The h Bar

Kenshin

9:00 AM

a person who is guided more by practical considerations than by ideals.

John Rennie

@Kenshin figure out what works and do that. Leave the navel gazing to others.

Kenshin

but it isn't a complete philosophy to me

to know what "works" one must have a goal

user228700

@BalarkaSen I'd like to be able to think about it without any of it resulting in destructive thinking patterns but that is probably something I ought to work out on my own. I'll still read that book u recommended though.

Kenshin

because whether something "works" or not, depends on whether it meets the goal

John Rennie

@Kenshin why?

Kenshin

9:01 AM

@JohnRennie because if you dont' have a goal, how can you say if something "works"?

and to me the biggest philosophical qauesiton is what is the ultimate goal?

Balarka Sen

@Kaumudi Yes, do read it. It tells you what can happen if you dig deep enough into the flesh and blood of the human mind - exactly the kind of destructive thinking pattern you mentioned.

Kenshin

is it to seek happiness, pleasure, avoid pain, morality or what?

and for this pragmatism is lacking

user228700

@BalarkaSen I'll go in as deep as my brain will allow and work my way up from there, then!

Kenshin

why did you edit that I had a good joke

Balarka Sen

scary endeavor

user228700

9:02 AM

@Kenshin This is why :-P

Balarka Sen

we're all inhuman degenerates deep down

John Rennie

All of us have aims of different kinds. They can be as short term as getting through a work day or longer term as in passing exams. In practice there is a continual spectrum of such aims. Deciding your life has a GOAL, presumably written on a board in sparkling lights, seems to me an indulgence.

user228700

@BalarkaSen It is, yeah.

John Rennie

@BalarkaSen damn, rumbled :-)

Balarka Sen

:P

user228700

9:03 AM

This summer is going to be wild.

Kenshin

@JohnRennie I agree with you that we all have different goals of different durattions but surely some goals are more meaningful than others

for example, surely it is better to have a goal to get a job, then to play video games in your mum's basement

John Rennie

@Kaumudi.H shall I notify the Chennai security services in advance? :-)

Kenshin

so if we acknowledge some goals are better than others

we must have some metric for determing what is "better"

and I want to know what this metric is

pragmatism doesn't tell me, but some other philosophies do try to answer this question

user228700

@JohnRennie No :-P The wildness will not spread outside of my own (already) toxic headspace. Damn, this Balarka has me talking about my toxic headspace and all :-P

Balarka Sen

sry

user228700

9:05 AM

:-)

Balarka Sen

i'm making an army of frankensteins from innocent teenagers

John Rennie

@Kenshin There is no such metric because there is no clear definition for what makes life better. There are some minimum standards that make life comfortable: somewhere to live, enough to eat, something to occupy you. Once you've met those standards anything further is own to personal choice.

user228700

@BalarkaSen Nah. This one's all on me.

Kenshin

@JohnRennie well what you have just said is a philosophy in itself

and it is distinct from pragmatism

John Rennie

Correct, and it's called pragmatism :-)

Kenshin

9:07 AM

lol pragmatism doesn't mean that you can do what you want after a certain point does it?

Slereah

The ideal pragmatist solution is to kill off all sad people

Kenshin

so pragmatism is about meeting bare essentials then do what you want?

Slereah

maximized happiness

Kenshin

rather than maximising happiness?

John Rennie

Pragmatism means choosing what works for you without worrying about some higher ideals that may be irrelevant.

Kenshin

9:08 AM

so "works for you" means what?

it feels good?

so it is hedonistic?

it doesn't have regard for others?

or do you mean "works for the community"

or is it a selfish philosophy

John Rennie

I think the key aim is to be contented. Happiness is transient, as is sadness, unless you have some form of metabolic disfunction.

Kenshin

My opinion is that pragmatism is part of a philosophy

John Rennie

@Kenshin Everyone is entitled to their opinion of course.

Kenshin

@JohnRennie you could be right, but this is different from pragmatism

being "contended" isn't necessarily a part of pragmatism

so what I was getting as is that pragmatism is only part of the story

user228700

@Kenshin: Existentialism

Kenshin

9:11 AM

ty Kaumu, hopefully this will solve all of my dilemenas

user228700

@Kenshin x'D I wouldn't be that optimistic, man.

Kenshin

My philosophy is self improvement

user228700

I don't know if that counts as a philosophy in its own right or what but that's nice.

Kenshin

well it is very similar to aristotle's philosophy on virtue ethics

the ancient greeks used the term "virtue" to refer to "excellence" rather than goodness

now the only constant in life is oneself

and a good philosophy is robust

so accumulating money isn't good, because money can come and go

but improving yourself will be robust (if you work on the right things)

Slereah

Improving yourself can also go

All is meaningless I guess

Kenshin

9:14 AM

not meaningless no

because the otherside of my philosophy is the goal

and to me the goal is eudomonia or wellbeing

Balarka Sen

if you don't exist, you have no business improving yourself

because the whole thing's a fraud

Kenshin

apparantly all greek philosophers agreed that eudomonia was the ultimate goal

the only question is how do you get there

now your strategy for achieving it shouldn't depend too much on external factors (because you can't control these)

Slereah

they had pretty weird ideas of what that meant, though

Kenshin

this is why self improvement is the most robust strategy for achieving eudomonia

Slereah

Living in a barrel and masturbating in public isn't my idea of wellbeing

But there goes Diogenes

Balarka Sen

9:16 AM

rofl

user228700

I think I'm with W.H.Auden on this one: "We are here on Earth to help others; what on Earth the others are here for, I don't know"

Slereah

Don't get too swept up by philosophy

Kenshin

yes @Kaumudi.H some of the best feelings I've had is from helping others

Slereah

It's 2500 years old, if that was the secret to a perfect life we'd know by now

Don't fall for the memes

Balarka Sen

helping others is good but... it doesn't define me

Kenshin

9:17 AM

so improving kindness for instance is also self-improvement that falls under my phillsophy

Balarka Sen

@Slereah nah it can't help. it can mess you up tho

philosophy i mean

Kenshin

@Slereah I'm discovering the secret, in 5 years everyone will know the secret that I share with them

Slereah

@Kenshin is gonna go through all of philosophy and every week he will have a new great idea on how to live his life

He's gonna read Thomas of Aquinas and suddenly Jesus will be the answer

Then it's gonna be hedonism

Then stoicism

Kenshin

lol

Balarka Sen

it all ends in hedonism

Kenshin

9:19 AM

Balarka has a point

Balarka Sen

youtube.com/watch?v=lKfupO4ZzPs - Pinhead aka philosophers

Kenshin

I don't like to admit it, but the more I learn and think about philosophy, the more hedonism appaers to be the truth

Slereah

Then dianetics

Surely I have too many thetans

All philosophical solutions to happiness sound good, that's why they're popular

Whether or not they work is another matter

Balarka Sen

The Hellbound Heart is a pretty scary story about what hedonism does to man.

Slereah

Oh I almost forgot

Egoism

Kenshin is gonna read Atlas Shrugged, and bam!

He's entitled to the sweat of his own brow

Or maybe he will read the ego and its own

ALL IS MY PROPERTY

Balarka Sen

9:21 AM

egoist hedonism is the worst

Slereah

MORALITY IS A SPOOK

Balarka Sen

bohemian hedonism still has humanatarian aspects - the happiness is for all!

Slereah

@BalarkaSen It puts pins in your face?

Balarka Sen

@Slereah hooked chains rips you apart, and spills innards all over

altho that didn't happen in the book

Frank got transported to the cenobite dimension and tortured and got rekd

Kenshin

@Kaumudi.H I have watched the video on existentialism

I don't like that theory

Slereah

9:23 AM

JESUS WEPT

Kenshin

it says that existence preceeds purpose basically

Slereah

Well yes

purpose doesn't grow on trees

Kenshin

however the human brain isn't born blank

it is born with the ability to feel pain in response to some stimuli

Slereah

If you're going by human instincts it's gonna be mostly about eating berries and having sex

Kenshin

and pleasure in response to others

Balarka Sen

9:24 AM

@Slereah +1

Slereah

I mean, it's a fine life

Kenshin

@Slereah wrong

the human brain also has an instinct to think and solve problems

many gain pleasure from such activites, just ask @JohnRennie

Slereah

Yes, the problem to solve is where to find berries

Balarka Sen

lmao

Kenshin

not just that

Slereah

9:25 AM

Remembering where the good berries are

Well that's what it's for

Kenshin

the problem is also how can you ensure you will always have berries

and how can you ensure that you can have stability in life

Balarka Sen

that's still about berries man

Kenshin

now if you look at what "successful" people do

Slereah

In the end it's all about berries

Kenshin

you will see that they are about ensuring lots of berries

@Slereah yes

Slereah

9:26 AM

I hear Bill Gates has a gigantic vault filled with blueberries

Kenshin

but the point is, our berry seeking essence isn't something we choose it is a part of us

it is the whole point

Slereah

yes.

Balarka Sen

in the end you get tired of earthly berries and look for cenobites

Slereah

But that's not very informative on how you should live your life in the modern world

Balarka Sen

and they turn you into berries

Kenshin

9:27 AM

@Slereah of course it is

Slereah

Because in the modern world, you have all the berries you want

Kenshin

wrong

Slereah

food isn't the issue

Even poor people can get food, at least in the first world

Kenshin

we have more instincts than food

Slereah

Sure, but which ones

Also those instincts aren't necessarily useful in the modern world

Kenshin

9:28 AM

the need to procreate (and hence desire for enough resources), the need for power (to ensure we can protect our offspring)

Slereah

They can lead to unhappiness

Kenshin

@Slereah no they lead to happiness

Slereah

Well no

Kenshin

suppressing instincts is what leads to unhappiness

Slereah

Because the instincts aren't made to make you happy

Kenshin

9:29 AM

the modern world, one is forced to work often in jobs they don't like to get food

Slereah

They're made to make you reproduce efficiently

Balarka Sen

I think striving for happiness is a fine philosophy of life. I think it's incredibly naive but that's just me

Kenshin

@Slereah wrong, people desire happiness due to evolution

Slereah

Yes, they desire happiness

Kenshin

achieving happiness leads to reproductive success

Slereah

9:29 AM

that's to push people into doing something

Kenshin

they desire it, because those who didn't desire happiness died off

Slereah

what happens after they do that is another matter

Balarka Sen

@Kenshin have you actually seen people who followed primal desires and looked for maximizing happiness? that's a whole crowd of 60's hippies, half of which died from drugs, a bunch of which became street beggars and scrounged for food, and some of them just reverted back to ""normal"" life

bohemian hedonism does you no good

Kenshin

@BalarkaSen do you consider accumulating knowledge to be a primal desire?

Balarka Sen

they openly recommended people to have LSD's and destoroyed the next generation

Slereah

9:31 AM

Humans aren't made to be happy all the time evolutionarily speaking

Because individuals content with their situations did not thrive

Kenshin

@BalarkaSen I believe the human brain cannot be fullfilled if it is not intellectually stimulated

all needs must be met

Slereah

that's why you get accustomed to your current situation

Kenshin

and then one must guarantee these needs for the future

@Slereah people are happy when they strive

Slereah

Not necessarily.

Kenshin

@Slereah perhaps you are confusing happiness and pleasure

I agree that pleasure is a transient emotion

but happiness can be prolonged

Slereah

9:33 AM

Also please note : not everyone is the same mentally

A variety of mental processes is also useful on an evolutionary standpoint

Because different mindsets have various efficiencies in different conditions

Kenshin

YEs, people may be happy with different things

but my point is, one should seek happiness

Slereah

well yes

Kenshin

thus the meaning of life is to do what makes you most happy

Slereah

Well no

Balarka Sen

@Kenshin to some extent, gathering knowledge is human instinct, yes. but i do think justifying knowledge with pleasure is naive

Slereah

9:34 AM

Because "meaning" is an abstract term

You don't have to

Kenshin

You don't have to do anything

but this is about what you should do to maximise your welllbeing

Slereah

Yes.

So your idea is that to maximise happiness, you should maximise happiness

I mean

That's not wrong

Balarka Sen

lol

Kenshin

@Slereah I think one should maximise happiness

because happiness is the ultimate good

Slereah

What does "good" mean

Kenshin

9:35 AM

the ultimate goal

Slereah

What is a goal

Kenshin

the thing that makes everything worth doing

Balarka Sen

@Kenshin well, what even is wellbeing? i can easily imagine someone spending a life trying to have a stable, happy life but being haunted by questions they did not answer in that process

Kenshin

To give an example, I may ask you why you do action A over action B

and you might have a reason

Balarka Sen

striving for happiness is perfectly fine, but it does not define life for many, many people

Kenshin

9:36 AM

many don't strive for happiness

user228700

@BalarkaSen Why..?

Kenshin

but what else is there apart from it?

the ultimate reason for doing anything should be happiness

otherwise perhaps a mistake has been made

Slereah

Yes, but

Kenshin

happiness is our objective function

Slereah

That's a fairly empty statement

Balarka Sen

9:38 AM

I agree with Slereah here

Slereah

You don't really prescribe how to achieve this

Kenshin

why is it

Slereah

Most people will strive to happiness

Kenshin

but some don't

Slereah

Sure, but even then

Kenshin

9:38 AM

some will do what they think is "ethically" correct

Slereah

The real issue is how to do it

Kenshin

yes

so you agree with hedonism tho?

happiness is the ultimate objective

once we've established that, then we look at how it is achieved (which I also have a theory for)

Balarka Sen

why? what for? why would i want to be happy?

i can choose to be unhappy, just to justify my choice

and justifying my choice is not seeking pleasure out of it

Slereah

@BalarkaSen Is that why you went in math

Kenshin

See @Slereah ppl can argue with my "empty statement"

Balarka Sen

9:40 AM

it's just... whim

there are many many emotions working behind a human brain

@Slereah lel

well i guess

Kenshin

yes but when I say "happiness" I mean optimal emotional wellbeing

so I mean eliminating all negative emotions

Balarka Sen

i can maximize whim instead. that's not equivalent to maximizing happiness, however you twist it

Kenshin

and attaining the good ones

Slereah

What if it's not possible

Balarka Sen

what is negative? what is dark is just bright to me

Slereah

9:41 AM

Also should you prepare ahead

user228700

...nobody will ever achieve this utopian state of "optimal well being".

Balarka Sen

what is good? it's your choice of meanings man

Kenshin

@BalarkaSen whim maximisation is a strategy but the strategy doesn't feel as good as happiness so why would you wish to maximize whim?

Slereah

What if it's a probabilistic issue

Balarka Sen

@Kenshin I don't want to feel good! That's the point!

Kenshin

9:41 AM

@Kaumudi.H good, otherwise we'd have nothing to strive for, nothing to do

Slereah

What if you can be happy for now at the risk of future unhappiness

Kenshin

@BalarkaSen why not?

Balarka Sen

you are justifying hedonism with hedonism! I want to justify whim because it's my whim.

Kenshin

@BalarkaSen hedonism is a postulate, you don't justify it

Slereah

but then if it's a postulate

Kenshin

9:42 AM

it is self evident

Slereah

We can always argue

well no

Plenty of people have argued against it

Hence not self evident

Balarka Sen

if it's a postulate then it's just one of the ways to live life

i can come up with ten thousand many

Slereah

Something self evident would be inarguable

Kenshin

yes Balarka is arguing about it now

user228700

@BalarkaSen I have no arguments against this but why?

Kenshin

9:43 AM

it is evident, but silly people will argue about anything

Words are insufficient to describe the subjective feeling of happiness

So I can't use words to explain why "happiness" is better than "whim"

but I know myself that happiness is better than whim

by definition of what I consider to be happiness

Balarka Sen

@Kaumudi.H "Whim"? :) It's pretty consistent, if you do it this way, actually. But I can write pages about why I choose to do certain actions even though it leads to unhappy consequences.

Kenshin

so if Balarka thinks "whim" is the best feeling, then for him, "whim" is happiness

Slereah

plenty of people have acted in ways directly contrary to their continued happiness

How do you explain this

Balarka Sen

I think anything I write here to justify my actions is going to be overly simplistic.

Slereah

Also as I said, evolutionarily, individuals don't act in the way that maximize their happiness

Balarka Sen

9:45 AM

@Kenshin I do not think whim is the best feeling.

Kenshin

@BalarkaSen then why do you act in a way that isn't the best feeling?

Slereah

It's either 1) maximizing survival of their genes or even 2) random processes

Balarka Sen

You're just seeing things through your happiness glass

@Kenshin Because I want to do it.

I want to defy happiness.

user228700

@BalarkaSen I'll be damned. If u do write about it and feel that u can share, please do. I've been thinking about the same thing for a terribly long while now.

Kenshin

YEs, but you must understand that a good feeling is its own reward

what is the reward for "whim"? There is none. So surely a reward is better than no reward?

Balarka Sen

9:46 AM

@Kaumudi I think pretty much literally whatever I say is going to intersect with what's in Notes.

Kenshin

If you think no reward is better than a reward, then there is something wrong

user228700

@BalarkaSen Notes?

Balarka Sen

The first part of Notes is the philosophical journal that boot-started existentialism, actually.

Notes from The Underground

user228700

Ah, do u mean that book? I've forgotten the name of it. Will have to look it up in the transcript...

user228700

@BalarkaSen AH, yes, thanks.

Slereah

9:49 AM

Aaaanyway

Balarka Sen

@Kenshin I think no reward is perfectly fine to me. On the other hand you could argue the reward in whim is the ability to defy rewards itself. It's far too complicated, and you're oversimplifying stuff.

Slereah

@BalarkaSen Apparently there's no direct link between the Grassmanian bundle and the sphere bundle

Balarka Sen

It's an infinite concatenation of logical consequences.

Kenshin

A human brain includes an emotional component (limbic system) and a newer rational component (pre-frontal cortex). The rational component has the ability to forget about the emotional component and act on "whims", but this is meaningless, nothing is gained. If the rational component acts to benefit the emotional component, a subjective gain is felt when ahppiness is achieved.

Slereah

But it still seems that the Grassmanian line bundle still only has a section if $\chi = 0$

Do you have any idea why

Balarka Sen

9:50 AM

@Slereah Huh.

Slereah

Steenrod does the proof for that on $S^n$ but not in general, I think

Kenshin

Evolution agrees with me. Those who act on whim will die sooner than those who act on maximising well being.

Balarka Sen

What's a section of the Grassmannian line bundle? A choice of a 1-plane distribution on TM, right?

Slereah

Well no, it doesn't

@BalarkaSen yes

Evolution, especially in social species, will make you act to preserve your group

Kenshin

Not if you act on whim

Balarka Sen

9:53 AM

That in turn gives you a vector field on M (the unit vector on each 1-plane aka line, modulo choice of Riemannian metric)

Slereah

Hence you can totally sacrifice your own happiness for the survival of others

Kenshin

If you act on whim your group won't be preserved

Balarka Sen

So by Poincare-Hopf, chi(M) = 0

Slereah

@BalarkaSen Not necessarily

Kenshin

@Slereah actually people get happy by making sacrifices for others

Slereah

9:53 AM

Line bundle doesn't give a direction

@Kenshin that's an assumption

Kenshin

@Slereah it's an observation

Slereah

Is it

Balarka Sen

@Kenshin I'll die if I want to, thank you very much. :P

Survival is the least important of all my philosophical worries

Kenshin

@BalarkaSen buffet said to 'In order to succeed, you must first survive' this applies to philosophy

Slereah

Not in all philosophies

Kenshin

9:55 AM

Yes I'm not a philosopher

I don't care about proving wrong the thigns I know to be wrong

such as acting on "whim"

Slereah

then stop talking about philosophy

Kenshin

I care about living the best life ican

Balarka Sen

you do, and you're fine

Kenshin

I'm not talking about philosophy

Slereah

Then stop going on the internet to argue

Kenshin

9:56 AM

I'm talking about how to live the best life

Slereah

I'm pretty sure that will not do much for that

Kenshin

@Slereah u mad bro?

Balarka Sen

@Slereah if M is orientable, it does, actually.

Slereah

@BalarkaSen BUT WHAT IF IT'S NOT

Balarka Sen

hrr

Slereah

9:57 AM

Klein bottle is $\chi = 0$

And not orientable

Balarka Sen

I guess you pass to the orientation double cover?

Slereah

But then this isn't the klein bottle anymore

Balarka Sen

every manifold is double covered by an orientable manifold. pass to that, and pull the line bundle back there. if the euler char of the double cover is zero, euler char of your base is 0 too

@Slereah yeah but note that if M --> N is an n-fold cover then chi(M) = n*chi(N)

Slereah

Ah yes, that is good to know

Balarka Sen

so since torus has chi = 0, klein bottle has too

p sure that works

Slereah

9:59 AM

So I guess that a vector field on the double cover translates to a direction field on the projection to the klein bottle

Hence a section of the Grassmannian

Transcript for