A Response to The Unlikely Techie

A Response to The Unlikely Techie

So this is a tad bit late, but I was requested to respond to this article not long after publishing my article “on the ascertainment of truth”.
At the time of writing that article I was nearly sleepless (only four hours of sleep within a 36 hour period) and was fresh out of a dextromethorphan trip.

The article to which I am now responding is here: https://theapeiron.co.uk/philosophy-as-we-know-it-is-dead-fff572b0544c

I am unfamiliar with the unlikely techie’s work and worldview yet this article they have written seems quite revealing and I agree with quite a bit of it.

Within the article, techie describes the issues of philosophy in the modern era, and their analysis is spot on as far as I can tell. Multiple questions are posed, yet I will sidestep these for now and focus on what I see as a more immediate issue mentioned within the article, which is the issue of philosophy’s inability to keep pace with the rapid rate of expanding information intake by each individual within a society.

Techie rightly recognizes that humans formulate identities based on the information available to them. With the advent of the internet, the amount of information available to each person is logarithmically expounded upon in comparison to humans from prior ages. Much of philosophy struggles to provide an adequate framework for most people to sufficiently handle this flood of data and most modern philosophy rejects the obvious and observable fact that reality exists independently of an individual observer, frequently misapplying concepts from quantum physics (concepts which physicists themselves admit they do not fully understand, concepts which receive hefty helpings of debate on a regular basis) in an attempt to justify this unfounded proposition.

As techie points out, if philosophy is to thrive, it must be highly adaptable and capable of doing so swiftly. Although they did not explicitly state so, it is apparent they acknowledge the fact that there is an objective reality, even if it is too complex for a single person to thoroughly comprehend with sufficient precision.

I was recently conversing with a friend about philosophy, specifically the links and differences (most importantly the pragmatic aspects of) Aristotle, Hegel, and Marx. This friend essentially stated that the Hegelian perspective is often misunderstood and that he appreciated that I was able to bridge the gap between the Aristotelian objectivism and the Hegelian subjectivism.
In reality, having gone over a large library of philosophical literature, I do not like to use labels for myself as I do not fully agree with anyone, and most people I find I hold many disagreements with.

Allow me to explain my worldview and personal philosophy, as I believe that my system actually functions in accordance with the ideal hinted at by techie and also is useful beyond this issue which I have chosen to focus on in this article.

I am a pragmatist, but pragmatism is not a philosophy in and of itself, rather it is a principle which can be defined differently by different people. I would like to clarify here that pragmatism can be viewed as a heterodox philosophy, I simply do not view it in this way and this seems to be a matter of personal preference. Because of my perspective on pragmatism, I do take the time to thoroughly analyze everything that comes my way so as to be sure of the best possible option.

I have experimented with what is known as chaos magick, which is an extremely pragmatic system of thought designed to rapidly adapt an individual’s consciousness to whatever ends said individual has chosen, usually focusing on occult practices to bring about altered states of consciousness.
The chaos magick worldview is somewhat Hegelian in nature, in that it acknowledges that different people and philosophical frameworks can be true and false in different ways. That is to say, an idea can have aspects which are true and aspects which are false, and under certain contexts can be seen as true while under other contexts can be viewed as false.
I also am a scientist (See my aforementioned article about “truth”).

Thusly, my system is primarily scientific and uses various perspectives and philosophies to explore information and concepts which I happen across. While investigating I look for what serves my purposes (or the purpose a group I am investigating or discussing with has stated) best.
In the aim of seeking ultimate objective truth I also frequently incorporate altered states of consciousness so as to prevent myself from falling into a rut of thought, allowing my ego to interfere with my observations or reasonings, or my mind from accepting demonstrably false notions.

To bring in one other point made by techie which I fully agree with here (I agree with most of what was said, I am simply maintaining a specified train of thought here towards my goal) it absolutely does appear as though philosophers dig in their heels and refuse to accept change. This seems to, in the modern era, stem from the patently false idea that reality is subjective and so there is no point in changing according to evidence not discovered by one’s own self. This is, of course, also an issue of egoism. I have mentioned ego in previous articles and even here and so will not go at length about it, but ego observably obfuscates fact and fiction.

My philosophy reduces and attempts to fully remove ego from observation and logic so as to reach as closely to the purest objective truth as possible.
As mentioned near the beginning of this article, I wrote an article on discerning reality from falsehood not long after what was essentially a shamanic ritual incorporating sleeplessness and a dissociative psychotropic substance. Dissociatives by definition remove the ego from the experience of reality, and sleep deprivation reduces the influence of the reptilian brain over the frontal lobes, which is quite literally reducing the influence of the basic drives over the reasoning faculties.

It seems that techie and I are in agreement overall and it would perhaps be both enjoyable as well as productive for me to converse with them.

Comments (0)
Join the discussion
Read them all
 

Leave a Reply

Hide Comments
Back

This is a unique website which will require a more modern browser to work!

Please upgrade today!

Share
%d bloggers like this: