Jump to content

User:RD/9k/Some prefer poetry to science (Q36,10)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From LithoGraphica
(Redirected from Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q3610)

Main entry

  1. poetry (literary flair)

    / poetry (lyricism); lyricism (arts) / poetry (expressive style of creating art or narrative style or expressive form of framing used in any form of storytelling; poetic quality of mythic narratives)
  2. Some prefer poetry to science

    / Some people prefer poetry to science / Myth, religion, dreams, visions ... the dark waters Freud fished to find his conception of human nature (Roszak 1968) [1] ->

    the answer is to give them proletarian poetry. think about it this way: fantasy books are poetry. they tell what are supposedly life lessons or at least meaningful statements about art through really thick, opaque, poetic framings. I think in some senses some people really need to be hooked into the poetic fantasy or history-myth that workers fight terrifying battles and the owners right next to them in their own town can be "kings of darkness".

Related

  1. Spiritual people are theatrical

    / Spiritual people aren't delusional; they're highly cultural / Spiritual people aren't delusional, they're just deeply absorbed in culture, poetry, and romanticism ->

    this becomes very apparent if you read enough secondary-source Christian media totally detached from the opinions of any Christians as if it all fell out of the sky yesterday and you're the first person that ever saw it. the point of the stories is poetry. to tell things that would make sense said another way through really opaque poetry. that's just it.
    the reason it's so frustrating to try to get people out of religion is this. religion was never about the supernatural. people don't necessarily care about a supernatural or afterlife existing whatsoever. the true draw of religion that keeps sucking everybody in is culture. religion is culture. people are really obsessed with culture, they absolutely love culture. (while I'm one of the only people in existence who doesn't; I hate culture and love math.) a normal person sees a poetic description of some Lived Experience purportedly universal to multiple people's lives in a bible story or a novel and goes crazy for it, they flip out about how much they related to it and go pour out their emotions of how much they love whatever simple trope of "love your neighbor", "lesbians got together", etc with however many other people who are all there just because they're flipping out over a little shred of poetry. and these normal people intrinsically trust each other and trust that they each belong there flipping out over a line of poetry and it's completely expected nothing bad will happen and they won't spontaneously turn out to be enemies because they come from different subpopulations. if that happens they just go "it's unthinkable for that to be able to happen" and act quickly to suppress it and crush the way things really work. (not that that's a terrible thing, should they actually succeed.) because they're totally wrapped up in poetry, they're under poetry's spell. people get together around a bit of poetry and become spellbound that whatever people they clustered together can become a stable ongoing countable culture and a "community". and from there they can get so wrapped up in poetry and "community" that they even start to have serious faith in their poetry-group out-enduring every human being who doesn't belong to it. this, I feel, partially explains the typical narrative around the New Deal and "fireside chats". people keep bringing up the fireside chats because they love the poetry of it. the simplicity of just collecting people together and sharing the same bit of culture and poetry, and thinking that this will supposedly make all of the suffering of the United States bit by bit slowly go away. but then it doesn't. the events that come next reveal people's attachment to poetry to be a mythology. it's revealed that the most innocuous case of people gathering around a national campfire and uniting together around poetry is a Cartesian system of reasoning that doesn't account for the existence of two separate plural groups in conflict with each other. the ignored group not integrated into the poetry gets upset and Zinovievizes the Roosevelt followers and the whole thing comes crashing down. and this, I think, is a microcosm of all of Liberal-republicanism. the human brain really isn't built for intuitively understanding separable multiplicity. the whole artistic, cultural, poetic, spiritual mode of thinking practically always fails to catch the existence of whole different countable cultures with whole different internal realities.

  2. Anarchists would rather read fiction than history

    -> hypothesis. can we successfully teach anarchists historical materialism with enough Warrior cats?

Ideology codes

  • (none)