To what extend mass-generalizations are true?

@dynamo,

I agree, generalisations are ultimately false.

@doc phil,

doc wrote:

I agree, generalisations are ultimately false.

Yet you (I, atleast) will have to make some generalizations to actually make a point. Yes, I know it will be false and I know that there are several limitations because we're not all alike. But in order to actually say something and make a point.

I feel the need to make a generalization and go with that, instead of having to list up my limitations first, which wouldn't lead to anything.

@Lasse,

I agree fully. I think that is because not many people are looking for new truths, merely reinforcing their own view. Often the more "intelligent" the more fixed.

@doc phil,

doc wrote:

Are not all ideas placeholders?

As Popper suggested, ideas are merely temporary...

With "Placeholder" ideas I meant ideas you know that are false and not even decently close of something you would accept as truth, but, due to having to deal with the object of that idea, have to accept until you get a better idea.

dynamo wrote:

I think all mass generalizations are false. They think that just because one is white or black or Jew or handicapped or mentally ill; everyone is like this one. it's easy for humans to generalize because we are generally lazy.

They are all false, thats why we call then generalizations Smile

doc wrote:

I agree fully. I think that is because not many people are looking for new truths, merely reinforcing their own view. Often the more "intelligent" the more fixed.

I think this is fruit of arrogance, people who are trully more intelligent than average tend to believe they are smarter than everbody, seemingly ignoring the fact that you can be intelligent to one thing and stupid to other, and than even the stupid can be very intelligent on a certain matter.

@manored,

manored;55279 wrote:

and than even the stupid can be very intelligent on a certain matter.

I agree. That's why "intelligent' not intelligent. I have found through my work that those with very limited education can (sometimes) have the greatest natural wisdom. Often they will know the highest moral virtue and live it, even when the logic of their situation (in terms of survival) would suggest to do anything but.

Doc

@doc phil,

doc wrote:

I agree. That's why "intelligent' not intelligent. I have found through my work that those with very limited education can (sometimes) have the greatest natural wisdom. Often they will know the highest moral virtue and live it, even when the logic of their situation (in terms of survival) would suggest to do anything but.

Doc

I dont understand part2 of your last question, could you give an example please?

@Caroline,

It happens all the time caroline. Young men working all the hours they can, then spending all their earnings on medication for their wife even though he too needs meds, and he too knows he will die if he doesn't get them. Women, taking on others children and treating them as justly as she treats her own. There is no learning behind such quality - there is an innateness, a natural affinity. But for most of us effort is required.

@doc phil,

doc wrote:

It happens all the time caroline. Young men working all the hours they can, then spending all their earnings on medication for their wife even though he too needs meds, and he too knows he will die if he doesn't get them. Women, taking on others children and treating them as justly as she treats her own. There is no learning behind such quality - there is an innateness, a natural affinity. But for most of us effort is required.

yeah i agree with that thanks doc for answering. Do you know why they do itie.take something else on when it doesnt seem logical?

@Caroline,

Caroline wrote:

yeah i agree with that thanks doc for answering. Do you know why they do itie.take something else on when it doesnt seem logical?

I don't know. I suspect such sentiment is beyond logic, or that logic can merely be part of such experience not the definer of it.

Thats quite an unsatisfying response. I do believe we are not that distant to the true nature of the universe. Perhaps, not being surrounded by so much opportunity, one is less likely to be lost. Therefore, those facing abject poverty have less convuluted paths of justification, and hence are closer to the true nature of things. In saying that, any terrible actions are made when surivival of the fittest is instigated. I guess they have the same choices we have, perhaps though, their choices affect a small number whereas our choices effects many, many more.

As I say, beyond linear logic!

I have tried though, in my recent publication - 'A Civilised Mind?' by Morgan Daniel. Check it out if you like.

Doc

@manored,

I do it coz im selfless and that it is the road to truth and enlightenment, logic does not always persist in these situations and i have been amazed at the satisfaction i have gained and what higher gains i've learned as opposed to walking away. What you learn by defying logic is inmeasurable in comparison. To me life is not always what seems logical it is the principle and i stand by my principles- not for gain but because they are my principles as simple as that and i did not expect the amazing results that followed by doing this.

@manored,

Yeah i wouldnt mind checking out your book, i thoroughly enjoyed reading your first post and was going to ask you but then you left a link so i guess that's where i find it?

@manored,

Thanks,
I think you will appreciate it.
Either google it or let me know if you cant find it.
Cheers

@Caroline,

Caroline wrote:

I do it coz im selfless and that it is the road to truth and enlightenment, logic does not always persist in these situations and i have been amazed at the satisfaction i have gained and what higher gains i've learned as opposed to walking away. What you learn by defying logic is inmeasurable in comparison. To me life is not always what seems logical it is the principle and i stand by my principles- not for gain but because they are my principles as simple as that and i did not expect the amazing results that followed by doing this.

Little things teach more that defying Smile

@manored,

I dont unerstand what you mean manored? Sorry:)

@Caroline,

Caroline wrote:

I dont unerstand what you mean manored? Sorry:)

No problem. What I meant is that trying to do things differently from what you are used to or what is recommended can teach a lot. For example: Trying to drink water with your eyes will teach you more about the interactions between water and the eye, running everwhere instead of walking will teach you more about the consequences of running, etc.

@manored,

manored wrote:

I just noticed that we hold massive generalizations of the society that we take as true, such as, for example, that most people are stupid and they dont know what they are doing, but I started to wonder if those generalizations are correct. I mean, as an example, are most people really stupid or its just the way the society works as a whole that lets out that impression? If groups such as stupid people exist, why we dont ever categorize people we know into groups and rather have unique views of each?

If the way society works is stupid then all society is stupid, because one person can change society drastically.

@manored,

manored wrote:

No problem. What I meant is that trying to do things differently from what you are used to or what is recommended can teach a lot. For example: Trying to drink water with your eyes will teach you more about the interactions between water and the eye, running everwhere instead of walking will teach you more about the consequences of running, etc.

Ok, thanks for answering, yeah it's far more interesting that way, i dont see the point in doing things the same over and over again like for instance being selfish bcause it's boring because you dont learn anything other than one is a ..... Smile

@manored,

Most mass-generalizations are correct.

But seriously: http //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schema_(psychology)

@Holiday20310401,

Holiday20310401 wrote:

If the way society works is stupid then all society is stupid, because one person can change society drastically.

It may not want too though, for various reasons. The most obvious would be the smart ones benefiting from the stupid system Smile

@manored,

Mass generalizations are often fallacies because the evidence is often insufficient to support the conclusions. Some other times, mass generalizations are stereotypes usually carrying a negative connotation. Thus, while mass generalizations can be true, they often are not, and serve to subvert common understanding by basing conclusions on insufficient and faulty evidence.

Philosophy Forum

To what extend mass-generalizations are true?

Quick Links

My Account

able2know