Plesiohedron

joined 1 week ago
[–] Plesiohedron@lemmy.cafe 1 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 22 minutes ago)

Because "knowing it" isn't the whole picture.

It's actually only a very tiny part of the picture.

You're asking about what motivates you. Knowing can motivate. Experience motivates more tho. So does habit and some other stuff.

[–] Plesiohedron@lemmy.cafe 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Ah. Nobody can afford un-enshittified products anymore.

It's progressive invisible poverty.

[–] Plesiohedron@lemmy.cafe 1 points 2 days ago

What's a "commercial break"? Arrrrrrr!

[–] Plesiohedron@lemmy.cafe 2 points 4 days ago

It might be voice to text. It sometimes gets carried away.

[–] Plesiohedron@lemmy.cafe 15 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Just put little silver skulls on the front of your hats already.

[–] Plesiohedron@lemmy.cafe 1 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

It could be inherently flawed. We look at a picture or a symbol and pretend it's real. That's insane. I mean, I know that's kinda how it works, but still. Insane.

Or maybe it's imprecise to call it a flaw. Maybe call it a trap, to be careful of. But nobody's careful. (So that's maybe an "out of control" situation)

(I know I'm not. I mean case in point. I'm watching this movie "don't look up" right now and I'm getting all teary-eyed and stuff. It's a fucking movie. An illusion of flickering images and bullshit. I know with great certainty that it's just a fantasy but I'm still having this reaction. So that's insane)

[–] Plesiohedron@lemmy.cafe 3 points 5 days ago (3 children)

Is it inherently bad? Out of control? Something else?

[–] Plesiohedron@lemmy.cafe 1 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

We could order understanding by quality.

First there is perception. That's the closest. Then there is thought about that. Then there is the secondhand form of that, gotten from a friend. Then gotten from a mere associate. Then a stranger. Thirdhand and fourthhand. And so on.

Close to far. That close kind you don't even have to think or talk about it.

Perceptions like rightness, beauty, gut make a good guide. Art and invention are proof of that. Call it a good source of truth.

Not too good for building objective consensuses tho.

[–] Plesiohedron@lemmy.cafe 4 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (6 children)

Hypothetically, one could step away from the whole internet/media/information system. Stick with firsthand experience and the testimony of trusted friends.

To what degree would that include "science"?

What would that look like. Amish?