The allegory of the cave is about people who are under an illusion and reject evidence to the contrary. Hence why it has “allegory” in the name, you know. I can’t really do anything about being told my brain gets no light and no one’s proposing we kill the person who said it, and the point isn’t that we shouldn’t kill them, so it’s not really anywhere near the same.
Plato’s Allegory of the Cave, while focused on the rejection of evidence and moral implications, also deeply explores perception and our understanding based on sensory experiences. This theme resonates with the shower thought about the brain being in a dark chamber, reliant on sensory “wires” for information. The allegory illustrates how our perception of reality, like the prisoners viewing shadows in the cave, is limited and shaped by our sensory experiences.
The shower thought and Plato’s allegory both suggest that our understanding of the external world is constrained by these sensory inputs. Just as the prisoners in the cave perceive shadows as their entire reality, our brain, encased in the skull, constructs its version of reality based on what our senses convey. This comparison highlights how our perception might be just a fraction of the true nature of the external world.
In linking the shower thought to the allegory, the aim was not to draw a literal comparison but to underscore the shared theme of perceptual limitation and reality versus illusion. This metaphor serves to reflect on how our subjective experiences shape our understanding of the world, akin to how the brain, in its ‘sealed chamber,’ interprets the information it receives.
Again, sorry you failed to connect the dots. Figured it was obvious enough to not have to write an essay to explain it.
In linking the shower thought to the allegory, the aim was not to draw a literal comparison but to underscore the shared theme of perceptual limitation and reality versus illusion.
But you didn’t say that! You just said, via text of all things, this shower thought is the allegory of the cave. So it’s no wonder some people aren’t connecting your dots. You could stand to be less arrogant about it.
But he didn’t say “this shower thought is the allegory of the cave” did he? He suggested a relationship between them by encouraging the op to familiarise themselves with the allegory of the cave. More of “if you liked this, you’ll love that” than “this is that”.
I don’t think it’s that farfetched to take that as “your shower thought is the story I’ve just mentioned”. In fact it strikes me as more likely than just drawing a comparison even in hindsight and this conversation is about four times longer than it should be.
Going on like you’re interested in philosophy and saying things like “y’all are dumb as fuck”, especially in this context, are incongruous and you really missed a great opportunity to stay quiet.
Acting like common slang is somehow incongruous with “philosophical” conversation and voicing that opinion is hilariously hypocritical. I urge you to consider what it is about that language that upsets you so much and take some time to work on it. I use common slang mostly because the point is obvious and using big words makes people feel like the speaker thinks they are above everyone they are speaking to. I wrote out that entire long ass sentence instead of saying you sound like a conceited jackass because I know you edge from unnecessarily long phrases.
Plato’s allegory of the cave is not about what this shower thought it about.
…
Yes it absolutely is.
I am sorry you are failing to connect these painfully adjacent dots.
The allegory of the cave is about people who are under an illusion and reject evidence to the contrary. Hence why it has “allegory” in the name, you know. I can’t really do anything about being told my brain gets no light and no one’s proposing we kill the person who said it, and the point isn’t that we shouldn’t kill them, so it’s not really anywhere near the same.
Plato’s Allegory of the Cave, while focused on the rejection of evidence and moral implications, also deeply explores perception and our understanding based on sensory experiences. This theme resonates with the shower thought about the brain being in a dark chamber, reliant on sensory “wires” for information. The allegory illustrates how our perception of reality, like the prisoners viewing shadows in the cave, is limited and shaped by our sensory experiences.
The shower thought and Plato’s allegory both suggest that our understanding of the external world is constrained by these sensory inputs. Just as the prisoners in the cave perceive shadows as their entire reality, our brain, encased in the skull, constructs its version of reality based on what our senses convey. This comparison highlights how our perception might be just a fraction of the true nature of the external world.
In linking the shower thought to the allegory, the aim was not to draw a literal comparison but to underscore the shared theme of perceptual limitation and reality versus illusion. This metaphor serves to reflect on how our subjective experiences shape our understanding of the world, akin to how the brain, in its ‘sealed chamber,’ interprets the information it receives.
Again, sorry you failed to connect the dots. Figured it was obvious enough to not have to write an essay to explain it.
Cheers.
But you didn’t say that! You just said, via text of all things, this shower thought is the allegory of the cave. So it’s no wonder some people aren’t connecting your dots. You could stand to be less arrogant about it.
But he didn’t say “this shower thought is the allegory of the cave” did he? He suggested a relationship between them by encouraging the op to familiarise themselves with the allegory of the cave. More of “if you liked this, you’ll love that” than “this is that”.
"(Story that’s older than showers)
This shower thought is older than showers!"
I don’t think it’s that farfetched to take that as “your shower thought is the story I’ve just mentioned”. In fact it strikes me as more likely than just drawing a comparison even in hindsight and this conversation is about four times longer than it should be.
Nah, it was pretty obvious. It’s not his fault y’all are dumb as fuck. It happens! Just be happy you learned something today
Going on like you’re interested in philosophy and saying things like “y’all are dumb as fuck”, especially in this context, are incongruous and you really missed a great opportunity to stay quiet.
Acting like common slang is somehow incongruous with “philosophical” conversation and voicing that opinion is hilariously hypocritical. I urge you to consider what it is about that language that upsets you so much and take some time to work on it. I use common slang mostly because the point is obvious and using big words makes people feel like the speaker thinks they are above everyone they are speaking to. I wrote out that entire long ass sentence instead of saying you sound like a conceited jackass because I know you edge from unnecessarily long phrases.
Eh? I didn’t have a problem with it being in slang. You could’ve asked if that was the problem and come off looking more honest.
Will the person you’re answering to understand? Or will they fall into their own allegory of the cave on the allegory of the cave? 🤔
deleted by creator