What are the differences between a brainwashed mind and a demarcated mind?

Good luck stupid

>>40782343
Can't answer the question?

It is a matter of categorization, a demarcated mind is a hyponym of brainwashing. It's like asking what the difference is between a tool and a hammer.

>>40782158 (OP)
Autonomy.

>>40782840
You do seem to get right to the point but it's a point on blurred lines. Correct me if I'm wrong, please, are you saying that brainwashing is deliberate because there is a deliberate actor on one side of the phenomenon but a demarcated mind is a natural product of qualia?

>>40782890
is not *autonomous* because there is a deliberate actor

>>40782579
(You) did not understand the ansswer.

>>40782956
I can understand the intention of bullshit and decide not to reward it. Your time in the sun is ending, you squandered the allowance given. What will you attempt next?

>>40782890
One demarcated need not be directed, they have agency. One brainwashed must be actively maintained. Think in terms of movements, the people in the crowds vs. the people who gather the crowds. Both work toward a goal under external will, one hears instruction and disregards result, the other hears result and may disregard instruction.

>>40783055
A demarcated mind has agency within boundaries.
>One brainwashed must be actively maintained.
Left unmaintained, it becomes a demarcated mind.
How did you arrive at your definition of a demarcated mind and what is it to you?

>>40783043
Ah! I'm hit, right in my ingrown toe nail!! The horror, it's leaking...

>>40783138
Get well soon.

>>40783123
Unironically all the words I know, I know from simply hearing and using them from context in conversation with others. Asking what that means, talking about similar words, when to use it, etc. I can't particularly pin down where or when but its one of those I must have discussed with my old math teacher because those conversations lended themselves to more obscure terms like this one. Anyway. Boundaries are often not self imposed on the demarcated. It is easier for them to be given a set of don'ts and let them play, if you have them aligned to your goals. Which is usually a proximity thing, but theres some coaxing involved. You have to meet them at the aforementioned boundaries, to coax them into new ones. Whereas the brainwashed must be given a list of do's as well as don'ts if you want them to actively do anything. Proximity isnt as important as urgency for them. Just have to get them first and fast. And a demarcated mind can be a brainwashed mind for a time before realizing it has boundaries to play with, you are right. The main difference I've always picked up on was how autonomous they are. "Thought leaders" seem more demarcated, they are true believers in the box even if they squirm around in there. "Thought followers" don't seem aware of the box, even when they are pressed hard against the walls.

>>40782158 (OP)
I think what this >>40782343 guy meant is that not being brainwashed means actually thinking for yourself by not asking the question, not inviting the misaligned suggestions of the horde to fill your head.

Don't be like the cat that gets captured and led by the laser pointer. Anything that jumps in front of your eyes and leads you somewhere else is just like that little red dot. The actual truth is not some particular, arbitrary, absurd, falsifiable, debatable, contrary thing. The actual truth about reality is utterly fundamental and all-encompassing by definition so in some fashion or another accomodates any little red dot that flies in front of the cat's vision. Understand the metaphor? It's less subtle than "good luck stupid".

So if you don't ask, you don't read, you close your eyes and contemplate with your own mind as your fpbp suggests, you might stand a chance of being "demarcated" from whatever epistemically self-annihilating suggestion signals zip through your consciousness.

>>40783218
>>40783263
You have a demarcated and confused mind.
I'll feed you more context with this post and we will see if you can narrow down what you are trying to communicate with these posts. Because you are rambling and getting off topic, like the cat in your analogy.

>>40783363
You have me confused with another, I mentioned no cat. What I mean to tell you is this: some people are incredibly stupid and do what they are told, some are smart enough to know they aren't the brightest and that they should listen to someone smarter, and smart people are usually an elevated kind of idiot that only listens to themselves or they are a lunatic, and rarely a person transcends all that bullshit, actually knows something true or has an original thought, and either suffers the consequences or dies eternally being fellated. Brainwashed, demarcated, elevated, venerated, in that order, good day and good night.

>>40783501
Aren't you a useful one. Elevation, veneration, only in moments. You put a lot of faith in the general structure of hierarchies which are historically more corrupt than not.
I hope you are one of the demarcated according to your description. As for the self-absorbed "or" lunatics, that is a matter of perspective really, isn't it?

Noted.

What are other options of what a mind can grow towards after being demarcated?

>>40783549
Order and Chaos are the same. Chaos is what Order looks like NAKED. Sometimes Order wears clothes past their usefulness, I won't argue with that.
>"Him who knows that I know what he seeks to know, knows it well, while he who knows not, knows not what I know or know not."
>"Those who seek what I know, desire a lie. For what I know is not truth."
>"Those who know, and those who know not, both walk toward the same end."
I am not demarcated as I have no boundaries, self set or otherwise, what I know I know, what I know I don't know, what I don't know I don't know, and what I don't know I know, its all the same thing, a structure that exists and can be interacted with. The boundaries are shared and open, not mine or yours to put ourselves into. I might not know a thing but I know a guy who does. Therefore my boundary ends at his, and he knows people too. A golden shore that exists in any direction either of us could choose to walk. However this isn't news, so I'm not one to be venerated. That leaves
>LUNATIC

>>40783828
To use the analogy you tied on at the end, why not go for a swim? Why not explore farther inland? What is beneath the sand? How high can you jump? Or can you fly?
You are demarcated. Demarcation is good and I think you know this. If one is to exist comfortably in any society, or reality even (let's not jump off cliffs), one must be demarcated. But to be unable to see these boundaries, one will never conceive of stepping outside their demarcation in the first place. Stepping out of these boundaries is also valuable.
Isn't it more accurate to say your demarcation is one of the things you do not know? As for your example of extending your knowledge to the knowledge of other individuals, what if your friend refuses to provide his knowledge? What if he deems you, even though you are his friend, unworthy of access?
You have a resistance to testing where your mind is demarcated, your limits, because you do not know how or you have a fear, but your rhetoric itself is indication of the demarcation. You are evasive, you are demarcated.

>>40783942
I once had self imposed boundaries, yes. I do not lack perception of boundaries, I lack respect for them. Any boundary inside the grand structure is a product of the structure. I am a product of the structure. Dependency chains are inherent to the structure, "resistance" is a product of that. There are always exchanges being made even on the smallest levels of being. Death and other "permanent" consequences are also products of interactions within the structure. Oh no the everlasting cosmic dream is hurting itself lmao. And as for a friend withholding info? Doesn't matter if he tells me or not, it lives in his mush and I can touch him, a stone can't tell me its story but when I hold it? The "unknown unknowns" expand into the boundaries the stone perceives, which is far greater than either of ours, and goes back billions of years in any direction. I will never feel what the stone felt but I can feel the stone that felt the thing. Perhaps, because the stone won't speak, I actually DON'T not know what it doesn't know, is that what you'd have me believe? Or is it easier to assume, the rock and myself probably have some things in common that we dont know we dont know know.

Anyway fucker im gonna go get drunk, stick THAT in your thinker and know it

>>40784216
>I can touch the source of knowledge therefore its knowledge is an extension of my own
I think you're drunk already. You're rambling and running away. Take a break, Anon. You might have earned it tonight.

One is internally incubated...
The other externally developed...
Tool can be an internal understanding...
Like plant...
Hammer is a environmental object...
Like excavator...

>>40784324
Yes :)
This is what >>40782840 was getting at.
The Hammer and Tool comparison is in regard to the current relation between the two, hyponym and hypernym. Because the latter can trick the former:
>One is internally incubated...
>The other externally developed...
The former has become a tool of the latter's repertoire.