Why self-respect is a first prerequisite for discovery

Good, that was precisely why I said it snarkily. Glad it got a laugh.

Sure, I don’t htink they know everything. And of course there are experts where I learn X, but notice they believe Y, and I think the are brasinwashed or naive for believing Y and stay away from any suggestions where Y might affect their advice or knowledge.

Well, how about my astrology example? Did you when learning not accept, for the moment, expert ideas about planet meanings/energies, the various angles (trine vs. square, say), sign meanings, house meanings, how to prioritize a chart reading. IOW you started looking at people’s charts using prior, more expertienced astrologers’ ideas how things should be interpreted

rather than

not reading anyone, listening to anyone and making a chart, then just seeing that first chart you made, your own most likely: well, mars might mean this, because…hm, it seems like 120 degrees might be a more gentle integration of energies since my mercury and nepture are in a trine and I have a gentle intuitive thinking style, that’s kinda fluid but I don’t get confused much…then on to the next chart, taking nothing from this base of knowledge provided by any other astrologer to form your base? Though why you would even associate mercury wiht minds or neptune in any way with intuition…I suppose you might have had a thorough background in mythology, but even then, I think that would skew some of the interpretations adn some of that was probably based on reading books and perhaps some experts on mythology.

Now of course one can do both, to some degree, simultaneously, and I did. But I started out using experts to give me a base to interpret from immediately. Then over time anomalies coupled with observations in general, my own take on humans and more gave me my own style and take and understandings. But I did not reinvent the wheel. No particular astrologer was my guru, I learning form a number often pulling out a best guess from contradictory ideas. But still there were consensus ideas and this formed a kind of base, from which I then, over time leaned on hardly at all and then was critical of in many areas.

But I built on previous work. I did not arise as an astrologer ex nihilo.

You did also mention a Kung fu teacher in the Buddhism thread. Did you not learn from him?

I do live somewhere with quite a bit of regulation…love has led me there, so there it is. But with the schedules, I was actually thinking of a rather chaotic country I lived in where I had to do visa crap with some regularity and here they changed the rules all the time or had none or improvised. Still, schedules kneow more than me, and local experts helped me navigate even the improvised BS by giving me insight into the likely cultural and psychological tendencies of the beauracrats. Their thinking was not like bureaucrats I was used to in the West. Little kings rather than little nazis, would be a quick heuristic.

I agree. It’s a huge topic. Over the years pieces of my criticism have appeared in various forums. They use weak science, weak philosophy, uninformed consent, fad diagnoses, weak logic, confused ideas about the self, magic bullet thinking and short cuts, and tremendous propaganda to spread views of the self, suffering, emotions and problems that are really quite pernicious. I tend to think this is not just idiocy and self-serving rationalizations by Pharma and those who have decided which treatments are valid. So I don’t have any reason to try to demonstrate that it is not.

[/quote]
They have an extremely high rate of suicide if that’s any consolation.

In any case as far as ‘expert’ - I do not remotely see them as finished - knowing it all - or remotely as infallible. If I was planning a trip to the Arctic next month, however, I would do some reading, and preferably some in person talking with experienced travellers. I wouldn’t kiss their feet.

A number of years back I got a music production program. It came with a handbook I read. I got a book on music production using that specific program. Took questions to online forums. Read other books on production in general.

I could have used my intuition and trial and error alone to work through the millions of options, but getting advice and a foundation from experts cut down my learning curve by years. I was not learning how my music should sound, but learning how to use the program.

I just continue to make issue with the term “expert”. Someone who knows some stuff from experience is just that, I wouldn’t use the term “expert”. Ever.
Obviously I have some hard aspects to my Saturn.

What you’re referring to however is the canon of established ideas rather than any particular astrologer.

But I would just say “I started out using astrologers” rather than “I started out using experts”.
Ive never read a truly expert astrologer. Ive talked to and read a great number of very adept ones, but even Ptolemy has a very great deal of nonsense under his belt.

Of course not. But that doesn’t mean any of that previous work was expert.

Yes, but I never called him an expert. All anyone really ever gets to be is an advanced student. There is always more of what one doesn’t know than of what one does know.

Ive always liked traveling in chaotic countries. I seem to get things done from people much more easily there. Precisely because they don’t have to check their rule-book but can just do what I ask them because it makes sense to them.

That makes sense. It would have surprised me if you were some zealous champion of psychiatry.
I don’t know if I have more contempt for the psychiatrists and their pernicious machinery or for the people who voluntarily submit to these regimes. Like with nazis.

Hahaha yes that certainly is.
Thank you for that.

And they’d be sure to kick you in the mouth or take advantage of you. As soon as you give an “expert” too much trust chances are they’ll abuse this trust. Or so Ive unfortunately found. Again, my Saturn just won’t allow me to put faith in much besides my own judgment at all. Anytime I try I am disappointed.

Well here is an exception, when someone creates a tool, that person would more likely than not be an expert on the basic possibilities of that tool. Though still, someone will discover things that can be done with it that the creator never intended or imagined.

LOL. Ok, so would you not consider yourself an expert? When Unwrong called himself the best philosopher in the world, you, or someone quite like you, defended this self-labelling. That seems even stronger than the word expert, though I admit there is a slight category shift, from descriptive to comparative. I suppose the best philosopher in the world might not be an expert.

Do not these types exist? Are you not one of them in some area of knowledge or skill, yourself?

Sure, but I got that canon via a few people. I didn’t go up to people in the street. I went to people who had actively studied and done astrology for more than a decade, and in addition seemed to have some solid knowledge of human nature and how to write clearly and intelligently. Or speak intelligently with those I met in person.

Would you really say you, FC, do not have a great deal of skill as a philosopher or an astrologer are not very knowledgeable about it? Because that’s what the word means. Or if you are humble - nudge, nudge, wink, wink - about your abilities as an astrologer, is there not another field or skill area where you consider yourself very knowledgeable or highly skilled.?

I just don’t see ‘expert’ as the same as omniscient in a certain field.

You must have way with people. Because I consider myself pretty damn good with people and charismatic, but I found third world countries much easier to navigate with expert knowledge in advance.

Yeah, I meant the opposite. A psychiatrist who is an expert has gone against his profession. He’s a heretic. To the extent he fits his profession, he is dangerous to people.

oh, sure. I definitely got into going against advice later. Use compression at the ‘wrong’ time in a mix to see if I like it and so on.

I’ll drop the expert discussion. I don’t think that in practice we are so different in how we view and ‘use’ people who have more experience and the word itself doesn’t matter much.

This would be true where the standard in question can only be measured subjectively or predominantly so
But for objective measurement a certain degree of self respect is not really relevant so is rather arbitrary
For example self respect for the study of an academic subject is nowhere as important as an open mind is

You have to respect your analytical abilities, your choices of sources, your notes on lectures, your own way of studying (self-pedagogy), one’s critical thinking, your choice of the course being a good one, your choice of school, the goal of your studies, the potential use you will have for the course and the grade. Sure you will get a grade which will be the school’s measure of what you did, and even that you need to put in a context of your own values and plans and how you interpret, use their sense of your learning. IOW to use the course well requires confidence at the meta-level that doing it is worthwhile for you and your own goals. They you need self-respect around all the skills needed to pursue your own goals and if they include doing well in the course according to the professor, confidence in your skills in satisfying his or her criteria. There is no passive learning nor contextless events.

and as far as the open mind - this concept is really quite vague, but one cannot learn simply passively, not that you are saying this. One can come close to learning simply with an open mind through rote learning, memorizing facts another has given one, but if the idea is to have some skill with those facts, one must still have confidence in being able to paraphrase, apply to concrete situations if the learning is about concepts, and draw abstract conclusions, if the focus is on specific events or facts. Any academic course is going to require skills in interacting with the information and arguments/justifications/evidence presented. And here you must respect your own abilities to interact with the ideas and apply them. An open mind generally means a willingness to try out new ideas, to consider them. Even at this minimal level one must have confidence in one’s understanding. One needs confidence in one’s own introspective skills - am I rejecting this (or accepting this) for emotional reasons or for rational reasons. One thus also needs confidence in one’s analytical abilities and then even intuition: nagging feelings that something is missing or not justified, for example.

Notice how Fixed Cross said that if you do not respect yourself you cannot respect the standard by which you measure other things. IOW sure, you can have an open mind, but if you don’t respect yoruself and your abilities then you can’t really respect your evaluations of other things. The author of this text I got in my ancient greece course was well argued and provided strong evidence for its conclusions AND I do not respect my intellectual abilities

just doesn’t work. How would I know? Why would I respect my conclusion about that work?

For me most of that would come under the definition of self assessment rather than self respect which I think are not the same
Self respect is accepting that you have moral value as a human being because of who you are and of what you think or believe
Self assessment is knowing what you are good at and not good at and how you can improve your skillset for what is necessary

For me also an open mind is simply avoiding all dogmatism by remaining emotionally detached from whatever is being studied
For it is merely accepting that within certain disciplines such as philosophy for example there will be multiple interpretations
One can acknowledge this and understand each as much as possible without necessarily being commited to any particular one

Also when you have acquired a certain degree of self awareness you should know where your capabilities are
This knowledge is not something that has to be acquired for it should already exist based on past experience

I for example know what my academic capabilities are without having to analyse them in order to know what they are
For I can instinctively assess whether a particular course is something I could do without requiring any real evaluation

OK, but then self-assessment is neutral. You have self-assessment means you evaluate yourself. Self-respect implies that you have a positive self-assessment. You respect your skills and abilities. You respect yourself as a learner or whatever.

It seems to me he was talking about measuring, evaluating, something else. IOW drawing conclusions. Not remaining detached, but taking a position. Whether one should or should not do this, I don’t think you are quite reacting to what you quoted in your first post above.

Which means you have formed a postive regard for some of your capabilities. If you don’t have a positive regard for your abilities, how could you have a postive regard for any conclusions you might draw about a text, a book, an opinion expressed by a lecturer. Whether this is instinctive or not seems beside the point. You can’t make the evaluation of the information, position, idea, if you don’t respect your own abilities.

Somehow I think you are responding to some other position.

The words that you have used there - positive / respect - are emotional ones which I do not personally apply to ability
Knowing whether or not I can do something is just practical knowledge that requires no emotional input from me at all

I can and indeed do assess my abilities from an objective perspective rather than from a subjective one
And so avoid any unnecessary use of emotion and try instead to have detachment as my default position

Indeed. We seem to generally agree on a lot of things, and to have explored quite a lot. Differences are largely due to different histories with certain terms.

The point you made about Buddhism and the limbic system is of extreme importance to me -
Id like to spend some thought on what would amount to methods for strengthening the limbic system.

Im sure much that occurs in the west could be designated as such a method - but it would be very useful to think about it anyway. Perhaps to form some kind of discipline where he limbic system is strengthened and purified of unnecessary disgust, despair, neurosis, etc.

I guess this approach would make me into something of a psychiatrist.

Another way to look at the goal could be to not treat the limbic system as the enemy and then to try to integrate the brain’s different parts.

There is a huge set of powerful judgments out there that you must choose one part of the brain over others. I don’t think this is true. I think they can work in conjunction.

Certainly. Lets go into that.

Is this true? Thats deranged.

Im sure that in sane humans they do.

But what isn’t an idiotic idea necessarily is to rank the different parts. They cant all be decisive in all situations. Our time is definitely marked by a completely chaotic relation of the different parts of the brain. Nothing makes sense, yet everything has its reasons.

What, in youe psychiatric opinion, would be the most important part of the brain to anchor oneself in, lets say, in a morning exercise?

Can one really have an open mind without self-respect?

Maybe.

But without self respect intellectual integrity is not possible, and that is required to do justice to any incoming information.

The brain may have many individual parts but they work together rather than operate in isolation

The limbic system communicates with the amygdala which is primarily responsible for fear and anxiety
The amygdala is in the reptilian part of the brain so it is very old and primitive compared to other parts

It is also responsible for moral and physical disgust because disgust in any form is based upon fear or anxiety
It would have been a more active region in early homo sapiens because of the evolutionary need for survival

I’m all about da mutual respect, honey… it’s fundamental, at a certain point in society, upwards… I’ve seen it in action… it’s an important aspect in business and politics and social settings.

Once respect has been lost, it’s very hard to gain back… and near impossible for some, that are so short-sighted that their vision prohibits such necessary formalities to materialise as true.

youtube.com/playlist?list=PLpXa … CBQSwi_2e8

Human Behavioural Biology / Professor Robert Sapolsky / Stanford University / Lecture I4 Limbic System

I watched the first of these by chance then just went through all of the 22 that he gave
The first lecture is absolutely amazing and is one of the best ones that I have ever seen
His other single lecture video on shamanism and the biology of religiosity is just as good

A world class education freely available on YouTube to absolutely anyone - the internet as it should be
I intend to watch all of these lectures as many more times until I understand them as much as possible