weirdway

70 readers

1 users here now

weird (adj.)

c. 1400,

• "having power to control fate", from wierd (n.), from Old English wyrd "fate, chance, fortune; destiny; the Fates," literally "that which comes,"

• from Proto-Germanic wurthiz (cognates: Old Saxon wurd, Old High German wurt "fate," Old Norse urðr "fate, one of the three Norns"),

• from PIE wert- "to turn, to wind," (cognates: German werden, Old English weorðan "to become"),

• from root wer- (3) "to turn, bend" (see versus).

• For sense development from "turning" to "becoming," compare phrase turn into "become."

OVERVIEW

This is a community dedicated to discussing subjective idealism and its implications. For a more detailed explanation, please take a look at our vision statement.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

syncretik

Scew

Othering and randomness (www.reddit.com)

submitted 1 year ago by syncretik to c/weirdway

17 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I'd like to hear your perspectives on randomness. This question has implications for the understanding of othering.

Is true randomness possible?

If not, this would be a limitation of mind.

If so, it also feels like a limitation of mind (inability to predict/know the outcome of an event).

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] syncretik 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

But deep down I'm pulling all the strings, right?

Yes, but not in the way you are imagining. It sounds like you're almost imagining you're fundamental self a material/objective/determinate.

Your power means you have the power to be extremely precise/orderly but also to generate randomness/chaos for yourself within whatever constraints you please. Randomness v. predictability is just another subjective perceptual phenomena, and you have the capacity to generate any variation of perception or any place in between.

Which means that the randomness is illusory, a result of (self-imposed) amnesia/ignorance.

As is any sense of order and predictability.

Originally commented by u/AesirAnatman on 2021-11-06 21:02:36 (hjj746t)

[–] syncretik 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yes, but not in the way you are imagining. It sounds like you're almost imagining you're fundamental self a material/objective/determinate.

Yeah, I was somewhat thinking like this when I posted the question. I was wondering whether apparent randomness is ever "really random", which seems like a misguided question upon reflection. Phenomena are never "really" anything in particular.

BTW, it's good to see you around. I'm relatively new here but I've benefited from reading your old posts while learning about SI.

Originally commented by u/VLSIHeaven on 2021-11-07 02:33:55 (hjk7flg)

[–] syncretik 1 points 1 year ago

Thanks! I should probably go back and review what I wrote because there are probably things I've changed my perspective on.

> Phenomena are never "really" anything in particular.

Exactly

Originally commented by u/AesirAnatman on 2021-11-08 23:59:13 (hjsr9sm)