Imaginary Notions: Philosophy Forums

Philosophy Forums » Philosophy of Language » Imaginary Notions » Imaginary Notions

Imaginary Notions
Segregation of man by imaginary notions.

Page: 1 2 3 4

Imaginary Notions

throng
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Aug 12, 2008
Total Topics: 9
Total Posts: 203

Posted 09/04/08 - 01:52 PM: Subject: Imaginary Notions	#1
The social grouping of humanity presents problems. There are the Red Demons and the Black Bats biker gangs. The individuals therein lead very similar lifestyles and have much in common, but they hate eachother so the gangs war. Whats a Red Demon or a Black Bat? Only visual concepts. This tendency to name imaginings has founded nations, religions, tribes and political groups, and war and atrocity ensue. These notions of belonging are ironic because in grouping together we segregate humanity, and as groups splinter ever smaller, we ultimately become individual. (and start again) The natural state is the individual. The names we attach to imaginary notions and ourselves are false, yet we war to uphold these arrogant banners. We belong as one. Should we name these notions and seperately group, for all the trouble it causes? Edited by throng on 09/04/08 - 01:59 PM. Reason: punctuation

Ubique
Initiate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Aug 15, 2008
Total Topics: 0
Total Posts: 7

Posted 09/04/08 - 06:41 PM:	#2
"Should we name these notions and seperately group, for all the trouble it causes?" The name only represents the ideology and beliefs of a group, it is not purely the name that is being fought upon, although it is the issue in some cases, a name only exists as a name. How would removing them really do anything? We have to work as groups, thus balancing our weaknesses and strenghts.

throng
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Aug 12, 2008
Total Topics: 9
Total Posts: 203

Posted 09/05/08 - 02:32 AM:	#3
Ubique wrote: "Should we name these notions and seperately group, for all the trouble it causes?" The name only represents the ideology and beliefs of a group, it is not purely the name that is being fought upon, although it is the issue in some cases, a name only exists as a name. How would removing them really do anything? We have to work as groups, thus balancing our weaknesses and strenghts. Thanks for your post and expanding my understanding. As I stated, a name represents an ideology. Belief is what segregates us. An ideology is just a concept. Once named, it becomes more tangible, but no more real. The name evokes images and serves as a summary of the concept. Individuals say "I'm a Black Bat" in pretence that the concept is an actual thing. Being imaginary, it is the personal or taught interpretation of the name that is believed. The fact that people practice different customs is not enough to segregate humanity, But belief in literally evoked imagery is. (biker gangs: same customs, different name.) By naming ourselves under imaginary banners we fail to see individuals as equal. A nation is as imaginary as the notion of borders. No more valid than "Black Bats". The natural state is the individual. Edited by throng on 09/05/08 - 02:39 AM

Cuthbert
Tenured Poster

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Mar 18, 2005
Total Topics: 21
Total Posts: 1615

Posted 09/05/08 - 04:55 AM:	#4
Imaginary in the sense of 'created by convention'. But not imaginary in the sense of 'merely fictional'. Money is imaginary in the first sense, but not in the second. It's very important to have money when you need it. Nations, families, tribes and parties can be just as important. They are real things, as real as money. But they are created by convention - 'social constructs' - and so you can call them 'imaginary' in the first sense. Perhaps the natural state of human beings is the troop, like gorillas, or the pair, like swans, or the colony, like ants. But perhaps there's no natural state. I'm not sure how you'd tell that the natural state is the individual, like viruses. Whatever the natural state is, if there is one, there's a further question: whether the natural state is a good state or a bad state to be in.

throng
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Aug 12, 2008
Total Topics: 9
Total Posts: 203

Posted 09/06/08 - 02:53 PM:	#5
CUTHBERT: Imaginary in the sense of 'created by convention'. But not imaginary in the sense of 'merely fictional'. Money is imaginary in the first sense, but not in the second. It's very important to have money when you need it. Nations, families, tribes and parties can be just as important. They are real things, as real as money. But they are created by convention - 'social constructs' - and so you can call them 'imaginary' in the first sense. THRONG: Money serves as a lable of false value. A tree is a tree, money makes it “worth” something. The practice of using money as the defining value has been disasterous. Different tribes or nations practice differently which is natural. Then they name the tribe to distinguish it from others by imposeing an identity. The individuals see themselves as “bongonian” as opposed to “yongonian”. It’s like money, the imposed identity is valued more highly than the actual state. CUTHBERT: Perhaps the natural state of human beings is the troop, like gorillas, or the pair, like swans, or the colony, like ants. But perhaps there's no natural state. I'm not sure how you'd tell that the natural state is the individual, like viruses. Whatever the natural state is, if there is one, there's a further question: whether the natural state is a good state or a bad state to be in. THRONG: I am an individual, others are my equals. We can pair or group. Yet I see disparity in falsely lableing ourselves. The lable becomes defining and the actuality is lost.

keda
Ijon Tichy

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jul 25, 2005
Location: Finland
Total Topics: 26
Total Posts: 2727

Posted 09/06/08 - 07:27 PM:	#6
The state of nature is war, where only one rule apply - the rule of the jungle - eat or get eaten. As social beings, we have a certain interest in forming groups, since you have a better chance of surviving when you cooperate rather than walk on your own. Groups should not be confused with ideas that may lay as a foundation for a group or not. Conventions are important elements in the formation of a group to assure that its members are protected from one another and from external threats. Money is an important means of exchange without which we would live in a much more primitive society, since barter has problematic limitations.
All about making money Free Europe Now How to fix your country The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. -Benjamin Franklin If my sons did not want wars, there would be none - Gutle Rothschild It's not the people who vote that count, it's the people who count the votes - Josef Stalin

unenlightened
psychobabble

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Aug 10, 2007
Location: Wales
Total Topics: 19
Total Posts: 1605

Posted 09/07/08 - 08:09 AM:	#7
<p><p><br > throng wrote: <font size="2"><br > The natural state is the individual.<br > </font><font size="2">The names we attach to imaginary notions and ourselves are false, yet we war to uphold these arrogant banners.<br > </font><font size="2">We belong as one. Should we name these notions and seperately group, for all the trouble it causes?</font> </p> <p>The natural state is "the_organism_in_the_environment". The individual is an imaginary notion too, and the source of all the other imaginary, arrogant banners.</p> <p> <span class="mediumtitle">keda wrote: </span>The state of nature is war, where only one rule apply - the rule of the jungle </p> <p>The law of the jungle is "Thou shalt not destroy thine environment, that thy days shall be long in the land." That means cooperate with it or die with it.</p> <p>The Red Demons and the Black Bats cooperate to fight in order to maintain a macho biker image. Rather like Bush and Bin Laden cooperate to be each other's bogeyman To maintain an image for oneself, one needs the'other' for contrast. If I have no image, then there can be no 'other' and then there is no separation from which to 'group'.</p></p> <p>Who put all that html there?</p> Edited by unenlightened on 09/07/08 - 08:54 AM
The observer is the observed. J Krishnamurti "Philosophy, to the Philistine, is an evolutionary process, watched over by some sort of brisk dynamic Providence, and culminating in the supreme insight of modern thought." John Cowper Powys

keda
Ijon Tichy

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jul 25, 2005
Location: Finland
Total Topics: 26
Total Posts: 2727

Posted 09/07/08 - 09:56 AM:	#8
Sure, Bush and Bin Laden cooperate but the latter is also known as Tim Osman a CIA agent. This is really what Plato was trying to get at with the cave analogy, we're watching a theatre with imaginary groups.
All about making money Free Europe Now How to fix your country The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. -Benjamin Franklin If my sons did not want wars, there would be none - Gutle Rothschild It's not the people who vote that count, it's the people who count the votes - Josef Stalin

ManiacJack
aka W

Usergroup: Members
Joined: May 29, 2008
Location: San Mucus, TX
Total Topics: 37
Total Posts: 535

Posted 09/08/08 - 09:59 AM:	#9
To Keda and others: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnychOXj9Tg 'tis truly a grand theater.
Future Tense Passed Relief the Escapist wrote: Bullshit, self-deception, self-aggrandizement. Explains everything, really...

throng
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Aug 12, 2008
Total Topics: 9
Total Posts: 203

Posted 09/09/08 - 07:13 AM:	#10
keda wrote: The state of nature is war, where only one rule apply - the rule of the jungle - eat or get eaten. As social beings, we have a certain interest in forming groups, since you have a better chance of surviving when you cooperate rather than walk on your own. Groups should not be confused with ideas that may lay as a foundation for a group or not. Conventions are important elements in the formation of a group to assure that its members are protected from one another and from external threats. Money is an important means of exchange without which we would live in a much more primitive society, since barter has problematic limitations. Nature is balanced, no beast dominates another. Man lables himself “lord of the jungle” and demonstrates his noble status by diminishing nature. “Lord” of nature. No such “jungle” law. Humans group because co-operation benefits each individual. Groups should see themselves as equal, because the individuals therein are equal. The imaginary notion “yellow” is adopted by a group and the individuals in it are “yellowish”. The word evokes colour in their minds and they adopt it as their identity. “Yellows” assert their superiority by insultingly labling the other group “Blue”. “You’re not Yellowish, Your Bluish,” they say, and humans are no longer equal. If a Yellow said “I wanna be blue” it would be treason. Some Yellows become Yellower than others. By this stage, to admit human equality would mean disbanding the notion of being “Yellows”, which is founded in patriotic fervor. Imagine, just groups of individuals without flags and drawn borders, who would we be? Individuals are equals in the group of humanity, but our imaginary notions delude us to disparity. We should better identify with ourselves and not our own illusions.

Page: 1 2 3 4

You don't have permission to post.

Please login or register.