GENIUS FORUMS

Kevin; Nevermind.

David Quinn wrote: Even if you tell the child "correct things", you are still not going to prevent him from developing these core delusions about the world. Developing these core delusions is part and parcel of a young mind learning about the world in a structured way. It is a natural part of brain development.

You can't tell a five-year-old child that the world doesn't objectively exist or that his self is an illusion - he won't know what you mean and it will only confuse him. He is not ready for such truths. Indeed, far from doing good, you could easily trigger psychcological trauma and ruin him for the rest of his life.

If you tell a five year these truths, he would not be able to develop the common worldview and would have difficulty navigating the world. But how about a 12 year old, he knows the common worldview and now he can experiment with the correct worldview.
I am not sure about psychological trauma, the correct worldview is traumatic for a strong ego which in the child is still weak. Hmm, but there is the evolutionary biology to consider which would want to instill an ego in him, I guess the results could be unexpected.

David Quinn wrote: Without this egotistical development, the child will be mentally undeveloped. His consciousness will not be much more developed than an animal's. He might have a pure mind which is full of innocence, but it will lack depth and awareness.

I think here you are saying that it is better to have a common worldview to navigate the world and to correctly understand other minds, yes?

How about an idealistic scenario in which every adult is enlightened, even now there is the need for the children to be raised up in the deluded worldview (if only to play along with the evolutionary biology). Is it not a bit strange that you bring up children deluded and then teach them ways for enlightenment. Does it show that enlightenment cannot be the default condition of society unless brain structure itself changes, evolutionarily.

Should I wait for my remaining questions to be answered?

ataxas wrote:Should I wait for my remaining questions to be answered?

[ataxas, could you please (and all those who don't) include the name to whom a post is being addressed to if it means to address someone in particular.

And some others also post quotes without mentioning who it is from. It helps to understand a quote if one knows where that person comes from. In effect, one may loose interest in the point that the poster is trying to make, thinking the quote may mean something different than the poster perceives and is trying to counter.]

I apologize; I did not mean to sound impatient. I was directing my question to Dan, primarily. I asked because I do not intend to be a permanent visitor to this forum, but will check it if it is still understood that I am an active member of a particular discussion.

ataxas wrote:I apologize; I did not mean to sound impatient. I was directing my question to Dan, primarily. I asked because I do not intend to be a permanent visitor to this forum, but will check it if it is still understood that I am an active member of a particular discussion.

Ah! you mean this...

Dan: I may or may not bother to point them out to you

atasxas: Why? Have I incurred your disapproval?

Dan: Disapproval? No, not at all. I'll go through the thread carefully and build a picture of the mistakes you're making.

Well, it is very possible that since David responded, he might have left it unto his expertise; unless he has something more to add on the matter, which I kind of doubt.

Keep your fingers crossed though... but not for too long :)

ataxas wrote:I do not intend to be a permanent visitor to this forum

Why not?

BTW, Dan, being in Australia, is the better part of a day different in time zone than some of us.

Dave and Kev have pretty much made the points I would have offered, so for me to go ahead seems rather repetitive. One point I will make in passing, and with perhaps limited relevance to this discussion, is that the wise person does not really explain anything to the unwise. They merely attempt to stimulate the latter's mind in certain directions. Explanations, such that they exist at all, always arise in the individual's mind.

Plus, as ataxas has apparently proven that words cannot work, I couldn't comprehend his posts.

I have proven that if you are enlightened, you cannot understand my posts, and I cannot understand yours.

If not, we could conceivably understand each other perfectly.