Philosophical/psychological dealing with uncertainty

[wesmorris]

A grave uncertain prospect is necessarily negative.

I took it as "impact". He said "gravity" not "grave", which isn't necessarily negative, just big. Perhaps I took it wrong though?

 

[Frud11]

You're discussing philosophical uncertainty, and notions of choice and expectation. We can expect to learn, but only a little. We can choose to learn, or observe (this truism is, in fact, reflected in the quantum world's uncertainty and observational paradox).

So what little we learn should be used with care. Logic should be a tool that cuts through the paradoxes.

 

[greenberg]

We are constantly being told directly and indirectly that this is the way things are.
...
I also wonder if all this reminding has a magical effect - I am not emphasizing supernatural, but more hitherto unknown to science effects - on 'the way things are'.

Some people who claim knowledge of "how things truly are" are thereby asserting the desire to control the situation. This has little to do with actually knowing "how things truly are", but with seeking to make things be as one wants them to be.

I watched the first one. She went past cues that would have had me setting that cat on the floor a long time before. In fact I am surprised the cat waited so long.

The second one is interesting because of the way the woman comments on the cat's behavior. The cat is behind a fence, and hisses severely when approached. Yet the woman keep approaching the cat, saying "You've got issues!" "You've got issues!"? I find it awful, the way she spoke to the cat.

 

[greenberg]

I took it as "impact". He said "gravity" not "grave", which isn't necessarily negative, just big. Perhaps I took it wrong though?

I would think that if something big or important is at stake, then this being-at-stake, this uncertainty is something one would normally experience as negative. By "negative" I mean in the sense of "uncomfortable", "something one would rather not have happening".

 

[sowhatifit'sdark]

The second one is interesting because of the way the woman comments on the cat's behavior. The cat is behind a fence, and hisses severely when approached. Yet the woman keep approaching the cat, saying "You've got issues!" "You've got issues!"? I find it awful, the way she spoke to the cat.

That is a classic mindfuck. Animals have advantages over us in some ways. The cat just heard the tone of voice and had no reason to start thinking about its 'issues.' In my life I have fallen for this and at my attacker's 'request' shifted from my feelings about them to thinking about my (potential) fucked-upness.
Pardon my Swahili.

And this does relate to problematic uncertainty. Enough experiences like that, where someone pushes you to deny the obvious and have a problem with yourself can make uncertainty a kind of base state. 'I thought you were hitting me for no reason, but actually I shouldn't have asked that question during dinner after your long day at work. I can't find the bad intent that I must have had, but it must be in here somewhere or you WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN SO CERTAIN about it being there.'

Others misplaced certainty can set off chronic uncertainty in us.

 

[wesmorris]

Alien abductees.

what about them? since I am not one as far as I know, and only know of the phenomenon through media, etc... what about them?

I think this distinction might be meaningless for everyone around you in relation to you.

What bearing does that have on its validity besides that you don't see it? It's a context thing. It's there because IMO, respect for the lacking capacity of "absolute validation" warrants the condition. It encapsulates it within the pertinent context as I see the pieces of the puzzle falling together.

Since you don't find it meaningful to you in relation to me, what about the reverse? If applied to yourself from your own perspective, are the words meaningless? Surely then mean something. What? Twisting it slightly, can you apply my meaning in your own context?

This was the direction I was heading with the teenager issue. I think people overestimate the importance of the tip of the iceberg's * next to the way they are.

I'm not sure exactly what you're referring to as "the tip of the iceburg" in this case, nor exactly why you think "the importance of it" is being ignored.

I would say my son has intrinsic value and never look back.

Good for you. Why? Are you "absolutely certain"? Do you need to be? What does this assertion mean to you? What should it mean to me? Where do you think this intrinsic value is located? How did it get there? Could it be moved, altered or destroyed?

 

[wesmorris]

Lucky you. :bugeye:

Had you thought through the line of reasoning you started above about brain chemistry, you'd sooner or later arrive at an "angsty uncertainty" too.

Oh? Lol. That's pretty certain of you.

I think it's obvious that you would, but do you really think that means I would too? Seriously? After all I've said?

 

[greenberg]

So what little we learn should be used with care.

One of the things I find most disconcerting is how little of what I know I can actually use. I have vast amounts of information, opinions etc. - but most of them are interesting but relatively useless, they're there for their own sake, basically.

So much reading, studying, thinking, dicussing - and for what?

 

[greenberg]

Oh? Lol. That's pretty certain of you.

What - do you think I am sitting here, trembling? :bugeye:

It's is odd - how I can investigate my own uncertainties, my own weaknesses, yet not give in to them, at least not fully.

How these seemingly overwhelming things aren't actually overwhelming.

I think it's obvious that you would, but do you really think that means I would too? Seriously? After all I've said?

I think that sooner or later, you would.

 

[sowhatifit'sdark]

what about them? since I am not one as far as I know, and only know of the phenomenon through media, etc... what about them?

Make wild intuitive leaps so I can write in shorthand! OK. perhaps unfair.
Abductees could make the same claims about their experiences that you were making earlier about the births. I can see where you would come in with cost analysis and perhaps bring up issues of social tensions that might arise from taking their experiences and interpretations seriously, etc. On the other hand, the impact of the experience - which it clearly is - might make not taking it seriously deleterious - me using a fancy 'utility' evaluative word. (I have met a couple of these people who were really quite rational about everything and made no show of their experiences. In fact I had to kind of pull teeth to find out what they were upset about. I don't want to get into a discussion of whether this was objectively real - I hope to have some sympathy with you on that one - but to point out implications of your position. In fact where it no doubt overlaps with mine, if, in the end, you are more skeptical about what they experienced or their interpretation of it.)

What bearing does that have on its validity besides that you don't see it?

Well, I can raise the issue of whether it is true that you really have an asterisk or rather like to think you do but you don't. I can also wonder about the importance of the issue or philosophical stance. What does it actually do?

Since you don't find it meaningful to you in relation to me, what about the reverse? If applied to yourself from your own perspective, are the words meaningless? Surely then mean something. What? Twisting it slightly, can you apply my meaning in your own context?

Well, that's interesting.
I certainly have done what you are doing - if I can talk about it in terms of verbs. In my experience I find that it creates a layer in my psyche - words, words - or I should say, another layer. Now I am certain - still about certain things - and I have another process added on to this certainty. In a sense I have an extra personality - a doubter or qualifier - or a tag on qualification to my thoughts reactions ideas. I guess my experience was that it was excess. Sometimes it arises of itself: hmm, is this merely my perception. But to have it as a stance seem to me to create an ongoing extra function, even a, however mild, split in myself.

I also found that it seemed to fool me that I had an open mind, or was flexible, or actually was less fanantical than others, or had a transcendant stance in any way that was actually useful - touche for getting that out of me.

I'm not sure exactly what you're referring to as "the tip of the iceburg" in this case, nor exactly why you think "the importance of it" is being ignored.

Tip of the iceberg=the little thinker in the head
The iceberg=the whole you
The *=the qualification that everything is 'from my perspective'

I am not sure what you meant by ignored - probably obvous but I missed it.

I meant that the value and importance of the little part of the self putting that * next to their perceptions, ideas, etc. seems to me to be an overestimation.

I mean I might hang out with you in person and 'get it' somehow. Ah, in this man I can see the effects. I can feel it. But in other people I have known face to face who have similar - I think - ideas it didn't seem to make much difference. In fact I found that the conversation or the disagreement, if there was one, took longer. Because we had to include the qualifications layer until finally something broke and it slipped away and we got down to it.

I guess it almost seemed to take on the aspects of a cultural flourish.

Good for you. Why? Are you "absolutely certain"? Do you need to be? What does this assertion mean to you? What should it mean to me? Where do you think this intrinsic value is located? How did it get there? Could it be moved, altered or destroyed?

As I said, I ain't looking back. And I only say this much to give you the sense of a process I sometimes prefer to yours. I could see no reason to let those questions enter me in the past. I trust myself on that one.

 

[cosmictraveler]

One can decide to act, but to decide to believe when not convinced (ie. uncertain) is not satisfying for me.

That is totally different than being frustrated.

When one isn't convinced they remain SKEPTICAL about something which is

a good way to be about most things we don't understand. That is just

common sense not frustration at all.

 

[wesmorris]

I would think that "acceptance" is about being allright with something, not be concerned about it.
Acceptance is something one actively does.

Well maybe that's why you're bad at it?

I'm just sayin.

Acceptance is what you said, sure. Once though, the acceptance is accomplished, it is "accepted", and doesn't necessarily require constant attention. Focusing on the fact that you're probably going to die in 10 minutes doesn't help you live for 10 minutes. Focusing on how you're going to avoid death before your ten minutes is up, that might help. First, you accept that there is a "grave situation", and then you don't have to actively acknowledge that in particular - but rather its alternative.

seriously I think you choose a negative view because you're accustomed to doing so, because at some point you saw things as such, and it made sense. So the sense kept on building, and now you're an unhappy bastard because you learned how to see how shitty things are. i don't mean you in particular really, I just mean this is how the shit seems to work. i'm doing the same thing but more as puzzle pieces in the style of reasoning I learned to employ than "good or bad" as I see it.

Can you really say statments like "I don't have a clue what the meaning of my life is, but I'm okay with that, I accept it" or "I'm not sure whether it is possible to make an end to suffering, but I'm okay with that, I accept it".

WOW. Seriously? Yeah I can. I know it, I feel it. Why would you think suffering could end? Why would you think you know "THE meaning of life rather than YOUR meaning of life"? Seems like you're projecting your expectations onto reality and you're pissed that reality doesn't accomodate you. Don't you think that is really being dishonest with yourself?

This is odd. You seem to be separating the "mental" and the "emotional". I don't see how there could ever really be a difference between them.

No just being redundant, pardon.

To me, "unhappy" and "mature" are mutually exclusive.

So if you're unhappy you're immature? So you're not happy so you're not mature? What is "mature" then? Responsible? Understanding?

And how did they arrive at that value function?

Well you could call it "habit", but it's not exactly that. It's the shape of their mind. It is shaped over time, more flexibly when young, more firmly when older (generally speaking). It's like the grand canyon kind of. The shape of the water flowing through it changes based on the rock it's chipped away through its life. The water flows where it does and is reshaped over time... but the trough of the river just gets deeper... just like the assumptions (fundamentally shaping our perception) in mind become more and more engrained.

Do they treat it as a given, as part of "who they really are", and not as something created by one's own deliberate effort?

How they treat it is sort of what I was listing out above. Feel free to add the stuff you said I missed (and in case you didn't notice, saying "I got them all?" was just a backhanded way of saying "please add what I've missed".

The issue here is being uncertain about things that are important in one's life.

Again, focusing on the potential negative outcome does not lead to a solution. It does not negate the uncertainty. So the question is: why waste your time focusing on things that don't help you navigate your experience, especially in situations where you think it's important for whatever reason, that you nagivate to some standard you have for yourself, or that you feel is imposed upon you?

 

[sowhatifit'sdark]

When one isn't convinced they remain SKEPTICAL about something which is

a good way to be about most things we don't understand.

I dunno.
Skeptical sounds so active and resistant.
Curious and exploring might be one reaction - without having made any belief decisions.
Put off and looking elsewhere is another.

I see skeptical as 1) a decision to go mental and poke at something with words and rationality. 2) generally an, if subtly, combative stance.
I see these as valuable reactions to some things, but others I can simply choose to investigate, often experienctially, for example, or not.

Oh, mediation can make me feel better. Sounds interesting. I give it a shot. If someone demanded I state my level of belief it will help me I might say, Oh pretty low, I guess, but there is no need for me to focus on that, especially if I am curious.

The mind and all its wordy wordy words in often not the best way to gain or explore beliefs or processes.

A skeptical stance seems to me is but one tool in a vast repetoire in relation to things I do not believe - potentially, yet.

I understand that being skeptical does not have to mean what I said, but it sure seems to work out that way in every person I meet who says they are skeptical about something. Verbal Mind vs. belief.

 

[cosmictraveler]

The mind and all its wordy wordy words in often not the best way to gain or explore beliefs or processes.

Then how else can you explore the unknown if you don't use your mind?

 

[sowhatifit'sdark]

Then how else can you explore the unknown if you don't use your mind?

I think this is a very telling question.

In the example I gave above you actually try meditating.
You experience something. Sure the mind is there, but it is not going at the issue rationally.
And the body is there and the emotions and so on.

The mind can come in aferwards and evaluate. And more exploration can take place after this if one is curious, for example. Or if the process if fun, hell you can put off evaluating until years later.

Chanting leads to God. Hm. Me doubt that. But it sounds nice. Me try. 6 years later. Wow. I didnt find God, but I had a great time. Or some other conclusion after 1 time a week friday night chanting. and I just started a band and man all that practice helped my voice.

 

[greenberg]

Acceptance is what you said, sure. Once though, the acceptance is accomplished, it is "accepted", and doesn't necessarily require constant attention. Focusing on the fact that you're probably going to die in 10 minutes doesn't help you live for 10 minutes. Focusing on how you're going to avoid death before your ten minutes is up, that might help. First, you accept that there is a "grave situation", and then you don't have to actively acknowledge that in particular - but rather its alternative.

Regarding the bolded part: Then there must be something in a person that makes them focus this way. Like, they must be sure of their intrinsic value, for example.

Can you really say statments like "I don't have a clue what the meaning of my life is, but I'm okay with that, I accept it" or "I'm not sure whether it is possible to make an end to suffering, but I'm okay with that, I accept it".

WOW. Seriously? Yeah I can. I know it, I feel it. Why would you think suffering could end?

It is because of the realization that there is suffering, that the conviction that there must be a way out of it arises.

Someone who isn't all that sure whether there is suffering or not, won't seek a way out.
And this includes people who complain and blame and who admit that they suffer, yet who also shrug and say "Ah, it's all relative".

Why would you think you know "THE meaning of life rather than YOUR meaning of life"? Seems like you're projecting your expectations onto reality and you're pissed that reality doesn't accomodate you. Don't you think that is really being dishonest with yourself?

I was precise, mind you, to avoid this sort of absolutistic expectations. The passage in question goes - "I don't have a clue what the meaning of my life is, but I'm okay with that, I accept it".

So if you're unhappy you're immature? So you're not happy so you're not mature?

Yes, I venture to say that.

What is "mature" then? Responsible? Understanding?

Being master of whether you are going to suffer or not.

And how did they arrive at that value function?

Well you could call it "habit", but it's not exactly that. It's the shape of their mind. It is shaped over time, more flexibly when young, more firmly when older (generally speaking). It's like the grand canyon kind of. The shape of the water flowing through it changes based on the rock it's chipped away through its life. The water flows where it does and is reshaped over time... but the trough of the river just gets deeper... just like the assumptions (fundamentally shaping our perception) in mind become more and more engrained.

This is all fine and descriptive, but it doesn't say anything in terms of insight or instruction for deliberate change.

If your child asked you, "How do I arrive at holding something as intrinsically valuable? Please instruct me." what would you say?

I'm not asking for instructions here, mind you. It's just that when people give instructions, they most clearly reveal (or at least point at) the cause and effect relationships they deem important in the development of something. It's these cause and effect relationships that I am interested in.

Do they treat it as a given, as part of "who they really are", and not as something created by one's own deliberate effort?

How they treat it is sort of what I was listing out above. Feel free to add the stuff you said I missed (and in case you didn't notice, saying "I got them all?" was just a backhanded way of saying "please add what I've missed".

Defense mechanisms are usually not a matter of deliberation, while some coping mechanisms are.
I'd like to explore the deliberate. Because if we are to come up with some advice or insights on how to deal with uncertainty, then these advice or insights need to be something we can implement deliberately. Otherwise, we can't really implement them, but can only wait for them to kick in or not.

Again, focusing on the potential negative outcome does not lead to a solution. It does not negate the uncertainty. So the question is: why waste your time focusing on things that don't help you navigate your experience, especially in situations where you think it's important for whatever reason, that you nagivate to some standard you have for yourself, or that you feel is imposed upon you?

It is the apparent relativity or uncertainty of these standards that is the problem at hand.

 

[sowhatifit'sdark]

just like the assumptions (fundamentally shaping our perception) in mind become more and more engrained.

This is not my experience of myself. In other words I do not believe this to be universally true. My wife is also an exception. Of course we have spent time and energy exploring and challenging our assumptions, much of it experientially. We also became - independently - disatisfied with the limitations we had placed on how we learn and what kinds of sources of information and options for exploration we tried and considered. A lot of this work/play/interest was aimed at loosening assumptions/habits/imprinting precisely to reduce suffering, increase joy and improve a variety of abilities. I could even say we were trying to unlearn a lot of things that held us back, hurt us or said we must be only this or that portion of ourselves.

 

[greenberg]

Just to add to the backlog, I thought about the issue more in depth and wrote the following.

4 approaches to problematic uncertainty

1) meta-cognitive/cognitive
...
2) Emotional/past event focused approaches.
...
3) Finding new approaches:
...
4) Participating in Life more fully

Thank you for this! I find it very useful and I've printed it out for my perusal.

 

[wesmorris]

What - do you think I am sitting here, trembling? :bugeye:

Lol, no.

It's is odd - how I can investigate my own uncertainties, my own weaknesses, yet not give in to them, at least not fully.

Sounds almost mature.

How these seemingly overwhelming things aren't actually overwhelming.

So you're like this close to wigging yourself out, but you stand firm. Is this a weird way of thrill seeking?

I think that sooner or later, you would.

Well sorry but I've been down that road, around it... camped, come back. I just didn't have time at that moment, nor right now. If you think it would be useful, I can go there.

 

[greenberg]

So you're like this close to wigging yourself out, but you stand firm. Is this a weird way of thrill seeking?

Ha! Actually, it is. To see how much I can manage, to push the limits.

Well sorry but I've been down that road, around it... camped, come back. I just didn't have time at that moment, nor right now. If you think it would be useful, I can go there.

Thanks, but no thanks. It would take us months.