Rate each other on the Sliding Scale Of Idealism Versus Cynicsim

There's no such thing as "realism". <_<

Yes, there is! Have you never seen a Michael Bay movie?

Philosophy appears to disagree with you.

Yes, there's a philosophy term "realism" but it's entirely irrelevant to this.

There's also various art movements and the existence of the colloquial form of "realism". Which like "cynicism" doesn't match up at all with the movements of which it is named, but are still highly commonly used.

So really "realism doesn't exist" means very little. It exists because people have made it a position that exists in a number of areas.

Realism, used along cynicism and idealism, is simply another way of saying "I'm right". As such using it is silly.

Most words we use to describe our moral standpoints or world views could be described as such. Just because the usage of it is often times silly or you view the usage of the terms silly in general does not mean that the view point doesn't exist nor that the concepts described by said view point don't exist. There is such a thing as realism because people made it a thing and continue to make it a thing. Now whether or not this is the objective standard of existence is another story, but there is nothing I think we can argue as truly being such.

edited 6th Jul '12 1:35:58 PM by Aondeug

Pretty much it does mean that though, since it's a contentless view...

It's not a contentless view point. It has content that content and idea being "The world is neither completely shit. Nor is it completely good. Both things exist sometimes in greater amounts than the other. Things exist as they are and I accept them as they come."

It's not going to not be a thing just because you think it isn't.

If that's the case, all cynics and idealists are realists also, no matter how cynical or idealistic they are.

They may or may not be. It doesn't mean that their positions don't exist either. It merely means there can be heavy overlap between world views.

BTW, idealistic doesn't mean you think the world is great. It means you have strong ideals. And it means you think the world can be improved. Cynics don't.

Many people take it to mean "the world is great and adheres to just rules" colloquially. I'm well aware that it can also refer to strong ideals in general. Cynicism too has a variety of definitions. Some of which are both cynical and yet not, while also being idealistic and realistic.

Which doesn't mean that these positions don't exist or that they are contentless.

They are however useless in formal discussion, though I would not count this and indeed any discussion on this site as such.

edited 6th Jul '12 1:48:59 PM by Aondeug

On one hand, I have depressive mood swings and yet claim Cannibal Holocaust can be redeemed by giving the beautiful score by Riz Ortolani to exist, and giving us one of the few sociologist cinema heroes in film ever who's actually the most upstanding human dignity having character in there who makes other anthropologist like characters such as Indiana Jones look like a grave robbing hack. In all the depressing material within, those two elements justified that film to me.

On the other hand, I enjoy really dark and messed up films, yet my ability to either get warm and fuzzy over cute stuff astounds me when I remind myself the mood swing to Oscar the Grouch won't be forever, and suddenly One Direction and Silly Love Songs slash Disney Showtunes aren't as guilty a pleasure as my family tells me they should be and kittens suddenly become adorable again...

I'm putting myself in the optimist with mood swings issues territory.

Idealist with occasional bouts of cynicism when sad.

I'm definitely an idealist. I know the world is majorly screwed up, but I think we can do better. I think we can create a society where everyone has their needs met, there's no major inequality, violent conflict is very rare and war non-existent, and we all cooperate to reach our goals. There is no aggressive drive that must be expended, humans are fundamentally capable of altruism and cooperation, and greed and violence are the products of repressive institutions, they are certainly not universal for societies. It wasn't always like this, and societies still exist today that embody these ideals.

I think humans are fundamentally capable of both "good" and "evil" things. A matter of choice.

I do too, but with the variant that I see evil as lack of good.

Basically, I tend to think of humans as of giant nozzles pouring pure, elemental Good into the world. They get to choose whether to "open" and let the Good enter the world, or to "close" and not allow the world to be perfected through them.

Evil is not a force opposing Good; it is just a defect, an imperfection that will eventually be corrected. It is a typo in the Book of the Universe; and we are the editors.

edited 6th Jul '12 2:59:28 PM by Carciofus

Since when were you under the impression that it isn't the other way around?

I think both ideaism and cynicism both co exist with each other just like night and day and ice and fire. they both make up one whole that just feels incomplete either way, so both are needed.

Wow. Do all your interactions with other humans take place online, then? Seriously, dude, the real world out there is nothing like that.

Humans are, for the most part, bad with specks of good in them. Evil is very much an active force, almost exclusively perpetrated by humans.

Let's not get into a 'which is more accurate' debate here, shall we?