Topic: The Love Of Ignorance | |
---|---|
I learned a new word, today; Neologism. No, its not a bowel movement caused by roids. In psychiatry, the term neologism is used to describe the use of words that only have meaning to the person who uses them, independent of their common meaning. And here I thought that it meant that's the logic that Neo used to beat The Matrix. I can understand how you might derive that. Especially when Neo was told to clear his mind when he was going to take that great leap. "Clear my mind". It might be hard for some people to love ignorance. |
|
|
|
Cypher- You know, I know this steak doesn't exist. I know that when I put it in my mouth, the Matrix is telling my brain that it is juicy and delicious. After nine years, you know what I realize? *Takes a bite of steak* Ignorance is bliss.
|
|
|
|
Cypherites are a group of redpills that appear during the course of gameplay in The Matrix Online. The Cypherites uphold the ideals of Cypher. They violently disagree with the idea of awakening humans to the truth of the war between mankind and the machines. Initially introduced as "The Masked", they waged war against Zion and served as the human opposition to their red pill campaign. In order to further their objectives and the infiltration of Zion, many members wore bandanas to conceal their identities.
With the disappearance of the founding Masked members, Gemaskeerd and Enmascarado, the organization went underground to rebuild the order. The reformation was complete and the Cypherites emerged once again. A series of critical setback came when it was revealed by Seraph that Cryptos had been programmed by the Machines to serve as a leader and a means of controlling the organization to their own end. During this time, Veil assumed leadership and the attacks on Zion became increasingly more vicious. After Cryptos was stable, Agent Gray informed him that there was no process for reinserting an awakened human. This was devastating as many Cypherites longed to return to the bliss of the Matrix. Many of them vanished or left the organization. A short time later an unnamed crew of Cypherites located New Zion, which had remained hidden from the Machines. This violation of the truce ended the peace and war resumed. Cypherites took advantage of the new chaos and infiltrated Zion. During the evacuation of the city, a bomb was planted and detonated in Zion Command by the operative known as "Silenci0". The explosion wounded many Zionites, as well as Commander Lock. A large number of deaths were also reported. It was a tremendous victory for the organization. After the arrival of the Oligarchs, the Cypherites were approached by the Oracle. Meeting in a construct known as "One-Zero", Veil was given half of a heavily-encrypted code by the Oracle with instructions to watch over Sati. A short time later, the Oracle was "killed" by the Oligarch Halborn after refusing to hand over the Biological Interface program she had designed long ago. In the end, Cypherites sided against the Oligarchs and worked against them and their goal of obtaining the Biological Interface. They chose the safety and stability of the Matrix and mankind over their own desires in the final confrontation with the Oligarchs. |
|
|
|
statement: "It is truly amazing how much ignorance the mind can actually hold." The smallest mind can hold all the ignorance in the world, if you consider the similarity between "ignorance" and a null-vector, and "mind" and a three-dimensional bucket. A bucket holds an infinite number of points, or null vectors. It is not possible to not add a null vector to a bucket already full of null vectors. So the amazing thing about minds as vessels for ignorance is that we talk about them as if they were something. |
|
|
|
Philonihilophy
|
|
|
|
Philonihilophy Cool word. I like it. |
|
|
|
Philonihilophy I mean, can anyone name all the things I don't know? Or can anyone imagine a large enough number of thigns that I cannot know about, because there are too many of them? It is impossible to know about more and more things just because they are simply out there to be known. If I don't know them, they can still be not only numerous, but growing in number. Trout was right, the mind's capacity for ignorance is immeasurable. But theoretically it can be calculated, and my calculations show "infinitely large" as a final result. |
|
|
|
Philonihilophy I mean, can anyone name all the things I don't know? Or can anyone imagine a large enough number of thigns that I cannot know about, because there are too many of them? It is impossible to know about more and more things just because they are simply out there to be known. If I don't know them, they can still be not only numerous, but growing in number. Trout was right, the mind's capacity for ignorance is immeasurable. But theoretically it can be calculated, and my calculations show "infinitely large" as a final result. Wow. That is really huge. |
|
|
|
Edited by
CeriseRose
on
Thu 10/14/10 09:59 AM
|
|
ig·nore
ig·nore [ig náwr] (past and past participle ig·nored, present participle ig·nor·ing, 3rd person present singular ig·nores) vt refuse to notice somebody or something: to refuse to notice or pay attention to somebody or something [15th century. Directly or via French < Latin ignorare "not know, ignore" < (g)noscere "know"] ignorance is bliss it is often better not to know about something unpleasant |
|
|
|
forest gump is a good example... made a good life just gumping thoruogh... lol thats awesome...just gumping thru ... all he ddi was run ...right? lol |
|
|
|
The oracle told Socrates that he was the wisest man in Greece. He refused to accept that, and spent the rest of his life seeking out those who claimed to be experts in their field: priests, government officials, etc. Soon, he discovered that they knew nothing about their disciplines, at least nothing useful. But he kept going, asking sensitive questions and making important people feel awkward. Eventually he came to the conclusion that the reason the oracle said he was wise was because Socrates understood something that no one else did - that he knew nothing.
He developed something of a following, and he soon had a gang of young people cheering on his balloon-pricking question attacks. Eventually the local establishment got sick of his antics and set him up for blasphemy and corruption of the youth. He was sentenced to death by his own people shortly afterwards. He had ample opportunity to avoid his fate, but chose death willingly as a consequence of the life he chose to lead. Some of his followers set up institutions to honour his life and work, and they are still with us, in the form of universities. The Christians among you will notice some similarities. |
|
|
|
Okay. I hit a bump in the road in my ignorance. I think its a pot hole. I was reading up on the difference between slaves and servants. It interests me. What can I say? Evidently, there is a dominate helper and a subordinate helper. I work as a CNA and that means a nurse's assistant. Does that mean I am supposed to help the helper or help the helpless? Lately I have been feeling like a hopeless slave to the helpless. This pot hole is irritating to me.
|
|
|
|
Intelligence means you have a drug addiction of some sort.
|
|
|
|
Intelligence means you have a drug addiction of some sort. I think you are right. You look different some how. |
|
|
|
Does that mean I am supposed to help the helper or help the helpless? Lately I have been feeling like a hopeless slave to the helpless. This pot hole is irritating to me. If you have a choice - if you can walk away any time you like - then you are not a slave. |
|
|
|
socrates was onto something, just ahead of his time...
to know one's know's nothing, or consider itself as know nothing, at any second in time, allows increasing knowing at each second? it is simply the only way to keep the mind abosrbing data, and assimilating it, as the moment a human believes itself smart, it does not accept outside data as meaningful as selfs, not seeing in it's haste to believe in itself as supreme, that all itself knows, it got from outside data somewhere else... the wisest will be one that access all environmental feedback as accurate, including all human voice, not ignoring those that speak some proposed criticism? those that do not access self as knowing nothing, will simply base data intake, or imformation from other's, soley upon the negative or positive "emotion's" it envokes in the human body of self? so, these will recreate the past over and again, not seeing it be because for some reason, they said they were not perfect, but then defend everything they think as if they are, so never actually accessed any negative feedback about themself as real, so then in time, coming to not see a true picture of reality, as reality to them, is TELL ME GOOD ABOUT MYSELF, and anything else i can prove is false, lol... one that believes itself smart, will simply weigh incoming data against what itself ALREADY KNOW'S, so add no new perception to itself, so these NEVER CHANGE. 30 years later, they still sayin and doin the same things, but will sure try to use every word in their arsenal, to convince you how smart they are, lol... listen close, and all and each word out of their mouth, will be a "defending" of themself. in other words, it will simply fall prey to "self validation"? if self thinks it, feels it, it must be true. and to prove this to itself, it only seeks out the voice or opinion of what concur's with ITSELF? that which seeks to prove itself a dumbass, become wise, that which seek to prove itself as wise, become a dumbass, lol... the wise one seeks out it's worst critic, the dumb despise any critic? if a shipbuilder wish to build a excellent ship, he will seek out the best shipbuilder's and ask for critique, but a dumbass shipbuilder that builds a ship, seek out whom agree's with self. |
|
|
|
I learned a new word, today; Neologism. No, its not a bowel movement caused by roids. In psychiatry, the term neologism is used to describe the use of words that only have meaning to the person who uses them, independent of their common meaning. That is actually really interesting, to me at least. A neologism (pronounced /niˈɒlədʒɪzəm/); from Greek νέος (neos 'new') + λόγος (logos 'speech') is a newly coined word or phrase that may be in the process of entering common use, but has not yet been accepted into mainstream language. Neologisms are often directly attributable to a specific person, publication, period, or event. According to Oxford English Dictionary the term neologism was first used in print in 1483. In theology, a neologism is a relatively new doctrine (for example, rationalism). In this sense, a neologist is one who proposes either a new doctrine or a new interpretation of source material such as religious texts. Neologisms are often created by combining existing words (see compound noun and adjective) or by giving words new and unique suffixes or prefixes. Portmanteaux are combined words that begin to be used commonly. Neologisms also can be created through abbreviation or acronym, by intentionally rhyming with existing words or simply through playing with sounds. Neologisms can become popular through memetics, by way of mass media, the Internet, and word of mouth, including academic discourse in many fields renowned for their use of distinctive jargon, and often become accepted parts of the language. Other times, however, they disappear from common use just as readily as they appeared. Whether a neologism continues as part of the language depends on many factors, probably the most important of which is acceptance by the public. It is unusual, however, for a word to enter common use if it does not resemble another word or words in an identifiable way. When a word or phrase is no longer "new", it is no longer a neologism. Neologisms may take decades to become "old", however. Opinions differ on exactly how old a word must be to cease being considered a neologism. Many neologisms have come from popular literature and tend to appear in different forms. Most commonly, they are simply taken from a word used in the narrative of a book; a few representative examples are: "grok" (to achieve complete intuitive understanding), from Stranger in a Strange Land by Robert A. Heinlein; "McJob", from Generation X: Tales for an Accelerated Culture by Douglas Coupland; "cyberspace", from Neuromancer by William Gibson; "nymphet" from Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov. Sometimes the title of a book becomes the neologism, for instance, Catch-22 (from the title of Joseph Heller's novel). Alternately, the author's name may become the neologism, although the term is sometimes based on only one work of that author. This includes such words as "Orwellian" (from George Orwell, referring to his novel Nineteen Eighty-Four) and "Ballardesque" or "Ballardian" (from J.G. Ballard, author of Crash). The word "sadistic" is derived from the cruel sexual practices Marquis de Sade described in his novels. Kurt Vonnegut's Cat's Cradle was the container of the Bokononism family of nonce words. Another category is words derived from famous characters in literature, such as quixotic (referring to the titular character in Don Quixote de la Mancha by Cervantes), a scrooge (from the main character in Dickens's A Christmas Carol), or a pollyanna (from Eleanor H. Porter's book of the same name). James Joyce's Finnegans Wake, composed in a uniquely complex linguistic style, coined the words monomyth and quark. Lewis Carroll has been called "the king of neologistic poems" because of his poem, "Jabberwocky", which incorporated dozens of invented words. The early modern English prose writings of Sir Thomas Browne are the source of many neologisms as recorded by the OED. The children's book Frindle by Andrew Clements is a story about neologism. I think I have written poetry that is neologism. Yeah. Its a cool word. Just goes to prove we make it all up and can take it all away just as easily......maybe I will start calling apples pears tomorrow and see what reaction I get.....could you please hand me those pears......betcha they would look for 10 mins before telling me there r no pears only apples......LMAO |
|
|
|
The older I get the less I know......LOL....
|
|
|
|
Just goes to prove we make it all up and can take it all away just as easily......maybe I will start calling apples pears tomorrow and see what reaction I get It doesn't mean changing the definitions of the perfectly serviceable words we already have. Also, davidben1, despite his terrible spelling and grammar, managed to identify, explain and illustrate the reason Socrates was great much better than I tried to do. |
|
|
|
Does that mean I am supposed to help the helper or help the helpless? Lately I have been feeling like a hopeless slave to the helpless. This pot hole is irritating to me. If you have a choice - if you can walk away any time you like - then you are not a slave. Good point. Now if the state could just see that. |
|
|