Home › bluemason3 › Posts

Posts by bluemason3

1288 posts shown.

Eco-primitivism: The downfall of civilization? in Philosophy · Apr 23, 2020

It just works better with the judges, honestly. There’s no way you can pull it off with the jury. 🧐

Eco-primitivism: The downfall of civilization? in Philosophy · Apr 23, 2020

Melissa Stewart6 said:He keeps citing anthropologists, but honestly, it’s hard to say how much weight to give him when his bias is so incredibly obvious.

Culture is actually a relatively recent development. If you look at the timeline, cave art dates back roughly 30,000 years, yet agriculture only kicked in about 10,000 years ago. There is this massive gap between when our IQ levels first allowed for symbolic thought and when we actually started building civilizations. I suspect the missing link in that interval was a fundamental shift in how we relate to the natural world. It’s possible that during this period—to an immeasurable degree—there was a collective hesitation to exert dominance over nature. It might even be that symbolic expression didn't truly take off until the desire for power emerged, likely as an unconscious byproduct of our gradual move toward a division of labor.

There’s this common argument that you can only tame the violence of primitive societies—things like human sacrifice, cannibalism, or slavery—through the introduction of symbolic culture. But I think there's a simple way to debunk that stereotype: organized violence wasn't actually cured by culture; it was actually triggered by it. William J. Perry studied various indigenous groups throughout the Americas and noted a striking contrast between agricultural civilizations and those that remained unmanaged. He observed that while the latter might be seen as "culturally inferior" by certain standards, they lacked the horrific, organized customs found elsewhere. It seems that almost every society on Earth that moved toward a domesticated relationship with nature eventually became prone to organized violence. Meanwhile, non-agricultural societies largely avoided it altogether. Anthropologists have long looked at Native Americans on the Pacific Northwest coast as a unique case study for this rule. Even though they were primarily fishers, they eventually adopted slavery and developed a very rigid social hierarchy. However, even in their case, there was an element of domestication present, such as the use of domesticated dogs and small-scale tobacco cultivation.

Actually, I just looked up this one too: https://www.britannica.com/biography/W-J-Perry

The guy was just a product of his era—a time when anthropological fantasies ran wild because we lacked solid archaeological data. We can probably forgive him for spouting nonsense, considering nobody knew any better back then.

But the people quoting him today? Not so much.

Eco-primitivism: The downfall of civilization? in Philosophy · Apr 23, 2020

Also, I see Google claims the oldest cave paintings aren't 30,000 years old, but actually 64,000—and they weren't even Sapiens doing the painting, but Neanderthals: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cave_of_Maltravieso

It’s a fair question, though: why are there so many of these drawings scattered across Europe?

I’ll take a shot at guessing, and I could be totally off base here, but maybe it comes down to colder climates. Even if physical remains last a long time, nothing stays forever. Today's deserts used to be forests, and vice versa, and paint on walls eventually fades. So, it makes sense to assume that as we look further back in time, our chances of finding anything diminish—not because they didn't exist, but because they're gone. Another factor might just be that archaeology is most developed in certain parts of Europe, so people there were simply more likely to notice, study, and preserve them.
In any case, in Europe, the history goes back only as far as when Sapiens arrived.
P.S. I'm reading now that pigments found in African caves could be 160,000 years old and might be remnants of paintings, along with worked shells that could have been ornaments. But we can't be sure. There's just too little evidence and too little information.

Writing is a different beast entirely, but I think Sam Martinez9 might have a point here. The first instances of writing we know of (Egypt, Mesopotamia, etc.) that have been deciphered show a very high level of pragmatic, administrative focus. It suggests that bookkeeping probably came first, with religious texts following much later.
A primitive community doesn't really need ledgers to track grain levels in silos or the number of stone blocks issued to build someone's ego-driven monument.

Eco-primitivism: The downfall of civilization? in Philosophy · Apr 23, 2020

Melissa Stewart6 said:He’s not exactly a teenager—he’s 76.

I just hope he can use dementia as an excuse.

If he's fully lucid, then he's just being an idiot.

Eco-primitivism: The downfall of civilization? in Philosophy · Apr 23, 2020

Melissa Stewart6 said:According to his own words,

"The fall from the simplicity and fullness of lived experience—from that raw, sensory moment of realization—leaves a void that can never be symbolically bridged. This void has always been masked by layers of civilizational comfort, civilized detours that never truly restore what was lost. In one sense, symbolism only represents what has been repressed, for only the repressed requires symbolization. The sheer magnitude of symbolism is a testament to how much has been buried, yet remains potentially recoverable."

For context, he's a contemporary writer, and most of his books were published in the 2000s.

This kind of nonsense is only tolerable coming from some teenager who just watched The Matrix for the first time, thinks they’ve reached enlightenment, and now spends all day philosophizing about the meaninglessness of philosophy and the concept of "evil concepts."

Anyone over the age of 14 peddling these hollow, unfalsifiable ideas deserves a reality check rather than an actual debate.

By the way, he's a contemporary writer, and most of his books were published back in the early 2000s.

So, in this case, it's clearly just another fool being cited here. What a shocker. 🐔

Eco-primitivism: The downfall of civilization? in Philosophy · Apr 23, 2020

Melissa Stewart6 said:He keeps citing anthropologists, but honestly, it’s hard to say how much weight to give him when his bias is so incredibly obvious.

Culture is actually a relatively recent development. If you look at the timeline, cave art dates back roughly 30,000 years, yet agriculture only kicked in about 10,000 years ago. There is this massive gap between when our IQ levels first allowed for symbolic thought and when we actually started building civilizations. I suspect the missing link in that interval was a fundamental shift in how we relate to the natural world. It’s possible that during this period—to an immeasurable degree—there was a collective hesitation to exert dominance over nature. It might even be that symbolic expression didn't truly take off until the desire for power emerged, likely as an unconscious byproduct of our gradual move toward a division of labor.

There’s this common argument that you can only tame the violence of primitive societies—things like human sacrifice, cannibalism, or slavery—through the introduction of symbolic culture. But I think there's a simple way to debunk that stereotype: organized violence wasn't actually cured by culture; it was actually triggered by it. William J. Perry studied various indigenous groups throughout the Americas and noted a striking contrast between agricultural civilizations and those that remained unmanaged. He observed that while the latter might be seen as "culturally inferior" by certain standards, they lacked the horrific, organized customs found elsewhere. It seems that almost every society on Earth that moved toward a domesticated relationship with nature eventually became prone to organized violence. Meanwhile, non-agricultural societies largely avoided it altogether. Anthropologists have long looked at Native Americans on the Pacific Northwest coast as a unique case study for this rule. Even though they were primarily fishers, they eventually adopted slavery and developed a very rigid social hierarchy. However, even in their case, there was an element of domestication present, such as the use of domesticated dogs and small-scale tobacco cultivation.

I see two accurate, irrelevant facts, one half-truth, and a mountain of disconnected speculation, projections, and poor attempts to rationalize baseless assumptions.

This first chapter is nothing more than empty religious rambling. You could have projected any conclusion imaginable and gotten the same result. Terence McKenna would probably argue that psychedelic mushrooms triggered our creativity, while Erich von Däniken would claim they were left by aliens. It’s all pretty much on that same level of nonsense—just baseless projections of ideological fantasies.

Actually, that urge to dominate nature—to exert control over our surroundings—is one of our most fundamental human impulses. It’s easily one of the core drivers of our species. (If I recall correctly, he’s got a fear of deep water.) It’s what you see in newborns. You can't get any more natural than that.
It’s probably true for pretty much any living thing, too—from bacteria all the way up the food chain.
What a load of nonsense this guy is peddling. It's honestly unbelievable.

I’d actually prefer if someone could quantify this second point instead of just tossing out half-baked info and speculative interpretations. It would be much better to look at actual data from reports written by people who lived within Native American hunter-gatherer societies. First you had Westerners who ended up kidnapped and raised by Native Americans, and later, those researchers deep in the Amazon.The whole argument about reduced violence just doesn't hold water, especially when you look at the archaeological record.

Organized cultures definitely had their share of organized violence—ritualistic stuff, cannibalism, you name it—but that seems to be a thing of the past. When you look at bone remains from the Stone Age, the evidence of violent death is on a completely different level. It depends on where you are, usually somewhere between 20% and 50%. Even in the most violent, war-hungry, and bloodthirsty civilizations in history—societies built on slavery and conquest—you don't see this. Even modern Stone Age hunter-gatherer groups, according to most accounts, show instances of extreme violence. It seems the recurring theme is a brutal, almost "racist" divide between those inside the clan and everyone else, who are treated like little more than insignificant animals. There’s no sense of fair play. Compared to how these tribes treated outsiders, any obsession with borders would seem downright humanitarian.
Not across the board. Tribalism varies wildly depending on how many tiny micro-communities you're looking at, but more often than not, it’s a real issue. The only place I can think of is a specific region in Southeast Asia where tribes show incredible tolerance; everywhere else I've studied, things tend to get pretty nasty.

Eco-primitivism: The downfall of civilization? in Philosophy · Apr 23, 2020

Is there actually any solid ground for this kind of romanticizing primitivism? Or was this just part of that old, debunked, pseudo-religious obsession with the "noble savage" that used to be popular in Europe? If this theory is less than 50 years old, there’s zero justification for it.

From what I understand, anthropology and archaeology paint a pretty brutal picture of hunter-gatherer tribal life—honestly, it's not exactly a lifestyle I'd be jumping at.

Socially speaking.

Psychologically, I find the dismissal of severe cognitive limitations even harder to swallow—specifically regarding the lack of verbal and symbolic reasoning or long-term planning. And yet, people use modern tools to criticize the very systems they're ignoring.
Then again, maybe it makes sense coming from someone posting this nonsense; if you're operating on a significantly lower cognitive level, perhaps you can only find common ground with others in the same boat.

Has anyone actually managed to stay sane and level-headed among these clowns?

Eco-primitivism: The downfall of civilization? in Philosophy · Apr 21, 2020

It’s a very short walk from this kind of nonsense to becoming an Unabomber.

Death to anarchists and communists—long live the state and capitalism!

Do you have a spiritual mentor, and how much of an impact do they have on your life? in Spirituality · Apr 18, 2020

P.S. Baula have their own gurus and guru-initiations, though I don't know enough about them to really grasp the underlying dynamics or how much weight those relationships actually carry. My guess is it’s probably no different from any other sect in that realm, and I’d rather not get ahead of myself by trying to interpret specific verses.

Do you have a spiritual mentor, and how much of an impact do they have on your life? in Spirituality · Apr 18, 2020

David Vaughn75 said:If there's no guru, then there's no lineage of disciples stretching back to Brahma, which would basically mean all that Vedic knowledge is just a total fabrication.

Whether there was an actual lineage from Brahma or if it's all fiction doesn't change much, honestly. Those Puranic stories aren't just mythological; they're fundamentally unhistorical. When you look at them alongside archaeology, geology, paleontology, and scientific historiography, there's zero chance these tales are factual.

Some things might have a grain of historical truth, similar to other myths, but even that usually undermines rather than supports the conclusions those myths try to draw or the way they frame things.

Do you have a spiritual mentor, and how much of an impact do they have on your life? in Spirituality · Apr 18, 2020

David Vaughn75 said:Look, I already told you—God looks out for people. You're sitting here questioning how I could have believed that back in my younger days, but honestly, what else am I supposed to say?

Bottom line is, if you're looking for something real, you'll find it, because God takes care of us.

Does this psychopath care about little kids too? You know, the ones he kidnaps, rapes, murders, rapes again, and then bakes in an oven? Or is that when "necessary measures" only apply? perembozanskerucice Karma, right here. Karma? What's that supposed to mean? Forget karma. I'm stronger than that. JebesKara JaSamJaci God?

It all comes down to whatever baseless fantasy is convenient enough to bridge the gap between the nonsense we believe in and actual reality. 🕺

Do you have a spiritual mentor, and how much of an impact do they have on your life? in Spirituality · Apr 18, 2020

Rachel Kern5 said:
Rational vs. Irrational Fears

http://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/rational-vs-irrational-fears/

I don't see how some random idiot rambling on the internet matters here.😁

"Rational fear" is an oxymoron.

Do you have a spiritual mentor, and how much of an impact do they have on your life? in Spirituality · Apr 18, 2020

Rachel Kern5 said:Exactly. But we’re talking about RATIONAL fear here. I mean, nobody in their right mind is going to stick their hand into a burning stove just for the hell of it. What the Chinese wrote about in the Tao te Ching focuses on those IRRATIONAL fears—the kind of irrationality that keeps unstable people, the self-proclaimed "panic artists," constantly spiraling. 🥱

Rational fear doesn't actually exist. Every emotion we feel is either hardwired from birth or some kind of conditioned, internalized instinctual reaction.

It’s entirely possible that whether a reaction is conditioned or just part of someone's nature, it ends up being more or less in sync with the circumstances they're actually living in.

It’s like training a dog. If you didn't socialize them properly when they were young, you're going to have a hell of a time trying to meet their needs once they've actually matured. It depends. Will I be getting an incredible guardian, an aggressive guard dog, or just a companion to hang out with? It really comes down to what we're looking for. You’re both going to run into trouble.
That’s just the nurture side of things. You also have to account for nature—how different breeds and individual dogs come with their own built-in predispositions, some strengths and some weaknesses. Then, you eventually run into those outliers we might call "broken," where their behavior—whether it's something they were born with or something they picked up along the way—is just wildly outside the norm for any reasonable context.

It’s the same story with people.

It’s not about logic. Nobody actually sits down when something happens to them, runs a bunch of mathematical models on their computer to project every possible outcome, and then decides which emotion to trigger by pressing an "emo button."
The whole point of an instinctive reaction is speed. In most real-life scenarios—especially considering the vast majority of our evolutionary history in the wild—acting fast is everything. It’s about outrunning a predator or landing a kill before it's too late. There isn't any room for deep analysis, overthinking, or logic in those moments. You just move.

If someone finds themselves having emotional reactions that are wildly out of sync with the current social climate—to the point where it’s actually causing problems—they have options. They can try working through it via therapy or lean on medication. Some things can be fully resolved, while others are simply impossible to fix entirely. For most people, it’s really just about finding a way to manage it to some degree.

It’s like training a dog again. If you have a decent trainer, they can sometimes nudge certain breed instincts in a different direction through good discipline, though it’s never a guaranteed fix. I’ve seen plenty of overconfident trainers take a completely broken dog and honestly believe that Caesarism works in real life just as smoothly as it does on some TV show.
In a week, the dog gets put down, and the guy who thinks he owns him ends up in a casket. On the bright side, he’ll probably stop acting like such an egoist after that—at least in front of the people he used to try so hard to impress. 😬

I don't really see how any of this connects to spirituality, to be honest. 🤔

Do you have a spiritual mentor, and how much of an impact do they have on your life? in Spirituality · Apr 17, 2020

Does this kind of spiritual "achievement" imply a psychopathic or manic level of fearlessness, or is it something more clinical, like Urbach–Wietheov disease? 😳

Fear is a vital survival mechanism, just like hunger. It exists because we need it to stay alive. Too little fear leads to dysfunction, much like chronic anxiety does, and a total absence of fear is usually a symptom of a very serious medical condition. Temporary modulation might be useful—like dosing soldiers to get them through a messy job—but as a permanent state, being fearless is both bad and dangerous.

That said, I’d say moderate (hypo)maniacs (there are certainly more intense, cult-driven manic types out there, though they probably lack the self-control required for high-level guru manipulation) and psychopaths tend to dominate the field of spiritual teachers. So, that’s likely what people mean.

Do you have a spiritual mentor, and how much of an impact do they have on your life? in Spirituality · Apr 17, 2020

David Vaughn75 said:I explain everything to you three different ways and you still come back with the same questions 🤦

It doesn't matter if the guy is a celebrity or a complete nobody—what matters is whether he actually lives out his own BS. Your soul can sniff out who's legit. Like, look at parents who tell their kid to stay away from sugar while they're sitting there devouring a donut; those people have zero credibility, so their words don't mean squat.

Quincy:
How can you even tell if someone has actually found enlightenment and isn't just lying to you or playing you? Is it based on how smooth they talk, or the peace and compassion they radiate, or maybe all those deep thoughts and that charismatic vibe? They could even be using an aggressive, persuasive style. Honestly, all of that can be rehearsed, especially if the person is a natural performer.
The universe knows exactly what your intentions are, and it sends people your way based on that.

If you aren't looking for anything real and just want something to kill the boredom, that's exactly what you'll get—some con artist selling you smoke and mirrors.
But if you truly want to dedicate your entire life to God, the universe will send you a real teacher.

Quincy:
What does "living out your enlightenment" actually look like in practice?

A Zen proverb 😁 says that before enlightenment, a man chops wood and carries water, and after enlightenment, he chops wood and carries water. You can't just watch someone and decide they're enlightened. In fact, they say only someone who's already reached that state can recognize it in someone else—though, by that point, they wouldn't really care anyway.
Personally, I prefer the idea of surrendering to God over "enlightenment," mostly because I haven't got a clue what enlightenment even is.
Someone who has surrendered is free from fear.

You can spot someone who has surrendered to God because they aren't out there trying to grab power over anyone else; their only real interest is helping other people find their own freedom.

Religion loves dodging logical arguments by hiding behind vague, empty platitudes.🕺

Do you have a spiritual mentor, and how much of an impact do they have on your life? in Spirituality · Apr 17, 2020

David Vaughn75 said:Go ahead, why don't you try doing a deep psychological analysis on the types of people who flock to forums just to lecture everyone else on why religion is supposedly "bad."

That’s the real childish behavior here, if you ask me.

Are we talking about humanitarian types who actually care about people's mental freedom and building an educated, progressive society free from superstition?🤔 🤷

Do you have a spiritual mentor, and how much of an impact do they have on your life? in Spirituality · Apr 17, 2020

Wait, is this woman actually serious? Where did she even get this? 😁

Maybe it was actually Gandhi?:
https://www.habitsforwellbeing.com/b...ted-to-gandhi/

Or is it just some internet myth?

Honestly, it feels like just another one of those reductive New Age fairy tales. 🕺

Don't be naive; their whole job is churning out these cheesy little stories, quotes, and aphorisms all over Sanasma and beyond. 😁

Do you have a spiritual mentor, and how much of an impact do they have on your life? in Spirituality · Apr 17, 2020

stormyskipper5 said:Well, sure. Go ahead. Strip me down and let me feel the current.

Do you have a spiritual mentor, and how much of an impact do they have on your life? in Spirituality · Apr 17, 2020

Dana Davis5 said:🤣🤣

I mean, what even is a spiritual teacher? Is it just someone showing you how to think, or how to observe things, or maybe how to carry yourself through life? What’s their actual role here?

Honestly, if they aren't handing over some real, practical, "use this tomorrow" kind of knowledge, then I'm just not really interested.

In non-tantric religious traditions, it’s roughly that—but you have to remember these traditions evolved long before widespread literacy, let alone the internet. In the oldest ones, predating writing altogether (like Vedic religion or Buddhism), oral transmission was the only way.

Because of this reliance on oral tradition, there's often this idea that an ideal state exists which can be reached, leading people to idolize those who supposedly achieved it.

In Tantric and Tantra-influenced traditions, a guru's role isn't just instructional; it's metaphysical and redemptive, somewhat analogous to Jesus'. Your teacher, through their own teacher, and so on back to the source, acts as the final "doorway in the hallway toward perfection." There is an initiatory, mystical dimension to how they conceptualize spirituality, rather than just a transfer of data. In many Tantric paths, meditating on the guru is a fundamental practice, similar to how one might meditate on deified anthropomorphic symbols in theistic traditions (like Jesus, a Wisdom figure, or various deities).

Do you have a spiritual mentor, and how much of an impact do they have on your life? in Spirituality · Apr 16, 2020

David Vaughn75 said:Look, when you’re "learning" like that, there might be a tiny chance you actually pick up something useful, but honestly? The odds are astronomically low.

And please, don't lecture me—gurus have existed in Hinduism since forever.

I believe this is a long-term unhealthy religious phenomenon. It pushes the psychological regressiveness already found in religious groups to an extreme, trapping people in a perpetual illusion of security through a childish relationship with pseudo-parental figures, which ultimately prevents them from reaching full maturity and responsibility.

Seriously, why would anyone walk away from a warm, loving home where everything is perfect just to go chase some spiritual teacher?

No kid in their right mind would ever do that.

Wait, so what? You're saying hell is actually a great place and we shouldn't be scared of it, but instead we should head down there to find spirituality? That theory is a massive stretch.

To me, it just makes sense that someone passes on their own knowledge; they aren't going to pass on someone else's.

Right, because those Purani stories basically just rewrite history however they feel like it.😁

Why would anyone walk away from a cozy, perfect home just to follow some spiritual teacher?

Because:

a) there isn't a "cozy" home, just a dysfunctional one, so they're hunting for surrogate parents.

b) they left home physically, but mentally they haven't grown up yet, so they're still looking for surrogate parents.