buylotrogold

Insight is a useful form of cognition. Insight consists of looking at essences and mechanisms and root causes for all phenomena. Insight is a form of thinking that goes from the effect to the cause and examines the causes of anything, thus achieving an understanding of phenomena as they are caused and as they are made. There are many people who equate insight with stereotyping and generalization. The answer to that is that when something occurs at a rate greater than chance then it must have a cause. That cause may not be what it appears to be at first; indeed it can be a combination of causes, or something that causes all of these causes, or a cause different from one apparent - that either causes it the apparent cause or underlies it or is simply unrelated. The insight is a form of cognition that argues backward: Looking for cause when confronted with effect. It is a form of cognition that looks at the root (and indeed ultimately seed) and sees what causes what exists. As such, it is a way to explain things completely. As an example I would like to cite a brilliant use of insight used by Spinosa. He reasoned that all effects must have causes, and then he applied it to the universe. Does universe itself have a cause? And then, What might that cause be? Could the cause of all things be caused by something else? Then it must be self-causing. Which led him to a logical proof of the divine. I find it more applicable to use insight in dealing with emotional and social issues. Looking at nature of all such forces, one sees not only what causes the things people feel and think and believe and thereafter do, but can further achieve predictive power over what will be the result of all such forces. So that, by thinking backwards (which in this case is combined with emotional understanding) it becomes possible to see the essences of human existence and not only understand them, but also thereafter know how to work with them in order to achieve a desired result. It is considered a stereotype that engineers and software people are prissy, anal-retentive, boring and hard to deal with. It however occurs quite often; and I can use insight to explain the root cause. The mindset of this profession is one of creating machinery. Machinery is something that does not have feelings; it also must be self-consistent and functional. That's all good, but the logic breaks down when dealing with people. A person whose mind is stuck on engineering mentality - unless he has another perspective - approaches people in the same way as he does the machine; which means that anything that is not tidy and easy to explain and easily put in service is his enemy. Which means that he will be incessantly hostile to passion, inspiration, wisdom, charm, romance, imagination, creative thinking and all things that make life worth living - as human beings rather than as machines. The machine-mind mindset when applied to people tries to see people likewise as mechanisms: Mechanisms that must be made to work in service of his purpose; that cannot have their own thoughts or feelings or personalities; and that must be bludgeoned into dullness and soullessness in order to serve the logic of the machine. The result - not only dullness but things far worse: Intolerance of imagination, inspiration, feeling, creativity and individuality - intolerance indeed of the life as such - is a logical result of this mindset, when it is not balanced with other ways of seeing the world. That does not mean that people should not know the engineering mentality. It means that it does not apply (or only partially applies) to people, and that in dealing with people one must come from a different mindset. An engineer or programmer who appreciates art, beauty, brilliant thought, scientific logic and spiritual inspiration, is someone who can be quite a positive influence in the world: Knowing how to make the tools and having benign purpose for making them. An engineer who uses engineering mindset where it does not belong and claims it the only possible way of thinking, is quite a destructive influence; abrasive, abusive, prissy, anal, unforgiving and overbearing - all functional to the mechanistic logic by which he runs and which he seeks to project on the world. One benign effect of higher mathematics, higher physics and the artificial- intelligence research has been one of opening minds. The complex numbers, fractals, relativity and quantum mechanics, show the use of imagination and inspiration even to people who otherwise would be stuck in HL Mencken state of mind. These discoveries have demonstrated that true science transcends that mentality, which puts an egg on the face of the swinish. And that is indeed a service done to humankind. Similarly it is possible to use insight to go beyond false conclusions made by science or pseudo-science. I look here at the concept of narcissism. Some say that this is a sickness; I say that this is a necessary effect of a much more profound cause. Long-term good of humanity requires for there to be people who come into the world with a unique perspective and a unique mental arrangement, in order that they come up with innovations and understanding that serves the good of the species and the good of the _meta_-tribe. This need, I believe, underlies the entire mentality. If someone comes in with an original mind, here to do innovative work, he or she will be obsessed with all kinds of ideas and inventions (one part of the supposed narcissism ) simply because that is the job they are to do. Further, that person will be accused of lacking empathy - not because that is truly the case (it is not), but because a person whose mind is different from bottom line would simply not think the same way as those who think bottom line. Which would make empathy for those people (who BTW are no better to the next person and much worse to people different from them) difficult to come by (I know also from experience that people accused of narcissism and even sociopathy can be extremely compassionate to those whose minds function in a manner at least partly similar to theirs). Further, the egotism involved is likewise part of the job: How else would they get the attention necessary to advertise their ideas, or shield themselves from the mindset around them in order that they could go on working on these ideas and inventions and other things that they are called to do? As for the supposed self-obsession, that is the obvious result of having original mind and as possessor of original mind being under constant attack from the mindset around them. The person has to defend themselves in whatever way possible, and if that means being wrapped up in one's thoughts and always thinking about self, that's just what happens when self is under constant attack and has to survive and keep alive the essence that creates these inventions, ideas and understanding - keep alive what is needed to do one's job as an innovator that is the outflow of having original mind. By using insight - by looking at nature of things; at seed causes; at the essences - by looking for the cause - one achieves understanding that greatly supplements that of logic or dialectic. To go from cause to effect and from effect to cause is to have the entire thing under consideration revealed for its complete nature, from two sides. To use insight and go all the way, is to see the complete picture, from top down. It is a form of cognition I heartily recommend to anyone who wants to understand things as they are. Ilya Shambat.