Graduate / Self Deception: reasons and implications [2]

Are you happy? One rarely asks himself this question because it entails many philosophical questions that make him doubtful about many of the moral values that he take for granted and depend on for survival. Doing that feels like destroying one's own building and having a completely new one. The cost of the effort involved makes one disinterested and discouraged and willing to cover up for whatever defects he might have, move on through life and play a self-righteous role. But the question remains: is this a scientific question or a philosophical one? Have we ever asked ourselves when we are addressing a complex mathematical problem are we acting on instinct or we are acting on something completely objective? Science means standards that are to be met and can be agreed on by a group of people and can be built upon. Have we ever asked ourselves, where does these standards come from? Are they somehow intertwined in our genetic codes? Are these standards objective or are they subjective? We can agree on many issues. For example, internet is a useful tool for information sharing. I am sure that this is the reason that 99% of users remain loyal to the internet. What makes information sharing important? Where does this standard come from? Where does this belief come from? Our perception is not that objective. When we solve a complex mathematics problem, we do not work like automatons. We do not say: I am going to hold the pen, then I am going to lift it up 50 cm above the white paper that is 22.4 cm from me and when I reach the paper I am going to tilt it 15 degrees angle and I am going to write "x", etc. It all comes with instinct; you just do it. Similarly, if I tell you for example: you can make a difference. I am sure 99% of us would be excited to know that. The question remains: why is it such an important standard for us to make a difference? I can give an infinite examples in this regards. And what I am trying to head toward is: moral values can be approached in a scientific way. But that doesn't solve the problem of us not wanting to address ourselves in a scientific way because we are far too special to do that. It is a painful question and it has painful implications. This is why many of us decide to completely drop the subject and never open it again. This takes us toward a road named "self deception".

For any kind of deception to occur, it requires two entities. How can you deceive yourself when you are equally intilligent as you and you have the same set of moral beliefs and motives? It is impossible. In order for any sort of deception to occur, there are at least two entities. So, do we have two people inside us? The answer is no: we have so much more than that! We have so many personalities inside us. We deal with stuff differently in different situations because we get the appropriate person for the right situation. A prominent psychology professor like Dr. Jordan Peterson would support my theory. But the question remains: who gets out these personalities, who chooses the right person for the right situation? That would be another person on us who likes to dominate us and likes the power that he is having over us. There can be only one inside us, or else there would be a terrible fight inside of us and we would never be able to move forward. So, that granted, one can agree that indeed self-deception can occur. Since we are talking about different entities with different personalities. I can understand if you are staring at these words with total disbelief right now since you are not used to the idea of approaching yourself in a scientific way. And I think that are very valuable counter-arguments. One might argue, for example, if we have the same set of standards, why don't we have the same personalities? The answer to that lies in our ability as human beings to realize our limitations. For example, I know honesty is a very good standard but I know that I am not up to it and that I am never going to have it. But I know that I have the ability to be loyal. This is why there are not so many accidents of people dead jumping out the window from tall buildings unless they intentionally want to commit suicide. They know that they are physically limited. Similarly, human beings know whatever moral limitations they might have even though they have the same set of standards.

Now that I have established the faith that deception is a possibility, I would have to address why is it a problem. If one establishes the faith that deception is a problem, he can be less inclined to have it or at least he would consider overcoming it despite the time and the effort. Self-denial extends beyond your boundaries to the that of the other people. The next morning you might look at your child and say: my child doesn't look ok. Then your other self says: oh shut up, he is okay. Then you retort: he is not okay. Then your other self says: you know nothing, he is okay. Two years later, you discover that your child is on drugs. If you have the ability to deceive yourself, you will never know what impact you can have on other people's lives. You wouldn't know how much you might have hurt your friends, people who valued you or people who you value because of self-denial. If it was your life only, destroy it like you want. If it is other people's lives, then you should at least give a moment for yourself to think about it.

Writing Feedback / History shows us how forgetful human beings are [4]

Preparing for the GRE exam.

Humans are very forgetful. Our great ancestors were once hunters and gatherers. They bore a huge resemblance to animals. They fought the same way animals would for food. Their ultimate dream was to make it through another day. Most great civilizations were born around rivers. The writings of Aristotle and Plato support this. As Herodotus said "Egypt is the gift of the Nile". The Nile used to flood every year producing silt rather than salt. The Nile producing salt in other regions destroyed civilizations. After Egyptians gained the means of subsistence and after they have stopped thinking about food, they started developing administrative and judicial systems and even producing arts and writings. This has produced the most stable of all civilizations that extended over thousands of years when other soils eroded because their rivers didn't flood. Then Nasser came and he build a dam that destroyed the Niles capability of regenerating soil and all Egyptians sang for him even though he didn't base his actions on a scientific basis. He had farmers lean on chemical fertilizers for the first time and destroyed Egyptian lands that has sustained the Egyptian civilization for thousands of years. But then media creates a fantasy that people live. Egyptian farmers were 80% of it's civilization and they are the once who the so-called "gods" depended on to live a luxurious life. But then, we never appreciate these farmers today and we call them names and we treat them with disrespect. When we go to the supermarket, we do not want to think that the nicely packaged chicken in our hands is the result of some farmer's sweat because it wouldn't appear tasteful then. This is us human beings, we are forgetful. We think of music, movie theaters, have the luxury to get bored, and also have the luxury to commit suicide and end our lives. This is not only our life; this is the hard effort that extended over thousands of years by our ancestors fighting so hard to get us to see. This is life; try to appreciate it and try to show it respect. The world extended for 4.5 billion years when human existence extended only for thousands of years; yet we have the luxury to feel so haughty.