I always enjoyed reading this story.
Being a victim/ feeler of lucid dreams I always resonated with this...
https://www.reddit.com/r/Glitch_in_the_Matrix/comments/30t9kd/repost_a_parallel_life_awoken_by_a_lamp/
not sure what you are linking but, i don't believe in parallel lives. we just a bunch of monkeys on this planet.
Evolution is an undisputed fact..yes.
not sure what you are linking but, i don't believe in parallel lives. we just a bunch of monkeys on this planet.
Evolution is an undisputed fact..yes.
Doesn't mean we're all the same monkey.
Ę̵̚x̸͎̾i̴͚̽s̵̻͐t̷͐ͅe̷̯͠n̴̤̚t̵̻̅i̵͉̿a̴̮͊l̵͍̂ ̴̹̕D̵̤̀e̸͓͂t̵̢͂e̴͕̓c̸̗̄t̴̗̿ï̶̪v̷̲̍é̵͔
not sure what you are linking but, i don't believe in parallel lives. we just a bunch of monkeys on this planet.
Evolution is an undisputed fact..yes.
Doesn't mean we're all the same monkey.
It's a good way of looking at people though. As if they're fundamentally just a copy of you, but with different stats.
not sure what you are linking but, i don't believe in parallel lives. we just a bunch of monkeys on this planet.
Evolution is an undisputed fact..yes.
Doesn't mean we're all the same monkey.
It's a good way of looking at people though. As if they're fundamentally just a copy of you, but with different stats.
I wholeheartedly disagree, this seems like the sort of streamlining that only serves to promote self-projection.
Seeing people as darts on a dartboard spectrum of traits meanwhile yields a more realistic image. We very clearly have subtypes when it comes to functionality and behavior, and those deviations offer a lot of variety, arguably more than any other species of mammal.
Ę̵̚x̸͎̾i̴͚̽s̵̻͐t̷͐ͅe̷̯͠n̴̤̚t̵̻̅i̵͉̿a̴̮͊l̵͍̂ ̴̹̕D̵̤̀e̸͓͂t̵̢͂e̴͕̓c̸̗̄t̴̗̿ï̶̪v̷̲̍é̵͔
not sure what you are linking but, i don't believe in parallel lives. we just a bunch of monkeys on this planet.
Evolution is an undisputed fact..yes.
Doesn't mean we're all the same monkey.
It's a good way of looking at people though. As if they're fundamentally just a copy of you, but with different stats.
I wholeheartedly disagree, this seems like the sort of streamlining that only serves to promote self-projection.
Seeing people as darts on a dartboard spectrum of traits meanwhile yields a more realistic image. We very clearly have subtypes when it comes to functionality and behavior, and those deviations offer a lot of variety, arguably more than any other species of mammal.
That doesn't mean they're not fundamentally the same. If you delve deep enough, you can dig up entire mountains of nuance but from a bird's eye view the perspective is different.
Even within those subtypes that you define, there will be differences. Once you move up, those subtypes will vary among each other, but once you move up even more, you'll see that there are clear principles that not even the furthest outlier is an exception to. So it's not that you disagree whole heartedly, you just aren't taking this point of view to the full extent.
I mean yeah we both have lungs, walk bipedally, and communicate using a sophisticated chain of nuanced sounds, but to me if everyone is doing the same thing by default then why even focus on it?
I've also seen a lot of know-it-alls and narcs use this "Everyone's the same" logic to excuse themselves from digging into not only other people, but also themselves. Without intimate knowledge of how others are different from you, how are you even supposed to see yourself?
Basically, everyone's assumption of "Everyone's the same" is largely different once you get past the retarded stuff we could even find in other species of mammal. It's like how everyone's version of "Common Sense" is uncommonly matched.
Ę̵̚x̸͎̾i̴͚̽s̵̻͐t̷͐ͅe̷̯͠n̴̤̚t̵̻̅i̵͉̿a̴̮͊l̵͍̂ ̴̹̕D̵̤̀e̸͓͂t̵̢͂e̴͕̓c̸̗̄t̴̗̿ï̶̪v̷̲̍é̵͔
last edit on
6/5/2020 5:51:14 PM
Xadem said:Even within those subtypes that you define, there will be differences.
Precisely!
Each newer and more extreme case defines the new bar, the new accepted 100% of that trait cluster. Even if someone is a recombination of multiple trait clusters, it's not like the room for variation within it is infinite.
For one's nature it's just a mixture of ancestry, birth-housing conditions, and what conditions the planet was in when you were born, and for nurture it's just a bunch of parroting the people and events around you that resonate within your nature.
Once you organize it into a diverse enough spectrum with multiple potential recombinations of pieces, human patterns start to yield complicated yet eerily consistent results. There actually is an end goal in sight with digging into variations, but that endgame however likely won't be 100% realized until an algorithm is predicting all our shit.
TLDR; Just because it's straining and time consuming to measure it deeper doesn't make it not worth it.
Ę̵̚x̸͎̾i̴͚̽s̵̻͐t̷͐ͅe̷̯͠n̴̤̚t̵̻̅i̵͉̿a̴̮͊l̵͍̂ ̴̹̕D̵̤̀e̸͓͂t̵̢͂e̴͕̓c̸̗̄t̴̗̿ï̶̪v̷̲̍é̵͔
last edit on
6/5/2020 5:50:23 PM
I mean yeah we both have lungs, walk bipedally, and communicate using a sophisticated chain of nuanced sounds, but to me if everyone is doing the same thing by default then why even focus on it?
I've also seen a lot of know-it-alls and narcs use this "Everyone's the same" logic to excuse themselves from digging into not only other people, but also themselves. Without intimate knowledge of how others are different from you, how are you even supposed to see yourself?
Basically, everyone's assumption of "Everyone's the same" is largely different once you get past the retarded stuff we could even find in other species of mammal. It's like how everyone's version of "Common Sense" is uncommonly matched.
I agree, it would be very silly to claim that everyone's the same because we all have lungs. But looking at other people as extensions of yourself isn't mutually exclusive with being able to categorise them. I don't doubt that this, like many things, can be twisted to avoid self reflection, but that's not saying much at all.
Everyone does seem quite similar even with all the nuances, like I said you can dig up mountains of details but then you'd be focusing on people acting out their similarities in different ways rather than focusing on what makes them tick. Like you'd be arguing Cindy differs from Mindy because she prefers strawberry jam over apricot jam, but I'd point out that they both enjoy jam and the nuance of their respective tastes is just a manifestation of their similarity.