idealism [Theme] Page 1

Idealists in power is harmful and dangerous, because it is guided by abstract concepts of morality, honor and conscience. In matters of survival ball is ruled by expediency, but because of tough and unscrupulous practices of many useful noble theorist.

Idealist and die -
understand whose fault that is? -
which came not to the court
at all times...

Men love women, women love children, children love hamsters, and hamsters don't love anyone - they are perfect...

I think to move forward and to really develop their talent many young women are hampered by "perfectionism gene". Try to change the approach: instead of perfection, aim to do all the "overall good". Remind yourself that you don't have to be perfect. Most men never suffers for this reason. Their approach is simple: determine where a favorable opportunity, and how to "catch". They do not think: "Oh my God, I'm not perfect, I have a terrible haircut, I brought the wrong shoes."

- I see you and the other became. All grown up. Has anything happened?
- Occurred. I Aronova letters burned.
- Did he hurt you?
- No. Just not myself I was last time. I have worked from the beginning to prove to him that I'm not perfect.
Now you don't have to prove anything to anyone enough to be myself. And that you feel better. Am I right?

"Selfish" instinct threatens to destroy, if not already destroyed all other life instincts. <...> Unwittingly pulled out the cry: surely it's all there, surely nothing else will? Surely all is lost, all? It was once a time, when told that without ideals a step can not be! Were great poets, great thinkers, and none of them mentioned "skin", none pointed to the principle of self-preservation as the ultimate goal of human endeavor. Yes, it certainly was. So surely these poets, and these thinkers, the Shakespeares, Barony, Cervantes, Dante were people of threat, be abolished?

Idealization is a lie, and a lie is a bad helper in life.

Science (scientific understanding of reality), according to this philosophy, is a system of utterances linking in one consistent complex the elements of “our experience”, sensations. A consistent set of symbols, interconnected in accordance with the requirements and prohibitions of formal logic. According to the Machists, these requirements and prohibitions do not reflect anything in objective reality. They are simply requirements and norms for working with symbols, and logic is a set of techniques for this work. Logic therefore is a science that does not reflect anything in objective reality, but gives only the sum of the rules governing the work with symbols of every kind. Work with symbols. In the name of what? What is the purpose of this work? Where do its norms come from? The Machians are also ready to answer this. “If the rule of law is aimed at maintaining and maintaining a well-known socio-economic system, then the norm of thinking should consider adaptation of the organism to its environment as its ultimate goal” 6. From the needs of the body (that is, from the needs of a completely biologically interpreted person), the Machists derive their understanding of thinking. From the need for balance, from the supposedly inherent need for eliminating all and all kinds of contradictions. “Of course, thinking that is completely free from contradictions is only an ideal, to which we should approach [53] as far as possible; but from the fact that we are very far from it, both in the past thoughts and in the present, it does not at all follow that we must abandon the struggle against contradiction ... ”7 Thinking, like all other mental functions of man, is directly is interpreted as an activity directed - as at its goal immanently laid down in the body of an individual - to maintain (or to restore disturbed) balance. “Every organism is a dynamic system of physical and chemical processes, that is, a system in which individual processes support each other in a state of equilibrium.” 2. Equilibrium, understood as the absence of any conflict states within the body, is here superior the principle of thinking, logic as a system of rules, the observance of which ensures the achievement of this goal, that is, of a state where the body does not experience any needs, but is in a balanced calm and stillness. It is easy to see how unsuitable for the revolutionary’s thinking is the logic resulting from such an understanding of thinking. This logic made the mind that obeyed it fundamentally blind in relation to the contradictions of the opposing reality [54], to contradictions in the composition of real facts themselves, in the sphere of material (economic) relations between classes. She made him blind to the very essence of the revolutionary crisis that has matured in the country, in the system of relations between people. The materialist dialectic of Marx aimed at the analysis of these contradictory relations by the revolutionary thinking. Mach's idealistic metaphysics directly averted his gaze from such an analysis. Lenin saw clearly that a revolutionary who adopted such a logic of thinking inevitably turns from a revolutionary into a kind of capricious being, ignoring the real contradictions of life and trying to impose his arbitrary will on her. And he began to patiently explain to Bogdanov, and Lunacharsky, and to all their like-minded people, what kind of philosophy they were captured, what terrible infection had penetrated into their brain.

The scheme of thought Maha is the scheme (logic) of thinking of the fundamental empiricist, seeking to transform the features of a historically limited mode of thinking in the universal definition of thinking in General. This scheme reflects perfectly the mindset of a troubled revolution, the petty-bourgeois Philistine preoccupied one - how to maintain balance within his little world, or restore this balance if it is shaken, to restore their lost comfort, both material and spiritual, by eliminating from it all contrary elements. At any cost, by any means.
The trouble is, if the schema of this thinking gets in the head of the revolutionary and begin to lead them. The man in the street, completely lost his balance, then turns in the enraged petty bourgeois, the "leftist" and like him a revolutionary and the leader of such "leftists". Or, losing his balance, he begins to seek release not in the "R-R-revolutionary" freaking out and in the quiet lunacy of religious quest, looking for a kind little God.

Only fools young can instill that supposedly you can build the perfect life. The perfect life was not, and never will be. You can minimize the evil, try to minimize it, but to think that you can make the perfect person to lead these perfect people in politics and they will be perfectly controlled is utter nonsense, which leads to more destruction, because once those people who will do it, you will understand that it is impossible - they will begin around himself to ruin trying to prove that it is possible.

... the most terrible enemy of those that can be, is a young idealist. <...> The young idealists - it is always very scary. Yes to be honest to say, any idealists - it's scary. These crazy people believe in the triumph of reason, in unselfishness and in the ultimate victory of good as on the territory entrusted to them, and around the world. And it's very hard to argue - they immediately called the disputants did not understand at the bottom of this old man, referring to what is now a different time, and somehow believe that they these become. And they sure know how to make it right, and don't listen to anyone who does not share their beliefs.

Idealization is a double - edged sword. It gives a wonderful feeling flattered, but at the same time hide from women the fact that it is doomed to failure. You can't be on the pedestal on which you are constructing mitogen, because you have no margin for error. If the partner is in a bad mood or behaves as misogyny don't like, he sees in her imperfection. He got himself a girlfriend in the goddess, and she does not match the official schedule. His disdain and frustration in fact gives him the right to from expressions of love to go to the criticism, accusations and insults.
Usually misogyny disappointed already in the beginning of the relationship. However, since feelings of love and excitement still ongoing, the fury quickly goes by the wayside. Even if a woman is experiencing shock, it is just a false note in the whole Symphony of good feelings.
First flash of anger at misogyny are rare. They do not become the norm until between partners does not have any liabilities, Declaration of love, the Congress, betrothal, marriage. And when mitogen understands that the victim is on the hook, the situation is changing rapidly.

Forming a realistic view of partners, understanding and acceptance of strengths and weaknesses takes time. When the vortex courtship emotions flow is so rapid and powerful that the perception of another person because of the shock off. Everything that violates the created picture of a "perfect" new love, is ignored or blocked. As if both partners are in the shore. All our attention is focused on what feeling awakens in us a different person, and not on what its essence. The thinking is that if thanks to this man I feel a wonderful feeling, it should be wonderful.

I must say that basing our biology on a primitive materialism has led to the fact that we essentially worked within the transport corridor, bounded by invisible but very barbed wire. Even the attempts of the decryption code security thinking, quite materialistic, as we now recognize and opponents, met at first with hostility "materialists", the idea of which boiled down to the fact that you can't see the code perfect. But we were looking for code material base is perfect, not one and the same. And yet- what is perfect? What is the idea? It turns out, from the point of view of the materialists, nothing. But it's there!