What else do you like?

[coffee]

Thanks a lot for that post. Could you perhaps expand a bit more on this idea above, I found it pretty interesting.

Sure. It primarily means I'm less interested in something like "the essence of Christianity" than in what Christians actually do. Makes a big difference if we look a tradition like Hinduism, where you've got these famous, deep philosophical texts, but most Hindus in practice ignore them entirely. Someone can say they're wrong to do that, but I'm not interested in whether they're wrong or right to do it, only in the fact that they do it. (Edit: I'd also be interested in the motivations of the person who says they're wrong. Likely enough he's trying to use his knowledge of those texts to gain status. "I'm the one who's really doing it right.") Similarly within Buddhism: you go to Thailand and you won't find a lot of people spending hours in meditation; you'll find people praying to astrological spirits and so on. Within Christianity it means that I'm only interested in something like what Jesus meant if I'm studying Jesus; if I'm studying contemporary Christians I'm interested in what they think Jesus meant, which passages they cite and which they ignore, and so on, and not really whether they're right or wrong.

But when you get that way of thinking, then it is interesting to see how people use scripture and so on. The way the Bible is used, or the Koran is used, and so on, is interesting: When is it cited, and when does discussion go on without it? Is there a sense that things need to be put in context, or can you pull out a key phrase or sentence? Allegorical interpretation? Not what they say about these issues, but what the actually do - and if they say something about these issues, why they say that.

And then at a more cynical level, you can see individuals and groups using their knowledge of something (such as a text or anything else) to gain status within a community or a society, and sometimes you can see people resist that, for instance by claiming direct knowledge or experience from a spirit (or God).

That kind of thing.

[Philoctetes]

Sure. It primarily means I'm less interested in something like "the essence of Christianity" than in what Christians actually do. Makes a big difference if we look a tradition like Hinduism, where you've got these famous, deep philosophical texts, but most Hindus in practice ignore them entirely. Someone can say they're wrong to do that, but I'm not interested in whether they're wrong or right to do it, only in the fact that they do it. Similarly within Buddhism: you go to Thailand and you won't find a lot of people spending hours in meditation; you'll find people praying to astrological spirits and so on. Within Christianity it means that I'm only interested in something like what Jesus meant if I'm studying Jesus; if I'm studying contemporary Christians I'm interested in what they think Jesus meant, which passages they cite and which they ignore, and so on, and not really whether they're right or wrong.

But when you get that way of thinking, then it is interesting to see how people use scripture and so on. The way the Bible is used, or the Koran is used, and so on, is interesting: When is it cited, and when does discussion go on without it? Is there a sense that things need to be put in context, or can you pull out a key phrase or sentence? Allegorical interpretation? Not what they say about these issues, but what the actually do - and if they say something about these issues, why they say that.

And then at a more cynical level, you can see individuals and groups using their knowledge of something (such as a text or anything else) to gain status within a community or a society, and sometimes you can see people resist that, for instance by claiming direct knowledge or experience from a spirit (or God).

That kind of thing.

Man, I'm digging this thread. I figured that is what you meant. I view it in much the same way. Although, you've put a lot more thought into it. You're a really interesting cat.

[coffee]

Man, I'm digging this thread. I figured that is what you meant. I view it in much the same way. Although, you've put a lot more thought into it. You're a really interesting cat.

Well, that's nice of you.

I don't know whether you'd be interested, but the book that really opened my eyes to this way of thinking about religion was Middleton's Lugbara Religion. Lots of anthropological stuff to wade through there, but ultimately what he's showing is how religious leadership works. There should be a simpler and more direct study, but I don't know if yet...

[Philoctetes]

Well, that's nice of you.

I don't know whether you'd be interested, but the book that really opened my eyes to this way of thinking about religion was Middleton's Lugbara Religion. Lots of anthropological stuff to wade through there, but ultimately what he's showing is how religious leadership works. There should be a simpler and more direct study, but I don't know if yet...

Thanks for that recommendation. I'll definitely put that on my "to read" list. Thanks a lot for that. 

[eyeresist]

Have you written anything that's been published or that I could see?

No and no, sorry. Nothing in presentable condition. I spent my late 20s writing a big crazy book about Satan, in the style of William Burroughs, but it doesn't really represent where I am now. Over the last decade I've been getting to grips with plot and character, which most people think are essential, but which I'd prefer to do without! Mood and atmosphere is what really interests me. The other stuff is just the scaffolding, but the craft of building plots and characters has its own interesting qualities.


Re Buddhism, I read a useful introductory book years ago which was interesting for the clarity with which it laid out the difference between the supposed origins and the eventual resulting religion. Gautama seems to have believed that speculation on spiritual realms was useless. But it seems that is not what people want to hear.

[Philoctetes]

No and no, sorry. Nothing in presentable condition. I spent my late 20s writing a big crazy book about Satan, in the style of William Burroughs, but it doesn't really represent where I am now. Over the last decade I've been getting to grips with plot and character, which most people think are essential, but which I'd prefer to do without! Mood and atmosphere is what really interests me. The other stuff is just the scaffolding, but the craft of building plots and characters has its own interesting qualities.

I see, so you have plans to try and get published and what not or is this more for personal interest?

[eyeresist]

I see, so you have plans to try and get published and what not or is this more for personal interest?

I definitely want to get published, but only started getting serious about this in the last couple of years. I wish I could go back in time and give myself a kick in the arse.
Ideally I will earn enough to quit work and write full-time (doing both is impossible once middle-aged tiredness has set in). But this will require having a "hit", and the odds of that aren't great.

[Philoctetes]

I definitely want to get published, but only started getting serious about this in the last couple of years. I wish I could go back in time and give myself a kick in the arse.
Ideally I will earn enough to quit work and write full-time (doing both is impossible once middle-aged tiredness has set in). But this will require having a "hit", and the odds of that aren't great.

Very cool. I wish you all the best in that endeavor. 

[North Star]

Intellectual interests:
-science, mainly chemistry and physics
-history of science, mainly chemistry, physics, and maths

non-intellectual interests:
-TV shows: All Creatures Great & Small, Darling Buds of May, Morse, Lewis, Columbo, Frasier, 3rd - 7th season Simpsons, Futurama
-Sports (watching): Ice Hockey; the Finnish Championship series, international games, football (Champions League, European top divisions, international games)

[eyeresist]

Very cool. I wish you all the best in that endeavor. 

Many thanks. All this positive feeling is very weird ...

[Philoctetes]

Intellectual interests:
-science, mainly chemistry and physics
-history of science, mainly chemistry, physics, and maths

Could you expand a bit or do you just mean them in general?

Many thanks. All this positive feeling is very weird ...

Really?

[North Star]

Intellectual interests:
-science, mainly chemistry and physics
-history of science, mainly chemistry, physics, and maths

Could you expand a bit or do you just mean them in general?

In general.

[drogulus]

    Does anyone remember an old PBS series called Connections? It showed how a vast web of discovery and invention came about almost by accident, by an endless series of serendipitous mashups. I imagine this is how an ant colony exhibits intelligence, only ants are more like cells than self directed agents. Yet intelligence emerges in the colony, and something like scientific and technical progress emerges in human society even though no individual plans it or really has more than a tunnel view of a part of it. People are just curious, and adventurous. So this bottom up self organizing is responsible for everything our culture has achieved.

     That's the kind of thing I like. I mean the show, and also that I learn things in that way. Intelligence is made of lots of stupid parts and the intelligence isn't planned for, it just happens when a certain set of conditions are met. And that's why it's so hard to make an intelligent machine, not because machines can't be intelligent or conscious but because even really smart designers are dumber than a slow process of accretion operating on a vast scale with all the time in the world. I think the machines will have to get smart on their own. And I have no doubt that eventually they will, just like us.

     Anyway that's what I like, reading and thinking about that process, which is the reading and thinking thing that's me.

[Florestan]

Besides music, my main intellectual interests are literature (incl. poetry and drama), history (in general and of anything), geography (I have a lifelong fascination with maps and I can spend hours studying them), political philosophy (particularly Paleo-Liberalism and Christian-Democracy). Non-intellectual interests: traveling, hiking, soccer (watching only).

[Lethevich]

If I try to think of the question in terms of how long I spend occupied with each interest, I sadly cannot even include "literature" given how much I neglected reading. I retain a strong theoretical interest in it, though. The things I tend to spend most time involved with are:

Collection maintenance and general preservation of books. I realised a year or so ago that working in the conservation field involves such a happy combination of factors that it became impossible for me not to try to do. The neatest thing is that it could combine typical "work" with things that are already strong hobby interest of mine: art, architecture, social history, assessment of worth and risk, and generally treating things with careful hands. It also gives me an excuse to push myself beyond my incredibly limited boundaries - i.e. I'm going to have to force myself to be more sociable than I would in a normal job (as networking is essential even to get a short-term paid position, as much as it terrifies me), get used to the idea that I will probably have to move to another area of the country, and even if I don't, I will have to for study as pretty much everything is in London. Even if I can't get paid in the end due to not being seen as a capable enough candidate in general (multi-tasking, teaching, and socialising is so important, brr) it'll have been great fun and will increase my skill-set a lot. Socially it's also amazing because of the lack of stressed or edgy people in this and many associated fields that I will end up dealing with.

E-sports. Seriously - it's taken over any need to watch real sport for me since I've discovered how hard the players train (often more than actual athletes), and how what is happening is more visually complex and relatable as a person who can just turn on the same game and play myself 30 seconds after I watch a high level match. It even has educational/cultural benefits - I now know an ungodly amount of things about South Korea, for example.

Cooking. I come from a family background with a very limited interest in experimenting with food. The designated cook mostly provided standard choices out of duty rather than passion, though they produced their usual recipes with great precision. I gradually got into cooking because curiously, this lack of creativity inspired my super autistic brain into not being scared by the randomness of experimentation. I produced food to the original pattern, then gradually tweaked the recipe until I was producing distinct versions of the same meal (lasagna, chili, etc). I am still far from confident so don't cook as often as I would like, but I have a house full of people to eat what I make, so if I become good at some styles I should have no problem with demand.

Art - to a highly limited capacity, as I do not visit major cities very often, but I cherish local exhibitions. There is a (sort-of) temporary exhibition of Tudor and Jacobean paintings nearby on loan from the National Portrait Gallery that I continually visit. As much as I like to collect art books, paintings experienced in person are completely different (much like music) and often much more richly detailed and vibrant. I include concertising in this because I experience both similarly - I don't live near a city so I don't attend performances with regularity, but this scarcity makes me value even standard rep.

Fashion. I am married to somebody who has a strong understanding of the area - they constantly prove me wrong when I have unvoiced concerns about "that cheap thing will look good on you?" or "that price totally isn't worth it" by how well they look wearing it in combination with other things. This has made me continually reconsider my own wardrobe, and I feel it's benefiting me a lot. Looking classically smart is nice, looking casual and eclectic is also nice, but the space between the two when both factors are still active and interplaying with each other offers a sense of engagement with what I wear that I couldn't experience until recently.

Edit: spam.

[Geo Dude]

I have a strong interest in many kinds of popular music:  '60s, '70s rock, blues, '60s and '70s country (Bakersfield, outlaw movement), folk music, among other things.

Anarchism
Classical literature/culture
Deserts
Geology, which I intend to make a career of.
Guns
Hiking
Invertebrate paleontology
History
Literature
Science in general

There are probably more I'll think of later, but that will do for now.

[Ataraxia]

(doing both is impossible once middle-aged tiredness has set in).

Nonsense.

[Philoctetes]

Anarchism

Of what variety?

[Ataraxia]

"Anarchism
...Guns"

[Geo Dude]

Of what variety?

Generally speaking, of the philosophical or theoretical variety.  That said, I'm also interested in how anarchism affects the thought processes and philosophies of famous writers/thinkers like the beats and Edward Abbey.  In a more indirect sense I'm also interested in how it can very basic anarchist theory can be applied to get people thinking in a moral, rather than legalistic sense.  For example, focusing on whether something is wrong rather than whether it is illegal, and figuring out why the two do or do not intersect. (E.g. why is something wrong legal, or why is something that's harmless illegal?)

"Anarchism
...Guns"

I assure you, the two interests are unrelated!   (I'm not planning a revolution any time soon, I swear...)