|
Post by toskaliku on Oct 3, 2010 14:03:00 GMT -5
|
|
donnie
Senior Moderator
Nike Leka i Kelmendit
Posts: 3,389
|
Post by donnie on Oct 3, 2010 18:07:32 GMT -5
Haha, very funny and informative lecture. And it's quite true when you think of it, often ppl just see certain details and miss the whole picture, thus going against their real preferences. It's like this joke about Norwegians driving several miles, disregarding gas expenses, for free beer.
|
|
|
Post by toskaliku on Oct 3, 2010 18:14:24 GMT -5
Its scary though because advertisers know all of these things and use them to promote suggestive thinking. If you watch the documentary "The Corporation" (available on youtube) there is this terrifying interview of a ad rep for a particular company talking about "getting kids while they are young".
|
|
donnie
Senior Moderator
Nike Leka i Kelmendit
Posts: 3,389
|
Post by donnie on Oct 4, 2010 7:00:04 GMT -5
Its scary though because advertisers know all of these things and use them to promote suggestive thinking. If you watch the documentary "The Corporation" (available on youtube) there is this terrifying interview of a ad rep for a particular company talking about "getting kids while they are young". True, it helps explain over-consumption also. Ive seen/heard/read about people buying the most ridiculous and useless things. Same irrational behaviour could very well also explain politics and deception/promotion of suggestive thinking there. Like here in Sweden, the nationalist SD party played on emotions rather than rational thinking, resulting in the election of a populist party that is rather underdeveloped in most/all political issues except immigration, which they seek to stop & reverse ... in order to "save" Sweden .. which is ironic since immigration and immigrants have helped sustain growth in Sweden, like taking on jobs ordinary Swedes would never take themselves or the arrival of already educated immigrants whose knowledge and expertise may be used without having payed for their education, etc., not to mention stopping the otherwise decline of population. Ppl are far more irrational in decision making than they would want to acknowledge.
|
|
|
Post by toskaliku on Oct 4, 2010 15:48:36 GMT -5
People dont realize how illusory our world is, how ultimately meaningless so much of it is and how filled with empty symbolism and perceptions it is.
We apply meaning to a product that is worthless and identify with it, thinking it is all real. We are surrounded by representations and images and then have the nerve to believe or claim that there is such a thing as individual responsibility.
As George Carlin said: the only choice you have in this world is paper or plastuc.
|
|
|
Post by Anittas on Oct 4, 2010 16:40:17 GMT -5
Oh, the old debate over free will.
---- spinoza--> kant--> schopenhauer - - ---> nietzsche - ---> freud ---> edward bernays ---> various academics
-------------> Melty and Donnie re-invent the wheel.
|
|
|
Post by toskaliku on Oct 4, 2010 17:35:02 GMT -5
Difference is that this is now being applied into the realm of the commercial advertisement. In that we live in a world where people understand these pholosophies are are able to twist them in order to bend the mind of the people. I think its something rather unprecidented in world history and something the figures of Kant and the like would have not been able to guess. its one thin to understand the world as a representation of the norms, its another to take that notion and reverse it in order to get better saled.
|
|
|
Post by Anittas on Oct 5, 2010 12:15:32 GMT -5
bernays did it in the early 1920s or so. the guy changed laws that allowed women to smoke and manipulated them into thinking that smoking is part of their liberation process. dude... this is no news. sure, before massmedia existed, u had the church that manipulated ppl. thats some kind of commercialism as well, but not as carefully executed as today.
|
|
|
Post by toskaliku on Oct 5, 2010 13:14:57 GMT -5
As much as I despise the church and any kind of hierarchical religious complex, I would hardly compare the domination of the church in past centuries to the modern market. Its one of those overly modernist views that has predominated particularly in communist structures (seeing the clergy much in the same way we see corporate CEOs
|
|
|
Post by Anittas on Oct 5, 2010 13:31:11 GMT -5
ya, cause the chuch didnt have the means of the mass media. the manipulation and the illusion was always there, but in different forms. ppl are well aware of it, but they choose to be manipulated, because it makes them feel good--even if its for the moment. the only way to make ppl aware is not by restricting their choices, but to make them abundant. and then u have discussions such as this one.
|
|
|
Post by toskaliku on Oct 5, 2010 13:38:31 GMT -5
Oh please, again, your bringing modernist perspectives and expecting the world of the past to understand and share those same views. It doesnt work. We live in a day and age when the limits of our perceptions are clearer than ever before and trying to bring those revolutionary ideals into a past world with a far more simple philosophy and way of life.
The church fooled even the clergy... while the corporate world understands very well that there is a manipulation going on. The clergy evangelized the faith out of a perception that it brought an ideal of goodness and salvation, and thoroughly believed this, the modern corporate world cares about profits and how to achieve them on a larger and large and more centralized scale
|
|
|
Post by Anittas on Oct 5, 2010 14:30:33 GMT -5
dont know why u talk about the clergy... u trying to find differences. all im saying is that in all ages, since man has had a conscious mind, there has been a force that did the manipulating and on the other end, you had the receptive part.
we can talk about specific periods of when man was manipulated and in what fashion... but i wanted instead to find a common ground for the problem. the things that happen now were predicted by others long ago. why? because they faced similar problems, but in different fashion.
the greeks and then the germans debated reality (the thing in itself <--- google it) for ages. human nature hasn't changed so much in the last 10,000 years, so what was relevant then is relevant now.
that some kids are upset with capitalism is because they feel helpless, but before capitalism, u had mercantilism and it was executed in the same fashion.
listen, i repeat: this massive commercial manipulation has been going on since at least 1920 and the industrial revolution and improved communication made it possible. now go run to ur mentor, donnie, and dont disrespect me by dismissing my argument with that boring tone of urs when im being respectful to u, u f**king little albanian bitvh!
u both are 2 university f*gs. donnie is so proud of driving his bitch in his volvo... he drives to albania in his old village to show off what his good education brought him... and of course he does it in the most humble way. donnie, the old manipulator... hahaha
|
|
donnie
Senior Moderator
Nike Leka i Kelmendit
Posts: 3,389
|
Post by donnie on Oct 5, 2010 14:36:32 GMT -5
Oh, the old debate over free will. ---- spinoza--> kant--> schopenhauer - - ---> nietzsche - ---> freud ---> edward bernays ---> various academics -------------> Melty and Donnie re-invent the wheel. Well, those issues are as relevant today as they were then. PS I think this guy's lecture fits more the field of psychology than philosophy ,, it assumes we have a free choice, but one that is limited by our own irrationality. Whereas in the philosophical debate, one who is a pure determinist for instance would argue that all alike, irrational & rational folks, are driven by predetermined mechanisms, and that we cannot escape it. I dont think thats precisely what this behaviour economist goes after, rather he researches human psychology and how our minds can be lured into thinking smth is in our best interest even though it isnt, and that if we educate ourselves, we can escape such idiocy. Determinism and free choice is a different debate, and if true, determinism would make subjects such as moral & ethics useless, bcs if we're predetermined to be criminals, we're not to blame, bcs we cannot control our fate.
|
|
|
Post by Anittas on Oct 5, 2010 16:03:48 GMT -5
lolz u little n00b... philosophy gave birth to psychology before the neo-freudian fags took the word and abused it. afterall, freud himself said that nietzsche was more of a psychologist than a philosopher and little freud based his dream theory on nietzsche's ideas. nietzsche talked about psychological observations and the good that comes with it... then the fags and their psycho-analysis bs fucked up everything.
check into human, all too human and the geneology of morals and then we talk psychology.
no one mentioned determinism and i have no idea why u mentioned it, since it has nothing to do with the concept of free will. spinoza, who was partially wrong, argued himself that we have no true free will and he did so on a psychological and biological level. free choice is connected to the shit mentioned by melty here.
besides, the guy who presented the bs didnt do such a great job, even though it was entertaining. for instance, the bs about donating your organs in case of death: i remember it very well because the debate was everywhere and the population was well informed. i remember getting pissed at my religious mom for sending in the application with a Nay for a possible donation--and she works in the medical field (shameful). so there was no true manipulation... instead, the dudes administering this shit decided to make it more convinient for those they deemed to be in the majority--the Yay and the indifferent ppl. thats not manipulation. they just realized that indifference prevails and turned it into a greater good. the only thing that stuff proves is that most ppl are indifferent, not that they were somehow manipulated.
|
|
|
Post by toskaliku on Oct 5, 2010 20:15:51 GMT -5
Hahahahaaaa!
|
|
donnie
Senior Moderator
Nike Leka i Kelmendit
Posts: 3,389
|
Post by donnie on Oct 8, 2010 4:28:31 GMT -5
Well, a mother and child arent the same person despite that one of them stems from the other. Psychology is a science in its own right and recognized as such.
It was just a sidenote, I know nobody mentioned it, nobody mentioned spinoza and those others either until you came. And how has determinism nothing to do with the concept of free will in the philosophical debate of how free we are in our decisions? It stands at the opposite of libertarianism in the spectrum of free will and is very much related to this concept.
|
|
|
Post by Anittas on Oct 8, 2010 18:46:35 GMT -5
u little n00blet... science and the scientific method was developed by philosophers (descartes, leibniz). philosophy encompassed different fields of science: mathematics, then other fields, such as psychology. philosophy gave birth to psychology. psychology doesnt derive from psilosophy--it is a part of it!
seems ur swedish fags (ya, those with skinny legs, wearing a purse, ugly noses and boring hair; with their arrogant attitude and retarded accent) at uni havent taught u all that well. u know why that is? because swedish education is shit. yes, i know it has a good reputation. just like the country, right? hahahaha!
|
|
|
Post by toskaliku on Oct 8, 2010 18:48:31 GMT -5
Did u call someone a fag because of "boring hair"?
|
|
|
Post by hellboy87 on Oct 8, 2010 21:03:01 GMT -5
anittas is drunk
|
|