A Barely Edited Introduction

The speaker is starting a podcast and wants to discuss truth and perspective. They mention Plato's idea of the ideal and how it relates to the material world. They also talk about the importance of art and how different philosophers have different views on truth. The speaker believes that truth is subjective and influenced by culture and experiences. They emphasize the importance of listening to others' perspectives and being open to different viewpoints. They mention Plato's allegory of the cave as an example of how difficult it is to change people's perceptions of reality. The speaker believes that there are gray areas and that not everything is black and white. They give the example of killing someone in self-defense. Overall, they argue that truth is subjective and that it's important to consider different perspectives. Buenos dias, ohayou gozaimasu, and welcome to the first iteration of what I am going to attempt to do, which is start a podcast. Now, I haven't decided on a real name for it yet. By the time I do post this up, there probably will be a name, in which case, right now, I just want to talk. Get it out there, you know? And talk about what, per se, is a fun and interesting question. I just want to speak my mind, talk about whatever it is that I'm thinking about, and eventually have other people to have discussions with, because I feel like I have some really great discussions with people that are just very interesting and compelling, and I want to put that out there. I want to try doing something like this, in order to see and test what it is that I can actually do. Now, right now, I've just come back from my English class, and we were talking about Phaedrus and Plato and Socrates and all that, and so the topic for today will be truth and perspective. Now, truth and perspective is a very interesting thing, and at least in my view of it, and mind you, that doesn't mean that this is the correct way, or that this is factual, or that this is what it is, right? This is just how I perceive it. It is this interesting thing to where some search for this ideal. Now, to kind of paint a picture and create context, Plato basically argued that there is the ideal, and the copy of that is the material where we live, so the things that we name, so if there is a table, or say if you're listening to this on headphones, that is the material. And the ideal is the truth, in essence. It is what it is, it is how the world is, and it is this interesting argument, utilizing this idea that there is this, you know, base, factual thing, and to which I disagree with to an extent, but we'll get into that. Now, Plato argues that, you know, there is the ideal, then there is the material, and there is the mimetic. The mimetic is a copy of the material, and the material is a copy of the ideal, and the mimetic is very interesting. It is this layer in which art lies, within writings, plays, paintings. The artistic expression is the mimic of that which we see in the material, and the material is that which mimics the ideal, what is, you know, and it's this very interesting notion that that is how things are seen, at least that's what he argued. He was a bit of a skeptic, and in which case he disagreed with the idea or the notion that the mimetic was important. In fact, he felt that the material and the mimetic aren't important. They're copies of copies, in which case you should focus on this ideal, and it was an interesting thought, you know. But Aristotle, one of his students, or a student of a student, a student of Socrates, had argued that the mimetic is important, that art is important. Not only can we learn from it, but, you know, they allow us to have this cathartic expression of emotion, in which we're able to kind of release these feelings. They make us feel good, they make us feel, you know, happy, or they help us relieve the stress of, you know, our everyday lives. And so, there is another who had conflicts with his ideas, known as Nietzsche and Marx, in which case they argued that it's actually flipped. The ideal doesn't truly exist, in which case we build the ideal based off of the material because the material affects the ideal. Essentially, what they were arguing was this idea that what we believe to be the ideal, what we believe to be the truth, is built upon what is around us, the material, and thus, it doesn't truly exist. Even less so that you can't really distill things into an ideal, say, for the fact of what is the ideal bed, what is the ideal woman, what is the ideal man. Whatever you describe will not encompass all. It is difficult because words fail us, and it's actually very interesting because it goes against what someone as highly respected as Socrates mentions. And it is actually what I also believe. I believe that truth is subjective, in the sense to where there are facts, I will not disagree with anyone there, but to me, truth is built upon, as Nietzsche and Marx said, the materials and the things around us. It's influenced by our cultures, by our histories, by our experiences, by the people around us in the world and what it has done to shape us into who we are. It's actually something that I am very adamant about. You see, there is a word, sublime, which describes this sort of view on the world that I have. It is beyond explanation, it is beyond words, and you can get close to distilling it down to that ideal, but not quite. It's hard to share that thing with someone enough for them to grasp it for certain things. I am someone who believes that everybody has their perspective, their view, and that not one can simply trump the other. There are arguments to be made for each and every single one of them, of course, but it is difficult to say that this one is above another. You see, there is this interesting thing where we get to a certain point where we feel enlightened, or that we feel we know better, or that we know more, or that we know what is right, what is true. And then we forget to consider that we were the person we were before. We were like these other people that we're trying to educate and that we're trying to spread this information to, this view of the world, what is morally right and wrong, what is factual, what is the truth in its essence, what is the ideal, as Socrates had tried to put it. And it is something that is, it just makes me feel passionate about not, you know, spreading my view and idea and perspective, but encouraging those to consider that we are not the ones in the right, that mayhaps someone sees something that we do not ourselves, that because we think we know more, or we think we know what is right, doesn't make it inherently so. That there is no ideal. That truth is subjective, and it is based on the person, the individual, not based off of an objective truth or divine truth. There is no ideal truth. And granted, there will be people who disagree with me. In fact, I hope to bring them along to have this sort of discussion with them, because while I do believe this, it doesn't mean that I disqualify others and their views. I truly believe in listening and hearing out these people and figuring out the why. Why do they see the things they do? Why do they want the things they want? Why do they believe the things they believe? Because I love that encouragement to think. Critical thinking is such a skill that is not used to its full advantage, that isn't as prevalent as it should be, and to which we find ourselves constantly going against others' opinions, others' thoughts, or defending our own without considering that what we know may not be the know-all-end-all. It's a very interesting problem, because when you think about it, it's hard to be as empathetic or understanding to another person's point of view, in which I'd like to point to Plato's allegory of a cave. Essentially, it's this analogy that there are these three prisoners locked up in a cave in which they see these shadows of things passing by, and they all make up their names for these things that they see. And these shadows, they dance along the cave walls because of the fire, and they each believe that it is what they think it is, and then one of them gets free. They see the outside world, they see the sun, and they find out that the things that they saw in the shadows are true, and they find the actual names of these things. And this person, they get used to the blinding light of the sun, and they are able to start seeing things for what they are, in which case they run back to the prisoners, and they try to explain this to them, but now the shadows, they're not used to being in the dark and seeing the shadows clearly, so now they're blurry, and when they try to describe this sort of truth or discovery that they've made when going outside of the cave, the other prisoners become hostile, defending themselves and thinking that the person has become dumb or crazy, spouting this nonsense to them. In this, the analogy is supposed to be of a philosopher trying to educate the public and how people are used to their own perceptions of reality, as well as being hostile to change or new things. It's essentially trying to show the other side of things and how difficult it is, though it requires empathy to understand and to be patient with those who see the world in one way since it is an uncomfortable feeling. You can't simply force someone to see something the way you do, and it also takes a lot, especially when what you see goes against what they see. It's this interesting problem in which he's trying to portray how it feels to be a philosopher, to try and educate the public of this ideal, of this truth, and I think it's relevant because you don't need to be a philosopher to understand what it is this feeling feels like, you know? I feel that certain people try to uphold their morals, uphold their truths, uphold what they believe to be right, because there is this instance within our lives to sort of dictate what is good, what is bad, what is right, what is wrong, but I feel like we get too caught up into it to where we don't consider that there are great areas, that not all is wrong and not all is right in those spaces of which we've labeled these things, that there is a sort of murkiness between those things because the ideal doesn't exist, or at least not in the way that it is supposed to, rather it is subjective. Take for instance killing somebody. Obviously this is a bad thing, inherently this should be a bad thing, this is a wrong thing to do because it is the taking of one's life, but then suddenly when you put it in a situation to where it's self-defense for what you need it to because if you didn't they would kill you instead, suddenly it gets a little odd, you know? It's not entirely wrong, now it's okay well then that is a pass, it gives a pass, it breaks the ideal because now you can't say killing is wrong, some killing is wrong. If some killing is wrong then it is not the ideal, then it's not distilled into the fact that killing is wrong, rather it becomes that killing is wrong in most circumstances, but it really depends. You'll find that most things in life tend to run into this wall, it really depends. Some people believe in cannibalism, in eating other humans regardless of what others may think, and you can say that's wrong, but to them it isn't. It's actually why I find that truth is subjective because there are so many different languages, so many different beliefs, so many different systems, because there is no ideal. It is rooted in our cultures and our very natures and the things that we experience as we grow up and the personalities that we take on that decide and dictate what is the ideal. It is this very notion of what we're raised with and what we're made to believe that decides what is the truth. At least to me, I feel that the truth is what is agreed upon by the general and common public. It is something that we have dictated ourselves to be true, and because of that I am skeptical of the truth. Not because it isn't the truth, but because I know that we as human beings are flawed and the words themselves are flawed. The words themselves will not be able to encompass all of it. Therefore, whatever we dictate as the truth cannot be the one and only truth. It cannot be the end all be all. But where does that leave us? Where does that leave society as a whole? Does that mean that there's no right or wrong? Does that mean that there is no just and absolute way to look and view at the world? Does that mean that the world is this myriad of things? Like where does that leave us? And it's an interesting question, in which case, at least for me, my response to this issue with there being no right or wrong, good or bad, or truth, is to take everything with a grain of salt, to think, to question, to ask why. Because it isn't the fact that there isn't an inherent truth, rather that fact of what is true in these circumstances based on you. You get to decide what is the truth. And that power in someone's hands is scary, it's chaotic, it's not reliable. But that is how the truth is. The truth isn't some sort of reliable system. It has the image that it is because we agree upon it and thus it provides us with stability. But like most things that we agree upon to provide us stability, it doesn't mean that it's perfect. In fact, it is flawed in so many ways to where it is hard to say that it is anything but subjective. You can make a fair argument for any point, and because of that, most points are hard to defend unless you have some sort of backing. You can cite your sources, you can get a bunch of other people who think the same thing, you can argue that this is this, but so can the other side. It's hard to say that there is good and bad because what's good and bad is dictated not only by your morality but by the morality of those around you. It's hard to say that gaming is bad for people because it incites violence and lets those violent tendencies out, but at the same time one could say that it is a mean to release it in a safe and non-threatening environment. You can say that guns are bad because, you know, they're used to shoot people, but at the same time you could also argue that they're good because it allows us to defend ourselves from those who may use them unjustly or wrongly. We lie in this problem where there is always going to be another side towards things. There's always going to be some argument to be made, to be had, and that's why I love discussions. That's why I love listening and hearing to these different points of views because rather than just simply shut down these other sides, I see the value in both. I can see that, yes, having guns and weapons in general can be a bad thing, but I can also see how it can be a good thing. I can see how, yes, this is bad, but it's also good. I can see that good and bad are terms that just do not cover everything. There is no ideal good, there is no ideal bad, because in some instance, in some way or another, one could argue something to be either of those things. You could argue that a government is bad. You can argue that it's good. It offers stability, it offers control, it keeps the peace, and it allows us to regulate the people. You can argue that it's bad because it gives the power to those higher up and sometimes they can misuse this power and take over or do wrong things with this sort of power. And that's just how the world is to me. It's this myriad of colors, this blending of ideas and thoughts coming into reality. It's the material that surrounds us. The mimetic, the art, the way that we express what it is we see in the material is such an interesting thing to me because these forms of expression pick up where words fall short. These forms of expression pick up where we, in our vocabulary, in our understanding of the world, are left wondering how to describe, to share with others. I love it because it's this fun and interesting thing to think about these different components and these different things about the world itself because ultimately, you are your own person. You have your own thoughts, you have your own truths, you have your own moralities, and you can throw it up and say that it's objective, sure. You can say that you have your backing, you can say that you have your points, you can say that you have your reasons, the logic behind it, but at the end of the day, we're all humans. We're all trying to search for what is right and what is wrong. We're all trying to search for what is good and what isn't. We're all trying to find our way around the world. And as someone who is extremely fascinated by humans in general, by people in general, by the world itself, it is something that I feel passion about to explore and discover. To not face it with prejudice and this sort of mindset that one thing is above another, but to instead allow them to enter the space together. Because to me, both Plato and the people who argued against him had good points. But it is the culmination of those things that truly make something great. It is the combination of these two different ideas coming together and pointing out the flaws within each other. These sides have their good points, but it's just so much bigger than that. Not to discredit these issues, these things that go against each other, but to say that they're both important. If something reaches this apex, this ideal, then it is only going to do so with the culmination and combination of these two sides. Not from these two sides butting heads and trying to figure out which one is above the other. Because we ultimately live in this sort of society as people, you know? There is a wrong and a right, there is a good and a bad, but it's subjective towards us. We decide what the ideal is. We decide what we feel is wrong and right, not because of someone else telling us, but because we ourselves believe it. There's a sort of grasp on our minds based off of our perspective. It's this sort of feeling inside of us that each of us have a different way of expressing, of seeing the world. I'm interested in seeing these, these perspectives of other people, their views and how they go about things. I love it. I love it when they're wrong and I love it when they're right because there is no right or wrong. Not to say that, you know, this should be allowed or that should be allowed or this is a good thing or a bad thing, but as someone who has my own opinions, I remove that from the equation and I let them say their piece because to me my equation or my part in the equation is, you know, something I already know. I'm interested to see what they bring to it itself. If you believe this sucks, why? If you believe that is wrong, why? Because at the end of the day, we're all human. We all believe in something. We all feel something. We all think something of one way or another. We can all come up with our own reasons and I am interested in those reasons. Now, sorry for the tangent, but I feel like, at least I hope, that that illustrates my point. You see, think, be critical, but also be considerate, be empathetic. Remember that the person that you may be talking to, you may be interacting with, is also a person. Going back to the allegory of the cave, Plato sees himself as this being who is trying to show everyone and educate the public about the truth of the world, of what is. But in my mind, how is it that his view trumps those of the people locked in the cave? Of course, you can put it like that and say, well, obviously he's been out in the world, he's seen the things, but what makes his perspective trump the other ones? What makes his right and theirs wrong? It's a very interesting thing to think about. It's fascinating because even Plato himself was not devoid of flaws. He found himself to be above others. There was this sort of hubris within him. He thought that the world should be run by philosopher kings, and it's a very interesting thing to think about. I mean, if we have philosophers running everything, what would that look like? Would it be better? Would it be worse? And if so, how do we dictate which philosophers would rule over us? How would a world like that look? It's interesting. The point is, and what this all is trying to iterate, is think. That's what this podcast is going to be about. It is going to be having these discussions and being open to these other perspectives and these other ways of viewing life. It is to think, to ask questions, to not only question the things around you, but to question yourself and the things that you believe in, the things that you see. And not to the point where you start to feel that everything is pointless. Not to the point where you start questioning everything and start to feel like you may be wrong, but in a way to where you can stand on your side, but be considerate that other people are in that same position too. To where we can coexist rather than go against each other. Because obviously we can fight for our ideals, but there's always a bigger picture. There's always more to the story. And without getting both sides, you will not reach what it is that you want to reach. It's very interesting. There's this quote, one of my favorites, where it says, It is an act of faith to assert that our thoughts have any relation to reality at all. If you are merely a skeptic, you must sooner or later ask yourself the question, Why should anything go right? Even observation and deduction. Why should not good logic be as misleading as bad logic? They are both movements in the brain of a bewildered ape. It's a fun quote. What it means to me is that we can come up with good reasons and good logic for things, but what makes it trump bad logic? What makes it different from bad logic? We see people do things all the time and come up with the most dumbest reasons for them, but obviously it was good enough for them to enact on the thoughts that they had. And so, rather than simply say that they're wrong, I like to hear them out. I like to figure out why they do the things that they do. Not to the extent that I would pass things that are, you know, as we have said, morally wrong or bad, because I too have my beliefs. I too feel that some things are wrong and some things are bad. The only difference is I don't let that stop me from hearing what others have to say. It's an important step and it's an important distinction I want to make because what I want to reiterate is that what I'm saying is that not everybody is right or wrong in their own way in the sense to where they should get a pass. But in the sense to where we should consider, that we should think about what it is and why it is. My goal isn't to simply say, hey, you know, the guy just murdered someone across the street. You know, don't say that's wrong, I mean, that's pretty darn bad. But instead to ask why did he do it? What led him there? What caused them to do such a thing? Because what we find in these moments is the root of the problem itself. And not surface level stuff. We have to go deeper. Is it because he's a guy? Oh, guys are aggressive. Oh, that leads to a generalization. A generalization leads to a mis-labeling, a mis-input of this sort of idea that something is the way that it is. Okay, well, if he's doing it, then maybe it's because of whatever he is. Rather, you need to look deeper. Why did he kill them? Were they abusive to them? Were they hostile to them? Did they make him feel a certain way for him to go and kill them? This isn't to provide lenience to such a person. It is to understand the universe itself. Because here's the thing. When you figure out how the universe works, when you start to understand how things play out and why they play out in the way that they do, what you find is that you have this unique ability to begin to control how you yourself see it and view it. And there may be things that you want to change about yourself. There may be things that you want to improve about yourself or to stop doing. But in order to do such a thing, you must understand what it is that you're facing. You don't have to prep for it and plan for it. I'm not telling you to be Batman, but what I'm telling you is that in order to reach what you want to reach, you need to understand the path on how to get there. Life is complex as crap, but it's also simple. You could argue that the simple way of living is better. There's people in tribes that simply wake up, hunt food, eat, celebrate, and then do it again the next day. They're fine with their way of life. There are people who go out and buy their Gucci flip-flops and their Louis Vuitton jackets and they want to get rich and make money and they want to flaunt it, or they might want to keep it a secret or on the down-low. There are people who want to go and be the greatest at something, or they want to achieve something that they can leave behind. There are people for all these different things, and to which we ourselves can use to find our way through life. We ourselves can use to understand the world better. We ourselves can use to build up this foundation in which we can use to not only understand the world better, but to navigate it better, to navigate it with more empathy, to navigate it with more understanding of the things around us. Regardless if we want to remain ignorant of things, this allows us to sort of control how we at least view things. It allows us to control what our ideal is. It allows us to be and take ownership of ourselves. Do with this what you will. Have your opinions, because that itself is what makes you, you. Your thoughts, your feelings, the way that you are, your personality, the way that you view things, your beliefs, the systems you have, the morality of which you follow, the guidelines, the things that you believe to be true are what make you, you. That's what I love. That's the part that I love to look at. And granted, I'm human too. There are some people that I just completely dislike, or there are things that I disagree with as well. I'm not going to go and watch a killer's documentary and be like, oh yeah, you know, I get him. You know, I understand. Because that's just not who I am. I have my own beliefs. I have my own morals. I have my own thoughts. I have my own idea of what the truth is. But I also have this part of me that is capable of sitting down, removing myself from whatever interaction I'm having, and allowing the other person be themselves. I'm interested in what you think. I'm interested in the beliefs that you have. I'm interested in what you find to be the ideal. And the only thing I ask of you, the only thing I want for you, the only thing that I want to encourage you to do, is to think about that. To ponder the very idea that each and every person has their own system, their own thoughts, their own beliefs, their own way of doing things. But beyond that, they have their own reasons, motivations, morals, and goals, and things that they find to do. Because with that, we gain the ability to empathize. We gain the ability to understand others better. And it leads to some pretty interesting discussions. Discussions that I wish to have on this show. I want to bring people in here, and I want them to give me their ideas, to talk, to be able to express themselves in the ways that they've collected. I want them, as the prisoner who has escaped, to come back and tell me what they've found. Because to me, when we halt the passing of this information, when we halt the passing and the understanding of one another, this leads to conflict. Wars have been fought over disagreements. Friends have been lost. People have been killed. There is a disconnect between people, more now than ever. And the path to connection is understanding. To be close to someone, to be intimate with someone, to simply befriend someone, it requires a level of understanding. It requires a level of ability to empathize. That person may have it. It needs to come from one way or the other, but in order for us to make these connections, in order for us to feel fulfilled, it requires understanding. Now if you disagree with me, or if you dislike anything I said, do tell me. I'd love to discuss it. And yeah, no. I am going to mostly start wrapping it up here. We'll see how this goes. I don't know how exactly I'm going to try to schedule it right now. I am just going to do my best to have these fun little talks and discussions because I love getting this stuff off my chest. Now I won't just be talking about philosophy and thoughts like that. I also really, really, really want to talk about just things on my mind. So this will be a mixture of things on my mind and things on other people's minds. This is supposed to be fun. It's not supposed to be serious. It's not supposed to, you know, go against things and ahhh, you know. I just like discussing things. I like talking and I love hearing and listening to other people as well. So you know, yeah, if you enjoyed, please consider sticking along. I will do my best to keep up with these and if these are successful then I might start making videos and that might be cool. But yeah, I hope that you enjoy the rest of your day. I hope that you know you can think what you think and that you're allowed to. Please do so. Critical thinking and us pointing out the flaws in things is how we've gotten this far in the first place. That is how we've advanced to the point that we're at. So go out there, have discussions with people, but be empathetic. Make them discussions. Heck, you can even do arguments. But be open. Be mindful. Be understanding. Anyways, tune in next time where hopefully I will share about the current story that I'm working on and hopefully I'm past chapter one so I can actually give you some pretty good details on that and also the project that I am working on. And yeah, have a good one guys. Bye bye.