Prelims has been rather depressing. Other than Physics Paper 3, I have no confidence in really any of the other papers. But so be it, see no point in ranting over it.
Its 4.14am, I've just finished watching another episode of a drama online so I just decided to blog about something worth of discussion today. Its just a train of thought that I kept going andpoof! it became koko crunch! it kinda came out. Enjoy (=
..
What is thought? Normally, we would just see it as model the world and to deal with it effectively via logical thoughts. Example, we develop the thought that we do not want to eat shit because we don't eat shit. Its as simple as that, nothing fancy about this particular definition. Logic.
But I'll like for all to perhaps consider another definition of thoughts and decisions altogether. Attempt to illogically discard away logic, and just embrace simply following our feelings and desires to drive our thoughts and actions.
When we act, we produce an effect that would undoubtedly give rise to certain changes in the environment around us. It cannot be prevented, simply because we are part of the environment itself. And the reason we act in the first place, is when we would like this effect to produce a positive outcome on our lives.
Basically, we act because we desire for something in the first place. There's really no logic involved in that. It is simply, I want this. Thus I'll get this.
Why bother putting your desires through a logical process before getting it done? And perhaps even risk getting the proper thought removed even.
Think of it this way, man desires everything. Just that we would desire something more than the others, thus we would be more inclined to fulfill that desire before the rest. We set priorities, like how some are studying Biology rather than Physics because they weigh that decision, just as how some people has landed flat on their face at the bottom of a tall building, because they desire suicide more. Hell, we all would have those desires implanted within us already from the start. Just that we remain sane compared to the rest.
Back to prioritizing. Having an infinitesimal number of desires, prioritizing should be done to separate them, and give them each a level of importance. When we prioritize, wouldn't we already have going through our logical process here? I mean, that's why we don't desire to eat defecation right?
Thus, why would we ever doubt that our desire are ever illogical? How can they be illogical when it was decided by logic in the first place? And if so, why bother using logic to question it again?
I believe the brain is smart enough to be rid of the Double checking stigma.
However, this idea of mine is flawed. I won't deny that, I'm just having a discussion here. Simply because the logical thought process of both situations are different. And completely different.
Here's what I propose. While logical thinking are emphasized in both desires and decisions, the thought process in obtaining desires are much more 'raw' as compared to the thought process that we would undergo before we convert desires into decisions. That our desires are simply instinctive logic, and thus, self-driven, materialistically. To put it in Layman's terms, that our initial desires are created on the basis of simply ensuring our survival on a very basic level. For example, the desire to work more to earn more money, the desire to mug more to pass the examinations. There's really no considerations of the after effects of actions that could harm or give us help. Taking mugging as an example, we mug, but our logical thought process overlooks the point that others might develop a bad point of view on us. We mug simply we want to score, who cares about others.
And here is when logical thinking to create decisions take the cake. They reconsider on desires more deeply to ensure that there would be no problems, and perhaps even reconsider low priority ideas to recheck them. If not for this process, nobody would have considered spending money to charity simply for the self-satisfaction of giving, eh? Think about it, at an instinctive thought process. Lose money = Bad. End of story. Though deeper thought do we achieve this ideas and revalue these ideas and reprioritize them!
While I do agree with this idea to an extent, I still remain rather attached to my original idea. Being instincts, there is no reason why our instincts would not have had social skills and morals throw into the equation. Comon, we're humans right?
Of course, this would be suggesting that man is intrinsically good. Which I suddenly realized I never believed in.
Damnit Looks like my head contradicted itself somewhere.
..
Open for discussion folks. And I'm not doing the tag EY. (=
Its 4.14am, I've just finished watching another episode of a drama online so I just decided to blog about something worth of discussion today. Its just a train of thought that I kept going and
..
What is thought? Normally, we would just see it as model the world and to deal with it effectively via logical thoughts. Example, we develop the thought that we do not want to eat shit because we don't eat shit. Its as simple as that, nothing fancy about this particular definition. Logic.
But I'll like for all to perhaps consider another definition of thoughts and decisions altogether. Attempt to illogically discard away logic, and just embrace simply following our feelings and desires to drive our thoughts and actions.
When we act, we produce an effect that would undoubtedly give rise to certain changes in the environment around us. It cannot be prevented, simply because we are part of the environment itself. And the reason we act in the first place, is when we would like this effect to produce a positive outcome on our lives.
Basically, we act because we desire for something in the first place. There's really no logic involved in that. It is simply, I want this. Thus I'll get this.
Why bother putting your desires through a logical process before getting it done? And perhaps even risk getting the proper thought removed even.
Think of it this way, man desires everything. Just that we would desire something more than the others, thus we would be more inclined to fulfill that desire before the rest. We set priorities, like how some are studying Biology rather than Physics because they weigh that decision, just as how some people has landed flat on their face at the bottom of a tall building, because they desire suicide more. Hell, we all would have those desires implanted within us already from the start. Just that we remain sane compared to the rest.
Back to prioritizing. Having an infinitesimal number of desires, prioritizing should be done to separate them, and give them each a level of importance. When we prioritize, wouldn't we already have going through our logical process here? I mean, that's why we don't desire to eat defecation right?
Thus, why would we ever doubt that our desire are ever illogical? How can they be illogical when it was decided by logic in the first place? And if so, why bother using logic to question it again?
I believe the brain is smart enough to be rid of the Double checking stigma.
However, this idea of mine is flawed. I won't deny that, I'm just having a discussion here. Simply because the logical thought process of both situations are different. And completely different.
Here's what I propose. While logical thinking are emphasized in both desires and decisions, the thought process in obtaining desires are much more 'raw' as compared to the thought process that we would undergo before we convert desires into decisions. That our desires are simply instinctive logic, and thus, self-driven, materialistically. To put it in Layman's terms, that our initial desires are created on the basis of simply ensuring our survival on a very basic level. For example, the desire to work more to earn more money, the desire to mug more to pass the examinations. There's really no considerations of the after effects of actions that could harm or give us help. Taking mugging as an example, we mug, but our logical thought process overlooks the point that others might develop a bad point of view on us. We mug simply we want to score, who cares about others.
And here is when logical thinking to create decisions take the cake. They reconsider on desires more deeply to ensure that there would be no problems, and perhaps even reconsider low priority ideas to recheck them. If not for this process, nobody would have considered spending money to charity simply for the self-satisfaction of giving, eh? Think about it, at an instinctive thought process. Lose money = Bad. End of story. Though deeper thought do we achieve this ideas and revalue these ideas and reprioritize them!
While I do agree with this idea to an extent, I still remain rather attached to my original idea. Being instincts, there is no reason why our instincts would not have had social skills and morals throw into the equation. Comon, we're humans right?
Of course, this would be suggesting that man is intrinsically good. Which I suddenly realized I never believed in.
Damnit Looks like my head contradicted itself somewhere.
..
Open for discussion folks. And I'm not doing the tag EY. (=
Comments (0)
Post a Comment