quote:

Originally posted by DrummeRaver86 Us mindless idiots can't even read His Majesty's theory, musch less discuss it.

I use this as an example of The Law of Superiority as well. You difuse yourself as being a mindless idiot by using sarcasim to illustrate your superiority to me and yourself, obviously believing that I am inferior to you.

quote:

The second example, why do people feel good when they are being religious? Why do some have a “divine feeling” when they pray, or believe they are close to God? The answer is the same, they are simply taking upon an action whereby they realize their superiority.

I'd say it's not so much their own superiority they realize, but instead believe that by being closer to a superior being, they are becoming more superior than they were in their normal lives. Basically it's coming from the idea that every person is somewhat similar to the people he/she is dealing with, so if you're on close relations with god, you become more, let's say, godly.

___________________
1+1=10

quote:

Originally posted by Yoepus Hello, I've been thinking of a new philosophical thesis and wanted to put it to the mindless crowd out here for though about it. It basically goes like this: thesis: All inter-personal relations are based on our preception of one another's superiority and inferiority. What that means, if I think I'm better then you I won't like you as much. And if you think I better then you, you'll like me. When you find an equalibrium (he's better then me here, and he thinks I'm better then him here) then you achieve friendship and love. Anyway its something going through my brain, and it seems to be able to explain all human interaction. So without further delay: DISCUSS. I will comment as I see fit.

I don't mean to impugn the originality of your theses, but what you're suggesting seems like a variant of Foucault's theory of power.

I obviously can't do Foucault justice here, but the most simple way I can explain it is that power is based on relative social relations and the perception of those relations.

Power, as a network, is ubiquitious and we constantly tap into it in our everyday social and professional lives. No matter how poweless one may be (or perceive themselves to be) they can always tap into these networks and gain a modicum of power. For example, regarding social interactions in this arbitrary internet forum, a Supreme Tranceaddict excercises more power than a Junior Trancaddict, but in the Junior Tranceaddict's living room, the situation would possibly be reversed.

Your examples involving people "liking each other" are based on sets of shared asumptions/perceptions can be quite neatly juxtaposed alongside the theories of power relations.

Or you can explain away Foucault the way I've done it to students in the past, using the "fielder's choice" in baseball as a metaphor for the excercise of selective power.

Check out Foucault's "Power/Knowledge" and "Discipline and Punish" for far more detailed analyses (don't forget to bring along some aspirin and ice cream when you start reading).

___________________
agenda:


[Dark Disco|Frozen Balearic|Gay Biker-House| Boogie-Trance|Heavy Electronica|Soft-Goth]

quote:

Originally posted by Konijn Island I don't mean to impugn the originality of your theses, but what you're suggesting seems like a variant of Foucault's theory of power. I obviously can't do Foucault justice here, but the most simple way I can explain it is that power is based on relative social relations and the perception of those relations.

No not in all, I don't claim to be the only one to have discovered this theory - but regardless I have discovered it on my own. Simply stating I've never been taught, heard, or read of this theory or a similar variant.

I have heard of Foucault's theory of power, but thats about it. I will definetlly look into it. I guess it could be similar to "power" (and I do know Foucault defines power really oddly, as basically everything... but I will definetlly have to read up) except for the following reasons.

i. Superiority is always existant - everyone considers themselves superior.
ii. The realization of Superiority makes us happy (this will be my second law in my thesis). I don't know if the same can be said for "Foucault's power". The fact that superiority makes us happy is a sign by nature or creator, I believe, that it is correct to interpert human interaction under superiority, and that humans pursue superiority.
iii. I'm starting to play with the following law as well and if it works will make it my third addition to the thesis: "All happiness is derived from perceptions of superiority[/inferiority balance]".


Getting back to your comments Konijn, and I appreciate them as they are insightful - using your analogy of trance addict memebrship. Here I will interpert it using my Law of Superiority, from my personal experience of it.

Being a Senior TranceAddict member did not and still does not, make me feel happier then when I was a n00b TranceAddict. This I explain, is because it does not make me feel superior for any reason. Perhaps I just don't consider making many post a superior trait for online discussion. If however indeed being a Senior TranceAddict bestows upon me some advantages - that contrast to the other TAs here, this will make me feel superior - and happeir by extenstion.

I see the point you are making however, that my status here is different then my status in the real world. But then we are getting into an identity issue. I am simply saying we can explain identity issues, and all other things using the law of superiority. Perhaps Focualt can do the same, I don't know - I haven't read him, and you don't make it sound very appealing to read him either

The claim goes that this theory of superiority can explain everything - although not the best, and perhaps in many times saying what other theories say in but different terminology, but regardless the poing goes you can examine everything in this context. And when we evaluate everything in this context it changes our preception of the world, and our thinking regarding certain issues.

Anyways thansk for the post guys, keep them coming.

quote:

Originally posted by Yoepus I use this as an example of The Law of Superiority as well. You difuse yourself as being a mindless idiot by using sarcasim to illustrate your superiority to me and yourself, obviously believing that I am inferior to you.

Number 1: I don't think that in this context "difused" can be correctly used. Number 2: I don't feel inferior or superior to myself, how could I? Number 3: It's not sarcasm (note, no "i"), it's humor. And, no I don't think that I'm inferior to you. I was agreeing with someone else's point of view, and I was just having a laugh at the situation. Take it easy mate, this isn't "Let's Make Fun of Yeopus Time, and See What He Does." I was just thinking about your theory, and making a small comment on it.
Also, I believe that now you feel superior to me. You have posted your opinion in a public viewing area, so that my comment could be refuted there by suppourting your theory, and making me look bad. Well, I'd like to refer you to Mr. Charles Darwin. He said that only the strongest survive. It's in our nature, Yoepus, to try and surmount what has been put forth against us. Therefore, we are always trying to be the superior person. Even in writing this response, I am rebutting your response to my previous comment and trying to make myself the superior one. Well, congratulations Yeopus, you've dicovered something that people have known for quite a while.
Take it easy mate, it's only a joke.

quote:

Originally posted by Yoepus I use this as an example of The Law of Superiority as well. You difuse yourself as being a mindless idiot by using sarcasim to illustrate your superiority to me and yourself, obviously believing that I am inferior to you.

Number 1: I don't think that in this context "difused" can be correctly used. Number 2: I don't feel inferior or superior to myself, how could I? Number 3: It's not sarcasm (note, no "i"), it's humor. And, no I don't think that I'm inferior to you. I was agreeing with someone else's point of view, and I was just having a laugh at the situation. Take it easy mate, this isn't "Let's Make Fun of Yeopus Time, and See What He Does." I was just thinking about your theory, and making a small comment on it.
Also, I believe that now you feel superior to me. You have posted your opinion in a public viewing area, so that my comment could be refuted there by suppourting your theory, and making me look bad. Well, I'd like to refer you to Mr. Charles Darwin. He said that only the strongest survive. It's in our nature, Yoepus, to try and surmount what has been put forth against us. Therefore, we are always trying to be the superior person. Even in writing this response, I am rebutting your response to my previous comment and trying to make myself the superior one. Well, congratulations Yeopus, you've dicovered something that people have known for quite a while.
Take it easy mate, it's only a joke.

quote:

Take it easy mate, it's only a joke.

Hey man I know its a joke, I don't take offense at it. Me stating you guys are "mindless idiots" was a joke (and challenge) as well.

I was just trying to illustrate some other point. Hobbs in his Levithan (sp?) comes up with the orgins for the superiority theory of laughter - which basically describes that laughter is our instant realization of superiority over another.

Now saying that again I will state - yes I get it, its a simple joke no offense taken, I feel no ill towards it. I just happened to like it and used it to make a point of illustration of my theory.

As for evolution fitting into superiority - yes it definetlly has a place in it which can be accomadated. However evolution does not help describe all our social interactions, after all how does evolution describe why we laugh? why we cry? (or could you describe these in such) How can evolution describe depression, schizophrenia, and so forth?

Initially I was thinking exactly like you. Yes haven't I just stumbled onto something everyone knows - "we all want to be the best", and then I realized no. Every single decission we make, every interaction is based (unconscioulsly until we seek to realize it) on our evaluation of others.

And furthermore if we can decribe evertyhing as "Evolution", or in my termed "Superiority Law", then what does this say about man? If you simply believe in evolution then who do you cherish equality? What is your explination for the greater ideals of life, and what is the reflection of the Law of Superiority on such matters?

quote:

Originally posted by DrummeRaver86 Number 2: I don't feel inferior or superior to myself, how could I? Number 3: It's not sarcasm (note, no "i"), it's humor. And, no I don't think that I'm inferior to you. I was agreeing with someone else's point of view, and I was just having a laugh at the situation. Take it easy mate, this isn't "Let's Make Fun of Yeopus Time, and See What He Does." I was just thinking about your theory, and making a small comment on it.

Number 2: You can, after all when do you laugh at yourself? When you do something stupid - you know you are better then that, but you did something stupid. You can feel inferior to yourself at this time. Many time you know you can be superior to yourself. I procrasenate, when I know I can be better then what I am and get some work done. Do you understand this point now?

Number 3: I don't believe you are inferior to me either, I believe you have many valuable superiorites to my own. This should mitigate your anger.