Hmm. Maybe a different tack: afaict the relationship of (eternal)ism to meaning is only obstructive to the extent that it's expected to provide meaning (including by accounting for its absence). I don't think that expectation itself comes from the content of the top-down process
-
-
Replying to @qu137157 @Meaningness
"hi i'm installing myself as a gatekeeper to your experience of meaning" would not be very smart content to include explicitly my analysis of these systems is that putting themselves between you and your natural capacities is their bread and butter
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @chaosprime @Meaningness
What you call the systems seem like the shadow not the gatekeeper
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
That is, unless what you mean by "top-down" is specifically the reification of meaning, rather than any reflective or descriptive processes around thinking about stuff with other people, broadly speaking, I don't think those processes are what's doing the gatekeeping at all.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @qu137157 @Meaningness
Chaos Retweeted Chaos
was this clarifying?https://twitter.com/chaosprime/status/1254473442100985866 …
Chaos added,
Chaos @chaosprimeReplying to @qu137157 @Meaningnessyou sound like you're using these words in technical esoteric senses, which i am not i just mean things like teaching ppl that experiencing the universe as full of divine love, which is a trivially available experience, is something they can only do as part of sanctioned rituals1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @chaosprime @Meaningness
A slightly different topic than the one I thought we were discussing, but parallel! In that I'm not sure teaching/learning those rituals is what obstructs spontaneous living meaning! The deprivation has to come first, for a ritual to make sense w/o meaning, or to seem to own it..
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @qu137157 @Meaningness
i don't agree any more than your endorphin response has to stop working for exogenous opioids to work, or for them to seem to own the effects they create
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @chaosprime @Meaningness
I don't think the metaphor is apt, because I don't think the top-down ism's (eternal or nihil) create the effect of meaning's absence; they are at best concomitant, but arguably postcede it. A different account of meaning's loss can be found in:
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
the condition of having learnt how to use systems of symbols (procedurally) but not yet having learnt (also procedurally) what they are (and aren't), such that their encounter produces difficulty in, well, just living..
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @MNV763 @Meaningness
to me, it being possible to rebuild experience of meaning from unmediated experience after tearing out exogenous meaning mechanics, but that some people don't get there because the exogenous meaning mechanics have taken away their permission for that experience, shows otherwise
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
This made me think of Marx's theory of alienation. Capitalism is the dominant source of "exogenous meaning mechanics", the revolution promises to restore human autonomy. I'm no Marxist but can appreciate this aspect of its emotional appeal.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.