Visceralizing

[Sugarpop]

Now, most of us seem to be doing a lot of introspection, and we have quite a sizeable collective storage of wisdom on the forum. We have lengthy and frequent discussions about it, and we all probablyhave a more or less complete model on how to live life. In other words, we have a lot of intellectual knowledge about life, which I see as something very different from visceral knowledge. We may know that people in general are nice when given the opportunity, helpful and generally not out to get us, but we may instinctively shun and mistrust them. We get constant affirmations of our intellects, but still apparently feel insecure about our capabilities.

Data confirmed by reason, induction or respected mentors is not always readily assimilated into our register of instinctive and emotional responses.

How do you go about really understanding the simple truths of life? For me, this is a very slow, possibly impossible process.

(In the text above, the first person plural has been used as a placeholder for almost any other pronoun.)

 

[Ermine]

Great thing to bring up, Sugarpop. The lack of visceral knowledge is exactly why I'm so insecure about my knowledge. As many models I have working upstairs, they aren't ever executed how I like. To a degree, all my life experience contradicts with how I think things are. And it doesn't help that we tend to have a relativistic take on intelligence. Sure, they say I'm smart, but I'm nothing special compared to others, and they're smarter than me in other aspects.

 

[cheese]

You have to experience them - at least, in my experience.

I think an intellectual truth becomes a whole-being conviction when there's an emotion attached. Usually this emotion comes through experience. Even then it might take your brain a while to process the emotion. I've gone through this over and over again, and have come to accept that most of what I think I know will probably be disproved - in the mentally pale, wishy-washy and ultimately more compelling emotional manner - by some future twaddle that inexplicably morphs into an epiphany.

I'm not saying throw away reason, or even that we should trust our feelings over it. It just seems that there are some truths that are completely unfathomable logically.

This is what I think now, anyway. It could change. It seems less likely than other options though, considering most older people I know tend to settle around the middle *shoots pun*. And even though mass endorsement doesn't imply accuracy, I think it's at least possible that these people are on to something because we never have all the information, and our thought processes are not infallible. With both the input and processing system flawed I wouldn't place all my confidence in the output. (Yes, that's reasoning as well.....shut up.)

I suppose the bottom line is: it happens if it happens. Assimilation, integration, profound comprehension. As far as I know anyway, which admittedly doesn't inspire much confidence. This seems to be another attempt to intellectualise the problem again, which, as you've implied yourself, doesn't get you all the way. The way I see it, you either get out there, live life and expand your emotional and experiential range, or you don't. Go or stay.

God, I'm inspiring myself. I think I'll get out and achieve stuff today.

 

[Sugarpop]

I suppose the bottom line is: it happens if it happens. Assimilation, integration, profound comprehension. As far as I know anyway, which admittedly doesn't inspire much confidence. This seems to be another attempt to intellectualise the problem again, which, as you've implied yourself, doesn't get you all the way. The way I see it, you either get out there, live life and expand your emotional and experiential range, or you don't. Go or stay.

God, I'm inspiring myself. I think I'll get out and achieve stuff today.

I suppose wisdom is a function of experience, and that experience is a function of the amount of different things we've done. A model of how to live life must be tested against life and intellectual epiphanies must be reinforced by emotionally compelling examples in the outside world. Of course, doing a bunch of stuff doesn't seem to be a guaratee for wisdom; there is definitely an intellectual or at least internal component to 'wisdom'.

The question is how whether we can or should take any form or action or think in a particular way to encourage growth. Is the answer simply to expose oneself and stretch the comfort zone and let feelings take care of it?

 

[cheese]

I suppose wisdom is a function of experience, and that experience is a function of the amount of different things we've done. A model of how to live life must be tested against life and intellectual epiphanies must be reinforced by emotionally compelling examples in the outside world. Of course, doing a bunch of stuff doesn't seem to be a guaratee for wisdom; there is definitely an intellectual or at least internal component to 'wisdom'.

The question is how whether we can or should take any form or action or think in a particular way to encourage growth. Is the answer simply to expose oneself and stretch the comfort zone and let feelings take care of it?

I'm assuming the point in your OP - that we have already mastered the intellectual side. This base has been covered.

Yes, "doing stuff" is insufficient stimulus. The mental component is necessary to reflect on the experience and internalise it by processing the data and comparing it against existing conceptual structures, which eventually either incorporate this data - modifying itself where necessary - or collapse, allowing for new and more empirically accurate ones.

This can take a while though, especially because of the emotional component which we're not as well-equipped to deal with, and because personal involvement with a situation introduces all sorts of mental interference when attempting to analyse and fully comprehend.

*edit
Missed the last bit -

How we should think: again, I assumed this has been flogged to death already, but I suppose it's always worth re-noting that a narrow mind stagnates, and an open one remains fresh = more conducive to growth. One must be willing/humble enough to learn. Rigid preconceptions almost invariably hasten intellectual decay.

 

[walfin]

You're assuming a great deal, such as - we have met people who trust us,and we get constant affirmation of the intellect.

 

[Sugarpop]

You're assuming a great deal, such as - we have met people who trust us,and we get constant affirmation of the intellect.

Yes. I'm generalizing based on my own experience and more than half a year of reading the forum. Nearly all of us perform well academically and are considered smart by our peers. Still we tend to have a bias towards the negative, which also makes us prone to misanthropy. We are poor at understanding people, and tend to choose the least flattering interpretations of what they say.

If you think there isn't plenty evidence of your intelligence and that you've never met someone who trusted you, I'd say you're ignoring the obvious.

PS: You will see a few examples of what I'm talking about in this thread.

 

[Rain]

ERR-Erratic Random Realizations
I get them often. They are-most likely- thoughts that I put back into my head that I was busy concentrating on another stream of thoughts, and then they pop back into my head later already concluded and established.