it to equal the level of say, eating a delicious cake or seeing someone you care about for the first time in months, it becomes an equal thing, though with the drug you don’t require complicated things or relationships.

Another problem is that there are many instances where one person’s happiness imposes on another’s, likely causing social harm of some sort. The rare but obvious example would be someone that takes pleasure in killing, though there are more common examples like bullies and con artists.

In order to come to any kind of decision on this that was rational, I had to first separate the two concepts into “Socially Negative Happiness” and “Socially Positive Happiness”. I realized there was one other, however, “Socially Neutral Happiness”, under which the likes of drugs would often (but not always) fall. Socially Positive Happiness is, as the name implies, the good kind. The problem here was that I had separated the different types and found “the most rational” one, but how rational was it? Technically, you were still giving into desires, and you might not even be aware of how rational of a choice it was until after the event!

Happiness isn’t intended to fit in the category of “rational”, but it isn’t “irrational” either. It’s the reward for making rationally pleasing decisions. The implications of this are important, though. You can lead a fantastic life by developing a great personal philosophy. Sure, you could be happy without one, but you run the risk of doing harm to others and likely even to yourself down the road. If you’re doing something you find fun but something seems not right, give it some thought! Sure, you may come to the conclusion that it’s not Socially Positive Happiness, but there are countless other things you could be doing that qualify as such. Get out there and do them!

Tags: Abraham Lincoln, Drugs, Happiness, Irrational, Philosophy, Psychology, Reason, Reasoning, Social, Socially Negative Happiness, Socially Neutral Happiness, Socially Positive Happiness
Comment

Re: The Capitalism Death Toll Project

Filed Under: Political, Response by Steve — 4 Comments
November 4, 2010

In response to:
bluelinchpin.wordpress.com The Capitalism Death Toll Project

I can see where some of this is coming from, but this looks like “the pursuit of money” is often being blamed here.

People are psychologically incapable of doing something that doesn’t benefit them in some way; greed and charity are two takes on this, as greed allows you to have more things that make you happy, and charity is an action that makes people happy (the charitable person included, “I’m glad I was able to help those people!”). You fighting something you see as a threat to people makes you feel good (and rightfully so) that you may get the word out to someone important or in a position to make a change, just as I feel good about standing up for something that produces wonderful results most of the time (not every time, I know).

Some people will end up making a lot of money if the opportunity is there, and if what they do with it is up to them (both of these things motivate creative people). Some people do end up helping others directly, others keep it for themselves. Additionally, this system can drive down the cost of things, (I’ve seen the cost of tooth cavity fillings, music, and especially computer technology drop in price) making these things available to more people.

Having a capitalist system in place does indirectly cause deaths (as with pretty much any economic/governing system), but it also indirectly saves lives. If one mechanic hurts someone with a tool, taking the tool away from every mechanic may prevent people from getting hurt (with tools), but a bunch of people now aren’t able to fix, make, or do things effectively. Bad people do bad things, and no governing system currently available/conceived is immune to that.

With that being said, I don’t think an honest death toll could be established for capitalism. Not only that, but under the title of “Capitalism Death Toll” it ropes in people that used capitalism for good, and lets those who used it poorly remain not called out. If you really worked at this, you could actually help make capitalism work better, which I think would make everyone happy.

Tags: Bad People Do Bad Things, Capitalism, Change, Charity, Collective Guilt, Communism, Death, Economy, Greed, Help, Money, Persuit of Money, Psychology
Comment

The Grand Philosophies of Facebook Users

Filed Under: Internet, Psychology by Steve — 1 Comment
August 31, 2010

Among Facebook’s several design flaws are a number of things that can be avoided if you take the right steps. What I’ve noticed that you can’t avoid are the little angsty preppy teen quotes everyone copy/pastes into their wall. Some of it has been made into business by turning them into things you can like on a “like site” with ads and such on it. Still, these little quotes can still plague your feeds.

The Facebook LogoNo, I’m not even talking about the “Pass this on and your wish will come true! (Really!)” things. Sometimes people will have these nuggets of vague advice they need to share with the world, and today’s technology enables them. Why anyone would pay for a fancy phone to read these things is beyond me (I’m hoping the facebook app isn’t used to check feeds).

Occasionally, emotions will overrun someone’s mind, and force them to post things like “men are awful” against their will. It can be happy emotions, too, like “I have the best girlfriend/boyfriend”. In any given moment, at least 90% of the population that is in a relationship would say they’re in the best one (or at least perfect!). If you ask that same group three years later, unless they were in the same relationship, they would definitely say it wasn’t the best.

Sometimes, they’ll even go as far as condescending to those who don’t happen to have learned from the faults they had in the past. Here’s a quote I saw earlier today:

“(Name) Doesnt care about “girls like bad boys” stereotype. I am dating a nice guy, assholes are overrated and I refuse to date them. Keep your dangerous rebels, emo boys, guys who are more jaded then a hobo living under a bridge hooked on meth, guys who like to seem distant so that the girls will chase them(nice reverse psychology). Ive got a good guy and Im not another statistic.”

Sure, that’s nice. While on the outside this is just another “I’m glad I’m not single at the moment”, it’s only slightly more than that. This person may also want to legitimately help someone else be as happy as she as, but in doing so, she has only formed a statement that fits that claim of a “Perfect relationship” status. Other people will tend to cheer these posts on, with even less insight:

“Amen girl! The good guys are the ones who will still cherish you when you’re old and wrinkly.” & “Scream it sister! Amen“. This will happen regardless of the positive/negative qualities of the post they care commenting on.

I’ve seen this sort of thing hundreds of times. It’s generally an early relationship thing, where one is just happy to be with someone, and the arguments haven’t started yet. This happiness from just being with someone is what prevents relationship-straining topics like “What is your opinion on abortion?” from coming up early on. There’s a point in the beginning of a relationship where you’d prefer to be floating in your brain’s happy chemicals than know if the relationship is genuinely going to last. But I’ve arrived at a tangent at this point.

Friends don't let friends drink and post.But there are much worse cases of low-quality Facebook posts. These are generally centered around the party/drinking culture. I’ve included in this post a screen capture of one of these posts by someone that is an emerging celebrity. Seems as though ten people like that this person is drunk. This post was commented on later, but before that point, there were a bunch of people that saw the word “drunk” and immediately found some sort of amusement there. Either that, or for some reason ten creeps thought they were going to score online or something impossible like that.

There are also some religion propaganda to help deepen your level of indoctrination, but that’s another topic for another day.

I could just be overthinking this, though. Maybe Facebook is just somewhere thinking doesn’t belong. I went there to connect to people, and I got way more than I wanted. I guess the general public is whatever the popular social site at the time makes it, which would mean Facebook is to blame for enabling these people to feel good about their existence without actually doing anything of value. It’s no place for my social commentary, art, inventions, psychology, or philosophy. That’s quite a shame, really, since these things (not mine in particular, but everyone who provides such things) bring legitimate lasting pleasure to people in the big picture. After all, it’s nerdy stuff (computers, smart phones, and other tech you’re spoiled with at this point that only nerds had three years ago) that you’re using to read this and post stuff on Facebook.

Related Blog Post by Bob Waack.

Minor note: While I’m aware I may upset people with this post, the intention is to educate, not anger.

Tags: Current, Emotions, Facebook, Internet, Mind Virus, Philosophy, Psychology, Relationships, Social, Social Commentary, Social Networking, Stupidity, Teenage Psychology
Comment
« Older Entries
  • Tags

    2010 Abraham Lincoln Ads America Blog Capitalism Change Comedy Comments Discrimination Economy Electronic Emotions EP Facebook FPFM Future Futures Passed Government Internet Life Mind Virus Money Music My Music News Personal Philosophy Politics Predictions Psychology Questions Racism Religion School Science Social Social Commentary Socialism Social Networking Social Traits Society Technology Video YouTube
  • Meta

    • Register
    • Log in
    • Entries RSS
    • Comments RSS
    • WordPress.org
  • Find This Blog On…

    Follow this blog
  • Categories

  • Personal

    FormSpring Google+ Last.FM My Music Twitter
  • FP Network

    • Futures Passed Forum
    • Futures Passed Free Music (Label)
    • Futures Passed Music News & Reviews
    • Time For More Info
  • Designed by Stephen Brand at Tech Secure 411, a Computer Repair, Web Design, & Business Technology company.