Isn’t that Janis Joplin?
What are Manson’s credentials in climate change and environmental sciences? Is he an expert on the subject? Has he written peer reviewed articles published in reputable science journals? Does he teach? Do research? Advance public policies?
No. No he does not.
He sits in a prison and indulges in whatever ravings cross his psychotic mind. If you recall, things didn’t go so well for the last group of people who thought to themselves, “Hey, this Charles fellow, he’s really on to something…”
So before you find yourself corresponding with him in prison and subscribing to his newsletter, I suggest you drop this obsessive line of thought that one time Manson said something that wasn’t completely fucking bonkers.
Her sung version more famous but written by Kris Kristofferson and Fred Foster, first performed by Roger Miller.
This feeling is pretty universal and is the basis for a lot of clickbait. Have a read: https://www.jeremysaid.com/blog/psychology-behind-clickbait-titles/
He’s not right though. Didn’t we get past that yet? He’s using emotive terms that when properly defined means his quote makes no logical sense? Remember that?
You seem to be arguing at the emotion that these words make you feel and making no attempt to analyse them whatsoever. You need to do that. Almost of your posts are “should I listen to this guy?” and “that’s not a good enough reason not to listen to this guy!” Can anyone just say anything to you that makes you feel emotions and you get confused because you have no mechanism for determining the truth? Are you aware that this makes you easily manipulated (see above clickbait link for a start, that just scratches the surface)? The good news is that this is a skill you can learn.
It’s more like the skills I have been taught are working against me. Confirmation bias for one, which makes it seem like I’m just rejecting something that conflicts with my world view. Ad homenium, which calling him crazy doesn’t automatically negate what he said. Even the bandwagon effect is occurring in some warped way.
Not even humoring myself is working, like asking myself “ok if that’s true then what”? Not only because I don’t want him to be right, but I also don’t want his supporter (that “seer”) to be right. Because if they are then it would seem like I would have to unravel everything that I know and have to make a drastic change in the way I live because they were right in some regard.
You shouldn’t automatically reject it because he’s crazy. You should, however, be even more careful to examine it to figure out if it is true, or just pseudo-profound BS as you would expect from a life-long con man, murderer, and loon like Charlie.
It’s way too soon to start thinking about the consequences if he is right. Because we have no reason to believe, and some reason to disbelieve, that he is right. First that has to be established.
This is quite good advice.
Con men like Charlie rely on throwing around a lot of impressively vague terms and letting you assume what they mean. They don’t mean anything, and you can tell that because they never will explain what they are saying.
If you were able to ask Manson, “what’s the difference between you, who is free in his mind but spent almost his whole life in prison, and someone else who is not free in his mind but can decide for himself what to have for dinner?” he would simply spout something else and never answer.
The point is, Manson is a sociopath. He isn’t trying to teach you anything about freedom. He is trying to manipulate you, and that’s pretty much the opposite of freedom.
Ad hominem is a logical fallacy, certainly. But Occam’s Razor is not. What is more likely - that a murderous psycho who cannot relate to anyone as an equal, has actually hit on a profound truth, or that that same psycho is trying the same head games from prison that he has been running his entire life?
Manson has based his entire life on exploiting people. He’s never achieved anything positive with anything he’s done, and no one else has ever achieved anything positive because he taught them anything. This is being free?
Regards,
Shodan
How many people exactly are in there at any one time?
Do they have names?
I remind you, you’re obsessing about Charlie Fucking Manson. (!)
When you grow up you will realize that no one else has the “ANSWERS” for you, but you must find the answers for yourself.
Or when you realize that you are grown-up. Something like that.
Squeaky Fromme holds the key.
This would be an instance where ad hominem is valid.
Does it seem to you that Charlie Manson has lived a happy, fulfilling, and successful life? I am going to stick my neck out and say No. That’s a piece of evidence that his idea of being free is not the best way to live.
If you want to find “the best way to live”, I wouldn’t ask a mass murderer.
Regards,
Shodan
But what if someone tries to argue how morality Is relevant to counter the points about him being crazy or wrong?
How would it be? Do you honestly need to counter the idea that murder is wrong? That believing the Beatles are sending secret messages of a coming race war is completely batshit? Isn’t it completely fucking obvious?
I mean, if you can’t tell that, then you have some serious problems, much more so than “being in your own prison”.
Yeah… Presuming you meant “relative,” as in debates over abortion or gay marriage, those are at least within the bounds of the overall envelope of sane debates.
Killing people with knives, not so much.
Really, Manson is a total distraction in this debate. Who gives a damn about him? He’s in physical prison, where he’s safe from us and we’re safe from him. I don’t care what he has to say, any more than I care what he had for breakfast today.
“Are we our own prisons?” That’s a meaningful question, with some good, solid philosophical juice to it. There are lots of ways in which, yes, we are. There are lots of other ways in which, no, we’re not.
We, as people, do a lot of dumb things, which limit and inhibit our own advantages and our own enjoyment of life. We mess up our love lives. We lose our tempers. Some of us indulge in drugs; some of us join weird cults. We are not totally free, even at the best of times, merely by dint of having brains that are kind of kludgy.
You make a thinking machine out of meat, you’re gonna get some really squidgy decisions now and then!
But we’re dreamers, and, in our dreams, heaven is conceivable to us. Peace, love, joy, creativity, and truth are still our ideals. We’re as free as can be.
Given an infinite amount of time, an infinite number of monkeys typing on an infinite number of keyboards will eventually write the complete works of Shakespeare.
That doesn’t mean you have to examine the monkeys writings line by line, though. Nor does it mean you have to defend the monkeys’ typing. Just go and get an already-compiled copy of Shakespeare.
“This is my brain/ And I live in it/ It’s made of love and bad song lyrics/ It’s tucked away behind my eyes/ Where all my screwed-up thoughts can hide/ 'Cuz God forbid I hurt somebody”
Well there’s also the thought that we label such things and people as crazy just to be able to make sense of what is going on, but it’s just crteria we decide. I heard that once in my philosophy class, although it seemed a bit iffy. There is clearly something off about people who do this sort of thing.
Then again, someone would probably cite wars as something similar, getting other people to kill for you. They would say that what we sanction is the same thing we imprison him for.
War is insane. That’s easy.
Stop with the wishy-washy “they would say.”
Use your words and own your opinions if you want any respect.
I’m offering the counterpoints to which I don’t have answers to. Like what if the whole crazy thing is just a label we fix to understand what is going on? What if there’s no such thing? Or how crazy is subjective?
Mental illness usually occurs along spectra. Nearly all of us are slightly eccentric in one way or another; a large number have problems like clinical depression; and a small number have problems so severe that they cannot function in society.
(I have a friend who is battling panic syndrome. It’s so bad, she is officially “disabled” from it.)
None of this is really relevant. You’re making way too much out of a side issue. Some boob said something that made you think. Okay, think away! But don’t let his boobiness become the defining thing about what he said or what you think.