Armchair Philosophy, July 11th, 2020
Topic: Fact is Fact, but Perception is All That Matters When Determining Truth
I had an interaction today that left me utterly riled to my core. I was repulsed by what someone said to me about myself. Not because it was a truth that hurt, but because he claimed something of me that violated my principles to their very core. I was told that I do not listen to others to learn, and that I simply await my opportunity to speak. Of course, considering the founding purpose and pursuit of this website, you may be able to understand why I would consider this both a ridiculous and slanderous claim against me. Yet, once I had calmed down, I gave it some thought. Why would a friend make such a claim about me? I reflected back to what I had read about different personality types, as well as my own actions and words, and I realized I can completely understand how someone could get that impression of me, and why the third party in the dialogue would immediately agree with him.
My friends, largely, do not know about this website. They do not know about commutationconstruct.com. They do not know about the time I spend with my community and others discussing and debating ideas, philosophies, and educating myself as to the beliefs and positions of others. Throughout my MBA program I had probably spent more time studying civic and philosophical matters than I had spent on my program itself, as though it were my full time job. I even had jobs where I would listen to podcasts on such topics for entire work days before going to school and then continuing my studies more when I was home from class. It was a personal pursuit that I would hardly even reference in situations where debate would spur among friends and relatives. This left my friends feeling that I was strongly opinionated and not willing to listen because I had already heard their arguments prior and had a solidified response, be it in agreement or disagreement. But because of their imperfect information about me, their perceptions were locked in place.
I also had to consider why I had such a strong emotional reaction to what they said. This had to do with my own perception. I have a personality where I tend to play my cards close to the chest. I don't open up to many people about what I do, I will hide when things hurt me, and I will celebrate momentous events on my own. At the same time, I'm incredibly analytical and will break down every specific use of language by the people around me and consider that in my response or use it as a marker to determine the perception of the people I am with. I naturally pick up on the perception of others fairly well, though I tend to end up in 50/50 scenarios unable to determine which of the viable paths I see as being the correct one. For me, this leaves many possibilities for the perception of others open, and I consider almost nothing in absolutes, so, from my perspective, it is difficult to imagine anyone close to me not being able to recognize the same series of possibilities in me when I speak with them.
I took offense because I had an expectation that they would consider my perspective in the same way I would consider theirs, and they didn't. I also gave them no real reason to question my understanding as coming from anywhere more than a remedial level of experience. This got me thinking about perspective, and what it means for society. I've heard Jonathan Haidt discuss how people with different political opinions can watch the same movie and both would give completely different summaries of what happened if asked about the movie. With media and politics growing increasingly partisan, I believe societal scale perceptions about reality are going through massive shifts.
Primarily, the left and right are losing the ability to communicate. Perception for both sides have labelled the other as unabashedly inept, hateful, and wanting to destroy the security of the other side. The right fears cancel culture, the left fears Trump becoming a dictator and removing all of their rights. Both sides see the other as racist, the left seeing the right as hate filled white supremacists, and the right seeing the left as racists of low expectations and an almost self-hating form of white supremacy. The ineptitude of our leaders may be the one thing agreed upon by both sides, yet both sides also likely embrace the primary leaders from their side, whom the other hates the most, as the devil that is on their side and the only figure currently giving them a fighting chance (see Pelosi & McConnell).
That is roughly where I currently see politics standing, and those views persist on both sides regardless of whatever facts may be brought to the defense of the other. Looking at social order, many digital and social media sites block content they do not approve of. Twitter banning people who say a man is not a woman, or YouTube blocking all Covid information that isn't WHO approved or from a major news outlet are both things that affect how people see the world. If the only world kids grow up in is one where the very questioning of what a transperson is is considered bigoted and hateful, then that is all that the generation will know. That will be the truth to them. This is what propaganda does. It creates a perception, and when that perception reaches a societal level, it might as well be truth, because it will be treated as truth. The manipulation of a cult of ideas.
Ben Shapiro is known for his quote "Facts don't care about your feelings". That is accurate. However, truth, as defined in society and treated throughout culture, does care about perception. Many history books carry false information due to school boards getting to decide what material they will teach and allow to be taught in their schools. Historians simply receive checks for letting the publishers of said books put their names on them. This gives validity to the content within, while allowing the content to reflect only the desired perspective of our leaders in education.
In the end, the main point of this discussion, for me, is that we must care about the perception of those around us and those who we interact with. It is incredibly dangerous for society to have such divisive perspectives that disallow the dialogue between the two primary perspectives of said society, as all alternatives to ones own are seen as evil. Therefore, it is our responsibility, as open minds seeking the betterment of our society, that we work together to consider the perspective of our counterparts so that we may communicate with them, and break through this division.
Alright everyone, this has been a long one from me and I am very curious what you all think. Do you think perception matters more than facts when dealing with other people, or do facts not caring about feelings give us the high ground in confrontation with others? What suggestions do you have for dealing with divided perceptions, or do you believe that my suggestion in this article is complete hogwash? I look forward to any and all responses. Thank you for taking the time to join the discussion today.
Just thought I'd share this comment I was trying to comment on a Lotus Eaters video. Btw, ya'll should follow the Podcast of the Lotus Eaters if you aren't already. Great analysis and discussion
It's been a while since I've made a video, and this time with a locals exclusive. A cherry on top that I managed to fit within the size requirements. I like making shorter form content like this, considering my tendencies to ramble. Having content exclusive for my followers here is something I'll be working on doing more and more. I'll be creating more value here for my subscribers as well, with some subscriber exclusive content in the future. No timeline promises, cause I think we know how I get when I make a ton of promises (go hardcore for a week and then fall flat on my face unable to keep up with the sprint, lol).
Anyhow, let me know your thoughts and questions below. Have a great day everyone!
A direct upload! It turns out I recorded a video just short enough to meet the minimum upload offerings that locals offers to small communities like mine. That means you guys get this exclusively on locals!
I didn't sleep much last night, so I decided this was the perfect time to mull over my confused thoughts on how businesses are viewed from a legal perspective. Businesses are somewhat legal enigmas to me. Corporations are kinda treated as persons so that they can be double taxed, but have other protections, other types of businesses aren't treated the same way. They're able to consolidate power like governments, yet aren't subject to any form of limitations in regards to violating natural rights the same way the government is, despite being treated somewhat like persons they can still buy each other. It's just very odd to me from a principled, legal, and philosophical position.
Anyhow, my ramblings here are just that, ramblings. Still, I am curious what you all think of this topic. ...
The 2020 election is over, and the battle has just begun. What do I expect to come from the end of the election? Will the legal suits turn over anything for this election, or will they mean something for later down the line? I reflect on these questions and more in this discussion, and I also reflect on some final thoughts relevant to the Rise and Fall of Empire Series, that, thus far, being episodes 8 through 10 of the Construct Cast. Let me know your thoughts, and if you have any reflections of your own from this year's political cycle or other developments that you can't seem to get off your mind in the comments below.
In this episode of the Construct Cast, I discuss my analysis of Sir John Glubb's The Fate of Empires and Search for Survival, with an emphasis on my own consideration for what it would take to help an empire survive, or reboot. If immortality for an Empire is impossible, is rebirth impossible in the same way? Let me know your thoughts in the comments below.
Editor's Note: Returning to the podcast versions of the Construct Cast, I want to catch our content up to the videos we have had released over the past month. I apologize for this getting away from me for a bit. With the rise in content production, I had allowed this to get away from me. We will be returning to audio podcast uploads of the Construct Cast as per our original regular schedule, at 12PM EST on the day of the original upload, going forward.
In this second Crossover podcast, we are once again recording with Kevin @Eng_Politics. His channel is a bastion of political thought and analysis from the perspective of a conservative engineer. Interested in diving deeper into my concept of Progressive Traditionalism and combating the concept with his own beliefs of what it means to be Conservative, we decided to put our definitions and beliefs to task in this crossover episode!
Be sure to check out Kevin's locals community here:
And if you're more interested in the video version, here is a direct link:
As someone who works with daily reporting to the Fed, big companies dealing with regulation are basically a clusterfuck and the requirements basically leave the companies in a position where they can never really update their systems because they need their systems literally every day. They can make new systems, potentially, but updating the regular system is more of a liability since missing a single day can screw the company up. At the same time, it seems like the big companies, at least the one I'm in, are mostly carried forward by the inertia of their own weight. I am fully convinced there will be another massive financial crisis if other major banks are like mine, just cause there really isn't anything that can be done if something is messed up. It's like fake it til you make it, only in reverse. Once something goes wrong, the requirements for constant regular action leaves no time to go back to correct the damage. All you can do is mitigate. Like debt gaining interest, eventually ...
Does anyone have any advice for the work, life, content creator balance? I just genuinely have not had the spirit in me to be able to create the content I want to be able to create these past few months as I am just feeling totally worn out day in and out. I'd like to get back into the philosophic deep dives and contemplations you followed me for, yet that's feeling like a lifetime ago now and every day feels like a step away from where and what I'm supposed to be doing
My locals app is finally working again. Been sick lately. Started considering the differences between corruption and evil. I decided to look at it from a moral framework and came up with a new perspective on how to define the 2 from a moral standpoint. A corrupt person will defy their morals to achieve their goals, whereas an evil person will determine their morals based on whatever ends satisfy or help to achieve their goals. In this way, you can see that a corrupt person may acknowledge when they are doing something morally wrong and feel guilt over it, whereas an evil person will determine that all who oppose them are the true evil threat and could even assess their own will as being justice.
Just a little thought that's been running through my mind lately. And it's interesting because it really makes you wonder which is worse? One who will defy morals or one who will redefine them? Perhaps they both have the same end result, but do they both have the ability to find redemption? I ...
Welcome to Commutation Construct. This is a community designed around maximizing open dialogue and discussion. Get your first month on us by using the coupon code "STARTHERE" or by following this link:
Happy to have you!