To be honest I think a big reason why people believe in telepathy and the like is because it sounds cool
I blame Star Wars
Star Trek... the Vulcan mind-meld 
Posts by Kalosyni
Regularly Checking In On A Small Screen Device? Bookmark THIS page!
-
-
Cicero discussed the usefulness of "practice" or "exercise" or "experience" in handling pain - certainly bodily pain, at least. In this section he did not specifically criticize the Epicurean position, and the position I took in the podcast was that the Epicureans would likely have agreed with Cicero's point, which was largely to the effect that practicing certain types of exercise or other experiences can help prepare you to deal with pain when it arrives.
I hope that Cicero's slight wafting scent of "stoic" virtue-signaling (put forward as a remedy) will be addressed.
It is one thing to be clear about the true nature of pain: short if severe, but still able to feel other pleasures when weak pain is present. And it is a very different (un-Epicurean) notion to "train" your body in a type of "exercise boot-camp".
-
Confirmation bias is a big reason why people retain superstitious or unscientific beliefs.
I did a further Google search and here are the results:
People hold unscientific beliefs, even in the absence of evidence, due to a combination of psychological, social, and cultural factors
Here are some reasons:
- Psychological Factors:
- People tend to stick to their initial beliefs and favor information that confirms them, which makes it hard to accept contradictory evidence.
- There is a tendency to overestimate our understanding of complex issues and prefer simple explanations, even if inaccurate.
- Holding strong beliefs can reduce anxiety caused by uncertainty.
- People may rationalize information to align with their identities, accepting what supports their views and rejecting what doesn't.
- Social and Cultural Influences:
- Beliefs are often based on intuition, trust, personal experience, or trust in others, which can lead to false beliefs if trust is misplaced.
- Social environment, including family and culture, shapes beliefs, and people may adopt beliefs to fit in.
- Exposure to false information, both intentional and unintentional, contributes to unscientific beliefs.
- Information that evokes strong emotions is more likely to be believed and shared.
- Lack of Critical Thinking Skills:
- Difficulty in evaluating information and comparing it with existing knowledge makes people susceptible to plausible misinformation.
- Low analytical reasoning and numeracy skills can also increase susceptibility to misinformation.
- Pseudoscience and Misinformation:
- Pseudoscience, which presents itself as scientific but lacks a scientific basis, can deceive individuals.
- Social media can facilitate the rapid spread of misinformation and pseudoscience.
Ultimately, human cognitive tendencies towards narratives, emotions, and social connection can sometimes override the ability to objectively evaluate information and evidence.
- Psychological Factors:
-
When ever talking about "science" consider the following, as a tool against pseudo-science (and to spot when science is done "poorly"):
The Baloney Detection Kit, by Carl Sagan:
It's from a very good book, by Carl Sagan: "The Demon Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark"
-
Further thoughts on the original question: "What fears does modern science remove?'
Modern science can usually diagnose diseases so that you can know if you have a terminal illness or something curable...and so in that way can sometimes reduce anxiety.
Modern science hasn't produced definitve answers for everything, so then fears will remain. We then need to go back to the Epicurean philosophy and work with our basic existential issues, in order to manage fears. I am adding in these links for anyone who happens to be reading this thread (there are of course many other threads on the forum dealing with these issues):
--Fear of dying - see this section of the forum:
Dealing With Death, Dying, And Old Age
--Fear of pain - see this thread:
--What can I control? ...Choices and avoidances, but some things still happen by chance. For free will read this article:
-
It's in these new found fears and anxieties. Genetic predispositions to painful or deadly diseases can make some feel trapped by some biological destiny. Psychology or neuroscience can also make some feel trapped by brain chemistry or childhood experiences (even compound the anxiety of biological destiny). Climate change can be the source of much existential dread. The interesting question is how does the Epicurean respond to these new problems?
I am trying to remember what Epicurean philosophy says about length of life/a complete life.
The need to deal with the fear of death would be the antidote here. Also the need to understand free will and the ability to employ wise choice and avoidance. And to deal with fear of pain itself. All these are dealt with in Epicurean philosophy.
I'll try to find and link to previous discussions on these topics tomorrow (unless anyone else wants to post here).
-
We need to balance it all with the fact that before modern medicine the infant/mother mortality rate and the mortality rate in general was much higher. Also in modern times, more safety for more people (much less warfare, although depending on when/where you are living).
-
On the flip side, you could say that modern science has resulted in germ-warfare and nuclear weapons. Also, modern medicine has the ability to resuscitate an unconscious person and prolong "life" (in a vegetative state). Unless you have a "Do not attempt resuscitation order", CPR will be performed on you (no matter how old you are or your condition - read about it here) and even though it has a low likelihood of success in certain conditions.
We must remember the Epicurean idea that it isn't the longest life but the most pleasant (whenever discussion of the doomsday clock comes up).
-
That said, I think we can both agree that ice cream is not necessary for a pleasant life.
What!!!? Ice cream isn't necessary? (lol
) That's like saying sex isn't necessary! For the most pleasant life I would recommend both.
But I think you could still be happy with vanilla yogurt and massages.
-
Perhaps I’m misunderstanding you Kalosyni, and please correct me if I am, but it seems that your definition leads to an ascetic view of Epicureanism in which we should only pursue what is strictly necessary.
Lol, I was thinking the other way around...lol, that you Rolf were coming from an ascetic view (due to your comment about ice-cream).
Movies are clearly not necessary for happiness or survival - countless people have been happy and healthy without them. And yet watching movies is not an inherently harmful or empty desire. In which case, what are movies other than natural but unnecessary desires?
I think that I talked about movies in another thread (but have forgotten exactly what I said, and forgotten what thread that was in). But this is a good time to talk about it again...because I would question whether or not harm might come about to an individual if they were to watch a lot of movies about people who desire and chase after great wealth, status, power, control, perfect beauty, perfect safety, or non-stop sensory variations...but it will depend on the person and the circumstances...so no absolute rules.
I wouldn't call myself ascetic...because I hold to Principal Doctrine 8 as being very important:
PD08: "No pleasure is bad in itself; but the means of paying for some pleasures bring with them disturbances many times greater than the pleasures themselves."
-
And yet I see it differently, as "unnecessary for survival" - and you only label something as natural/unnecessary when it is difficult/impossible to get or depleting/reckless to ones resources.
Because if something is necessary for survival, then you would endure pain and struggle for the sake of attaining it.
-
I don’t know if I agree that natural/unnecessary desires are “difficult or impossible to attain”, or that they should be viewed negatively at all. From what I understand, this category simply refers to things that are pleasurable but not strictly necessary for happiness.
"pleasurable but not strictly necessary for happiness"... maybe the word "optional"?.
And yet I see it differently, as "unnecessary for survival" - and you only label something as natural/unnecessary when it is difficult/impossible to get or depleting/reckless to ones resources.
Something that causes pain would go into the "empty" category (as in empty of pleasure).
-
Ooops, meant to type in that my "mistaken" idea of just two categories was in post 16.
-
Okay, regarding my "mistaken" idea in
post 22post 16 above (of only two categories)...now revising back to three, lol:- natural/necessary = necessary for life and for well-being
- natural/unnecessary = difficult or impossible to attain, and beyond ones means or recklessly depleting ones needed resources in order to attain
- empty = greed for status/wealth/power/control/perfection/non-stop sensory variations
-
But do not there remain very many desires that are not easy and not affordable to attain, and which we would go on pursuing forever without limit if we did not identify their nature as such?
The things that are not easy and not affordable are also "empty", such that they come about from a desire for status or control (a futile attempt at controling circumstances to make them "perfect" in some way (perfectly beautiful, perfectly safe).
-
What about the desires that are natural but not strictly necessary for survival and well-being?
I would now say that it is best in our modern times to not have "natural/unnecessary" as a category. And that also means discarding the labels of "luxury" and "extravagant". Our current civilization makes it easy and affordable to attain many "luxuries" and many "extravagances".
You can eat all the ice cream that you want (but just see what happens, lol...because the stomach can't take unlimited ice-cream and you'll get a tummy-ache). If you can easily find and afford to buy ice-cream and it causes you no pain, then it leads to pleasure. But if you are lactose intolerant or diabetic, then ice-cream would be "empty" of pleasure/well-being for you.
-
I like this idea of only: "natural, necessary, and empty".
Actually it should just be:
--- natural and necessary = Is it natural? Does it come to us from nature? (We will need to be clear about what exactly are all the desires that nature gives to us). And... Do we need it to survive? Do we need it for our well-being (and to feel blessed/happy).
-vs-
--- empty = Is it actually unnecessary for both survival and well-being? Is it an opinion not from nature but generated by greed for massive riches, non-stop variations of sensation, massive power/control/status (all of which are empty opinions).
-
it takes back or reclaims that "negative connotation" and turns it on its head. That negative connotation of "extravagant" strikes me as potentially Puritanical.
I personally feel that "extravagant" still ends up keeping the Puritanical connotation, and seems to convey that you "should" only indulge very rarely.
Would you say “natural”, “necessary”, and “empty” are suitable terms to use?
Well, if it was good enough for Epicurus...
PS. Okay, let me add that "Yes, I know Epicurus didn't use “natural”, “necessary”, and “empty” because he spoke Greek." But those translations are about as close to literal as one gets for φυσικαὶ, ἀναγκαῖαι, and κεναί.
I like this idea of only: "natural, necessary, and empty".
We could think about it this way:
- natural = Is it natural? Does it come to us from nature? (We will need to be clear about what exactly are all the desires that nature gives to us).
- necessary = Do we need it to survive? Do we need it for our well-being (and to feel blessed/happy).
- empty = Is it actually unnecessary for both survival and well-being? Is it an opinion not from nature but generated by greed for massive riches, non-stop variations of sensation, massive power/control/status (all of which are empty opinions).
-
Finally, we have the snow sprinkled atop the mountain representing the natural but unnecessary "extravagant" desires. Once we have everything below, we may take joy in these pleasures and allow them to adorn our life, without feeling like we require them.
I personally would end up choosing a word other than "extravagent" (but not sure exactly what word).
Also, I wouldn't see this as a hierarchy, but instead that they can all occur at the same time.
-
Creating a new thread to move over the topic here
