Is there anyone who can’t relate to this bloke?
AgentXPQ. Subscibe now.
I very much enjoy this man’s sense of aesthetics, practicality and do-it-yourself approach. I enjoy low impact living, not so much from a desire to save the world, but because it’s simply natural to me.
I have a thing to Tiny Homes. I’m not sure I’d want to live in one long-term, but I certainly love the idea of the independence that they can engender. The price range, if built by another (bite your tongue!), according to the tour guide ranges from 25k to 100k. DIY? $10 to 18k. If you’ve got a plot of land somewhere, and can tolerate living off-grid, this seems like a nice option.
If a god is claimed to be omnipotent, can it therefor simultaneously be god and not-god? Can an omnipotent being be of a nature that is not it’s own? If it cannot, then it is not omnipotent. If it can, then it loses it’s omnipotence.
If the latter were to be true, how do we know the Christian god, or Allah, or Taqyerpik hasn’t already done so?
Just a stray thought.
Imagine that there was a time–a mere 35 years ago–where a scene such as the one below was so socially acceptable, that the world’s scientists believed that it was worth showing to another species, should they ever be encountered.
Today, such a scene might be considered fraught with cultural and political peril. What would a parent or a teacher think should they see this simple act of teaching how to write?
Reification, in short, is mistaking the map for the territory, that is, mistaking a concept for a real-world thing. Hallucination is the most extreme practical example of the fallacy of reification.
The Fallacy of Misplaced Concreteness or Reification
The fallacy of misplaced concreteness is a fallacy formulated by Alfred Whitehead in his book Process and Reality (1929), and refers to the error of mistaking the abstract for the concrete. Whitehead explains the fallacy in a discussion on the spacial location of objects. He states that a concrete physical object in the universe does not possess the character of simple location without reference to its relations to other objects, and to think of a spatial point as being anything other than an abstraction is a mistake. In other words, people tend to mistake abstract concepts for accurate descriptions of reality.
Whitehead, A.N. (1929) “Process and reality”, New York: Harper
Most ideologies are based on this fallacy, and depend on concepts such as (but certainly not limited to)
Consider: if the human race based all of its thinking on that which was observable and testable, and refused to mistake the ideas in our minds for external realities, we’d have many fewer ideologies, no religions, far, far fewer psychological problems.
Yep. That’d be my choice.