Again, I am by no means arguing against the internet or technology.
Technology refers loosely to tools. Tools are amplifiers - hammers amplify power, binoculars amplify vision, wheels amplify speed. The internet, as a conceptual tool, amplifies ideas. Tools have no inherent value - their utility lies in how we use them. And just as a hammer can be used ineptly or for malicious purposes, so can the internet. I am suggesting that we get better at using this tool, and learn to use it with benevolent intentions.
You didnt answer my question as to why you decided to write anonymously. Shouldnt your title suggest that you too be "sincere" with your identity?
Furthermore, you are approaching this tool without approaching the root itself. yes it is a tool to amplify ideas, which can be bene/male/volent. But the tool is tangent. It can be anything. And while you may destroy/subside/regulate..etc the tool, it is the very idea itself which cannot be destroyed. To "learn to use" this tool for benevolent purposes is to "condition" or "regulate" the mind/idea to fit this category of what "you" or "some authority" considers to be benevolent. On what basis? There is no uniform benevolent approach which will satisfy every person. What is benevolent to me may be cruel to you, and vice versa.
Is there anything specific that you are referring to, and perhaps center on it, so as to be on the same ground, because right now, you are being very vague as a whole. Yes your ideas are wordy and lengthy, but have no central "thesis" or pinpoint to specific examples.
With regards to anonymity:
Well, I'm flutterhigh. What difference does that make? Even if I were to tell you my real name, it would have no bearing on how you perceived my ideas, nor should it. The sincerity I'm speaking of is a heartfelt kindness. I'm not really referring to blatant honesty alone.
With regards to the tool:
That's what I call a fruitless truth. Are you arguing that we will never come to a complete consensus on what is good for society? I think that's obviously true. But are you then trying to argue that this renders my intentions invalid? Or anyone else's, for that matter? That's what I call a fruitless truth. It takes wisdom to realize that true knowledge may be impossible. It takes stupidity to thus decide never to try and learn anything.
I'm not proposing that everyone does or even should agree with me. So far you haven't judged my ideas - only that I'm putting them forth at all. So then, what are your opinions on this? I'm not asking this out of spite, I'd honestly like to hear them.
With regards to my thesis:
I do agree that I'm dancing around the root of the issues, but I don't think that makes it insubstantial. These are just conceptual observations, really. I'll admit once again that I was using flowery, esoteric language, but the intent was to foster some sort of enthusiasm. But it's true that I don't know how to apply any of this on a practical level.
That said, I'm glad you answered with something other than "ya totally" or "that's fucking dumb".
Sincerity in the Age of Cynicism
← View full post
Random Internet Man.
Ironically, why did you write anonymously via internet (technology), a tool you are subtly arguing against.
--
Anonymous Post Author
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Again, I am by no means arguing against the internet or technology.
Technology refers loosely to tools. Tools are amplifiers - hammers amplify power, binoculars amplify vision, wheels amplify speed. The internet, as a conceptual tool, amplifies ideas. Tools have no inherent value - their utility lies in how we use them. And just as a hammer can be used ineptly or for malicious purposes, so can the internet. I am suggesting that we get better at using this tool, and learn to use it with benevolent intentions.
--
crimson_mamba
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
You didnt answer my question as to why you decided to write anonymously. Shouldnt your title suggest that you too be "sincere" with your identity?
Furthermore, you are approaching this tool without approaching the root itself. yes it is a tool to amplify ideas, which can be bene/male/volent. But the tool is tangent. It can be anything. And while you may destroy/subside/regulate..etc the tool, it is the very idea itself which cannot be destroyed. To "learn to use" this tool for benevolent purposes is to "condition" or "regulate" the mind/idea to fit this category of what "you" or "some authority" considers to be benevolent. On what basis? There is no uniform benevolent approach which will satisfy every person. What is benevolent to me may be cruel to you, and vice versa.
Is there anything specific that you are referring to, and perhaps center on it, so as to be on the same ground, because right now, you are being very vague as a whole. Yes your ideas are wordy and lengthy, but have no central "thesis" or pinpoint to specific examples.
--
Anonymous Post Author
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
With regards to anonymity:
Well, I'm flutterhigh. What difference does that make? Even if I were to tell you my real name, it would have no bearing on how you perceived my ideas, nor should it. The sincerity I'm speaking of is a heartfelt kindness. I'm not really referring to blatant honesty alone.
With regards to the tool:
That's what I call a fruitless truth. Are you arguing that we will never come to a complete consensus on what is good for society? I think that's obviously true. But are you then trying to argue that this renders my intentions invalid? Or anyone else's, for that matter? That's what I call a fruitless truth. It takes wisdom to realize that true knowledge may be impossible. It takes stupidity to thus decide never to try and learn anything.
I'm not proposing that everyone does or even should agree with me. So far you haven't judged my ideas - only that I'm putting them forth at all. So then, what are your opinions on this? I'm not asking this out of spite, I'd honestly like to hear them.
With regards to my thesis:
I do agree that I'm dancing around the root of the issues, but I don't think that makes it insubstantial. These are just conceptual observations, really. I'll admit once again that I was using flowery, esoteric language, but the intent was to foster some sort of enthusiasm. But it's true that I don't know how to apply any of this on a practical level.
That said, I'm glad you answered with something other than "ya totally" or "that's fucking dumb".