Jump to content

User:RD/9k/non-narrative thinking (Q60,61)

From Philosophical Research
Revision as of 05:27, 8 March 2026 by Reversedragon (talk | contribs) (copy markup from 9k/Q34,05)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Main entry

  1. non-narrative thinking [1] -> so this apparently has a name. (insert gif of Hermione. "that thing has a name??") I would call it a fallacy honestly, not a way to "escape" cognitive biases.
    non-narrative thinking + street protest = frog protest. non-narrative thinking + RPG progression as horror = Game worlds are cultural fabrications. non-narrative thinking + Careerist class = Being a waiter is a culturally-fabricated Game.

Related

  1. Being a waiter is an arbitrary narrative / Being a waiter is a culturally-fabricated Game / Being a waiter is a culturally-fabricated Game that prevents an individual having an understanding of self and an ownership of Life (Sartre, Being and Nothingness) [2] [3] -> no. the narrative of waiters is created by the existence of restaurants as structures. to argue this you'd have to argue that restaurants are a wholly made-up game and it's possible for everyone to spontaneously go "I don't want there to be restaurants" and thus drain the value of capital to zero but also take away any ability it might provide to earn any money. and there's nothing great about money, but it's quite notable that without money humans are still wholly capable of pinning down a territory and doing horrendous things in it and saying nobody can stop them. if there was no money people would have just, come to North America and carved out a micronation the size of Delaware and made whatever rules they want and said "I'll shoot everyone who tries to take this land or change the rules". money had a particular bizarre effect of allowing people to fight over territory and the exclusive right to make rules bloodlessly — instead of shooting murderers we have to demand money, instead of capturing slaves in an international war, now we buy them. clearly the effects did not bring total peace between populations. money took the basic act of two territories of people in tensions preparing to kill each other dead to change the rules and deferred it so that there was some kind of objective criterion by which people could decide when somebody should occupy a territory or not. nobody had to obey the criterion and sell a territory, and in the end this act of making spatial slot hierarchies systematic could be called an act of social darwinism, but it had the dubious advantage of allowing people to kill each other over resources more slowly and nonviolently, ultimately making things like homeless protests possible instead of the king killing all the homeless people before they can do anything about it. (real historical incident.) take that away by deciding that job slots and business territories are a fabricated Game that can be overwritten by a bunch of people banding together and arbitrarily making up new rules, and the results are not going to be pretty. it can work out for the Wampís people, but separable areas of racist White people are definitely going to do it.

Ideology codes

  • (none)