USSR and the War on Individualism | Clarissa's Blog
The forced collectivism isn't very good. I had that in the abusive workplace, which had a leftist ideology. I also had the weird invasion of my privacy when I took refuge in books, and had to return to live with my parents for a while. I had presumed this might be a way to recover my health from the workplace abuse situation, but it was also very stressful. My father considered my spending time with books to be a sign of something malignant. Also he became distressed when I tuned off the computer screen if I left the room. These seemed very strange objections -- but people under stress feel threatened if you do anything they do not understand. Intellectual engagement fits this criterion.
By the way, I had an interaction with a group of You Tubers, yesterday, where one accused me of using words like "logic" and "context" to make myself seem "more educated than I am". Anti-intellectual paranoia is also alive in America.
I wonder what it would mean to be "more educated than I am". I suppose they expect me to pursue a post-doctorate in order to be able to talk to them -- but these are just kids who are generally trying to make themselves seem more educated than they are. They want all interactions to fit the criteria of logic, but even if that could happen, truth would not be obtained in this way. Nonetheless, they persist in their notion. If you happen to disagree with any of them, they demand you go and do a foundation course in logical fallacies. I have done quite a lot of courses in critical thinking (informal logic) and philosophy. I'm also well-aware of how formal logic is structured. On the basis of all this, I'm well aware that no amount of applying the rules of logic will get someone who sees things differently to agree with you. Logic merely maintains internal consistency, so long as your thinking is already well-informed.
The forced collectivism isn't very good. I had that in the abusive workplace, which had a leftist ideology. I also had the weird invasion of my privacy when I took refuge in books, and had to return to live with my parents for a while. I had presumed this might be a way to recover my health from the workplace abuse situation, but it was also very stressful. My father considered my spending time with books to be a sign of something malignant. Also he became distressed when I tuned off the computer screen if I left the room. These seemed very strange objections -- but people under stress feel threatened if you do anything they do not understand. Intellectual engagement fits this criterion.
By the way, I had an interaction with a group of You Tubers, yesterday, where one accused me of using words like "logic" and "context" to make myself seem "more educated than I am". Anti-intellectual paranoia is also alive in America.
I wonder what it would mean to be "more educated than I am". I suppose they expect me to pursue a post-doctorate in order to be able to talk to them -- but these are just kids who are generally trying to make themselves seem more educated than they are. They want all interactions to fit the criteria of logic, but even if that could happen, truth would not be obtained in this way. Nonetheless, they persist in their notion. If you happen to disagree with any of them, they demand you go and do a foundation course in logical fallacies. I have done quite a lot of courses in critical thinking (informal logic) and philosophy. I'm also well-aware of how formal logic is structured. On the basis of all this, I'm well aware that no amount of applying the rules of logic will get someone who sees things differently to agree with you. Logic merely maintains internal consistency, so long as your thinking is already well-informed.
No comments:
Post a Comment