Paul Eres ([info]rinku) wrote,
@ 2008-02-29 03:36:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Entry tags:culture, games, health, politics, psychology, religion, world

Lately I've been losing whatever inclination I had to express thoughts in words. The very idea of writing something has become detestable. EDIT: Let alone writing something as long as this entry.

This might be due to an increasing distrust of the abstract (and all words are abstract, some more than others, but all of them.) I think a good response is to instead only write in a storytelling, pointing way. Truths that exist which cannot be conveyed in that way aren't usually worth conveying.

China will replace the US as a superpower solely on the basis that they eat more omega-3 fats than we do, and because the lack of them is associated with most forms of mental illness and all kinds of neurological troubles. They also don't have HFCS and so on (which is not to say that their diet doesn't have some problems, but it's far better than here). Also, although both the US and China are fascisms (in the sense of an unholy alliance between business and government), but at least theirs is more corrupt, and corruption is usually good for the people of a country because it keeps fascisms weak and ineffectual. Their economy also grows at around 10% a year and ours actually shrinks at around 1.5% a year if you account for standard of living and inflation. I suggest a good time to immigrate there is around 2035, 27 years from now; the relevant stars align around then. By 2050, definitely. To bad I have to wait so long to see how this turns out, but there are interesting things to do in the mean time.

There are all kinds of things happening in the world and it's hard to decide which is the most interesting to follow and work within. Just through proximity and other accidents the ones I follow the most are independent game development, nutrition / scientific alternative medicine, and the ridiculously ineffectual minarchist movement. But they could just as easily have been any of a thousand other things that people are interested in and work within, and although it seems to me that these three may be more important than most of those, anyone with a familiar knowledge of any of those thousand other movements would likely believe likewise. I do think that some may be more important than others, but just that with the bias of knowing some in more intimate detail than others, it's easy to be mistaken. For all I know, the so-called Mexican illegal immigrant invasion or the so-called Jewish banking conspiracies or the people who talk about drunk driving or the war on terrorism or the problems caused by not banning (or banning too many) guns or global warming or abortion or class warfare could be more important than the things I'm interested in are.

There are thousands of things that seem important to a lot of people which are irrelevant, stupid, or only mild curiousities to many other people. I wouldn't even dismiss the possible importance of celebrity culture and the people who intensely follow the activities of movie stars (even those who do so while admitting it's not important), even that kind of stuff could be more important in its possible effects on the world than I or even they realize: it sounds ridiculous, but maybe Clay Aiken really is more important than the torture camps in North Korea, or something (and I don't mean that just humorously, it's possible).

Okay, that sounds ridiculous, but here is how it's possible: people are largely controlled either through pleasure or pain. The more cruder nations tend to use pain to control, the more sophisticated countries tend to use pleasure to control; that goes not only for nations but also for just individual control of one person over another, parents over their children, cult leaders over their cult: the greater and more subtle control is obtained by pleasure rather than pain. Threating to cause someone pain is actually less effective than threatening to cut off their pleasure; psychology has shown this in studies as well. The Victorians as an example prevented people from having too much sexual pleasure, whereas other societies did the opposite and tried to overwhelm with too much of it. So while North Korea uses torture camps and force to keep its people chained, other governments have celebrities -- and many other things, such as pornography or various customs and holidays and economic products like drugs (illegal, prescription, or legal) -- to keep its people not chained but in a way enraptured.

And I'm not saying it's preferable to live under the former than the latter, or that NK does not use pleasure (think of those perfect birthday dances they have) or that we do not use pain (look at all the brutality in our prisons), just that one should recognize the essential similarity between the two methods to reduce the extent to which one is controlled, either by pain or pleasure, at least when you don't think it's a good idea to be controlled in a certain way (and it's usually not). Left to their own devices people in nature do not naturally seek out to maximize their pleasure to the extent that people do in many industrial democracies, and when they occasionally do they don't feel as guilty about it as the civilized do, but above all they don't drastically change their principles or their lifestyle or what or who is important to them just to maximize pleasure the way that's routinely done here. Pleasure is a mechanism and when it's working correctly most every-day things are pleasurable, just staring at the snow fall or doing a good day's work or just waking up or going to sleep. Requiring specific objects or activities or substances, at cost, in order to have pleasure is strange and inhuman when you think about it, it's kind of the inverse of torture, where there's pain for the sake of pain rather than pain for the sake of avoiding every-day things that are harmful.

So! What I think is good: ever-constant pleasure from every day life rather than its rise and fall, avoiding exterior behavior controls most of the time which limit you, being interested in a few domains while recognizing that they probably are no more important than the domains others are interested in, and moving to China around 2035.



(Post a new comment)


[info]harlockhero
2008-02-29 09:21 am UTC (link)
Also, consuming Omega 3 fatty acids.

(Reply to this)


[info]jordan179
2008-02-29 09:48 am UTC (link)
The difference between control by pleasure and control by pain is that control by pleasure is temptation; control by pain is force. One can resist temptation by will, but control by pain can be increased unto death. One whose society attempts to control him mostly by pleasure is mostly free; one whose society attempts to control him mostly by pain is a slave.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]rinku
2008-02-29 10:09 am UTC (link)
Agreed, but the issue here isn't freedom, but control; the two aren't necessarily contradictory. People who belong to a cult for example are usually "free" to leave at any time, but that doesn't mean the cult doesn't have control over them through other means.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]rinku
2008-02-29 10:23 am UTC (link)
And in some cases/extremes it may even be better to be uncontrolled, but not free, than to be free, but controlled: it might be more desirable to be a slave e.g. an African slave on a plantation in the early US who is able to keep his own thoughts and opinions even though he's forced to work for his owner all his life yet retains an individualist spirit that knows it's wrong, than to be a mind-and-behavior-controlled member of e.g. a cult Scientology all one's life who is nominally free to leave, but doesn't due to the sophisticated controlling techniques.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]rinku
2008-02-29 10:25 am UTC (link)
The main difference there is, in the first case, that if you manage to escape or otherwise get free of the slavery somehow you'll still be your own person, whereas in the latter case, you're existentially free but mentally controlled to such an extent that your freedom doesn't even matter.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]newedition
2008-03-01 03:30 am UTC (link)
re: first sentence: I know what you mean. At the same time, if you do recognize any value in writing long technical things, you should keep at it (even if it is not entirely enjoyable at the time). At the risk of sounding like an altruist or utilitarian, it is good to have your ideas "out there," and some of us more clearly understanding things when they are written in a straight-forward rather than story-like fashion. Story themes can be so easily mis-interpreted, through no fault of the writer.

What is this about relevant stars aligning?! Please explain!

Agreed that China has the potential for better diet (in that Americans are too lazy to change and are so contaminated that they don't have the motivation to change)-- but China's foods are filled with toxins, pollutions, waste products, and cardboard. Not so good yet. Plus US fast food is spreading there.

re: importance of things: all of what you mention is important. Perhaps an appropriate assessment of most important is that which would have an effect on the other points? For example, a banking conspiracy would impact our economy AND the war on terror; nutrition would affect attention span, life span, mental health and things such as drunk driving, etc.

Hehe at your Clay example... "important" is a word that needs to be qualified, though. Concentration camps would be more important to focus on if one's goal is immediately improving human rights. Someone like Clay would be more important to focus on if one's goal is to inspire people and impress them with good art and save their sense of life.


"ever-constant pleasure from every day life rather than its rise and fall"
I agree that this is the best of the best. It also explains why those less interested in materialism (her meaning consumerism rather than ephemeral-ism) consistently are ranked as the happiest people.


(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]rinku
2008-03-01 08:26 am UTC (link)
Normal abstract writing is just as open to misinterpretation as stories are, perhaps even moreso.

Stars aligning is a reference to Zhuge Liang from the Romance of the Three Kingdoms (he was able to predict specific future events, like the death of a general or etc., based on the stars).

China's diet is not overall bad, you just hear the worst stories from there, just as people not in America only hear the worst stories about America.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


Create an Account
Forgot your login?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…