• Praying and Wishing are Wireless Communications
    ↪L'éléphant
    So, you don't believe that the law of attraction holds? I agree. Imagine it were that simple to find happiness.     — Agent Smith
    I freakin' do! :starstruck:

    Did I not make that clear in my post? I find the law of attraction very believable, but we just don't have scientific backing for it.

    As for the OP, a novel take on prayer and wishing wells. :up: — Agent Smith
    Thanks.
  • Romanticism leads to pain and war?
    ↪Agent Smith
    :up:
  • Praying and Wishing are Wireless Communications
    ↪Agent Smith
    Thanks! I posted a passage here from that link.

    In the New Thought spiritual movement, the Law of Attraction is a pseudoscience based on the belief that positive or negative thoughts bring positive or negative experiences into a person's life.[1][2] The belief is based on the ideas that people and their thoughts are made from "pure energy" and that a process of like energy attracting like energy exists through which a person can improve their health, wealth, and personal relationships. There is no empirical scientific evidence supporting the law of attraction, and it is widely considered to be pseudoscience.

    This is the gist.

    The pure energy is what we give off when we have those thoughts. When sending good wishes to people, we're counting on that pure energy to travel through space and reach those people. As crazy as it is.
  • Romanticism leads to pain and war?
    The positive spin it gives to what are normally considered the bringer of misery and pain (war being the archetype) leads to people willing to kill & die (for a cause). This, I'm led to believe, is akin to brainwashing/mind manipulation of the worst kind ever. :smile: — Agent Smith
    I think this is an incorrect understanding of romanticism. On the contrary, being lost in the romantic view of the world is like wearing rose-colored glasses all the time. One fails to see the ugly side of existence -- that there are undertakings that are impossible to achieve or that there are things that require suffering and hardships. If you actually read the writings of the romanticists, you would think that people living in that world are childlike or immature, forget about innocence. There are failures in life.
  • The start of everything
    The universe is an infinite cycle of expansion and contraction. The beginning is equal to the end. — Benj96
    I voted for this because the universe is not bounded. The everything is the universe. We gave meaning to time, but without us, it has no meaning or existence at all. But -- there's decay! How about that. Stars die out.
  • Praying and Wishing are Wireless Communications
    ↪Garrett Travers

    Yes, I know the feeling.
  • Praying and Wishing are Wireless Communications
    ↪Garrett Travers
    I agree. I think it's one of the most honest conversations with yourself.
    lol. I know someone who reserves best wishes for people she likes. But don't we all do that? And what about the expression "I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy".
  • Praying and Wishing are Wireless Communications
    You don't go around praying about unicorns after all, you pray about what really matters to you. — Garrett Travers
    Yes! People actually pray for facts, for the actual reality. That's why I put this in epistemology because we treat our own prayers and wishes as part of our knowledge about the world.
  • Praying and Wishing are Wireless Communications
    it’s possible the prayer is a kind of therapeutic process. — Average
    It is, right? When visiting a person who is ill, people leave words of encouragement and well wishes. Even those who do not believe in prayers.

    I don't buy into these things literally of course, but I do have this instinct of refusing to say or think bad thoughts for fear that I'll think them into existence. — Hanover
    Good read from the link. Thanks.

    Same here. This thing is very strong and I doubt there's one individual out there who do not have some sort of thought-positive and negative-thought avoidance practice in them.

    Be strong!

    Do you feel the strength now within you?     — Hanover
    Yes, just reading those words make me feel it. I literally sent that thought to someone living abroad at the time when I couldn't reach him. And I felt at the time that the stronger you will it, the stronger it would get to the person.
  • Romanticism leads to pain and war?
    I'm assuming you had to meet a partner (assuming in your case a husband), go through a sort of dating/courting/falling in love process, decide to create new people in the world and raise them a certain way, be able to provide for yourself and family with some sort of job in the broader economic system which allows for things to survive.. — schopenhauer1
    This is too graphic. :)

    Yes, but how many of us think scientifically? Scientific thinking is empirical and religious thinking is not empirical. Understanding human values is not empirical thinking and our opinions are not empirical thinking. Even those who do think empirically do so only once in a while because it is very energy-consuming and we are running on automatic most of the time and rarely really think about anything. This is a problem for democracy and education can resolve but it is not. In fact, some states have laws preventing thinking. — Athena
    We shouldn't think that thinking scientifically means thinking logically. Common sense works too. No we do not think scientifically at all times. I made that clear in my thread about praying and wishing. But, in our day to day affairs, we've learned to treat scientific facts as common sense facts. The calm before the storm makes us stay inside the house and wait for the rain. We don't eat food that had gone sour or moldy. And of course, looking before we cross the street saves us from getting hit by vehicles.
  • Praying and Wishing are Wireless Communications
    ↪Average
    Please share your idea.
  • How do we know if we know something?
    ↪Average
    Fair enough.
  • What is the meaningful distinction between these two things?
    Obviously almost everyone rightfully supports criminalizing actual (real) [racism], but some people also support criminalizing the cartoon/animated kind of [racism] even though it doesn't actually involve the harming of any actual [black people]. One rationale that has been used to justify the criminalization of cartoon [racism] has been the belief that it could desensitize people who are [racist to blacks] to the idea of [lynching black people]. However, I've been thinking about this logic and I was wondering: By the very same logic, can't one also argue in favor of criminalizing photos and videos (especially but not only lynching tapes) of [white] adults who have a very [blackish] appearance? — Xanatos
  • How do we know if we know something?
    Exploit the nature of what? What kind of twist do you have in mind? — Average
    I mean how else can you breathe life into JTB? Do you have an idea of how to revive this epistemological view?
  • Romanticism leads to pain and war?
    "If you have faith in the natural ordering of state of affairs" My faith is in science, not human stupidy and the religions that maintain it. — Athena
    Science is part of the state of affairs.
  • How do we know if we know something?
    Well I suppose you can always discuss something else with someone else. — Average
    Or you could exploit its nature and introduce a twist. That would be something.
  • Introducing myself ... and something else
    So, you’re confused because I have written words you do not understand, and not because you do not understand the words I have written? Sorry, dude, that’s idiotic. — Joe Mello
    Nope. That's your interpretation of my post. I can't blame you. You're gung ho about your view. Suit yourself.
  • Welcome PF members!
    ↪Amity
    Okay, well put.

    In fact, it could be argued that there is a need for trolls.
    All the better to set things straight.     — Amity
    This is a philosophical stance. Good catch.
  • Ukraine Crisis
    ↪javi2541997
    ↪Janus

    Are we really this ingenuous? Or is this just our forum's personality?
    Why use nuclear weapons when you could inflict greater damage with economic and chemical/toxin terrorism using less resources? The covid pandemic had exemplified it could be done -- although I am not saying that it was a conspiracy. But we now know, this is one hell of a bitch!
    The nuclear war would wipe out the whole civilization -- read the nuclear winter, as the aftermath is much more deadlier than the actual weapons themselves. So, the nukes come with attached diplomacy and networking to make sure everyone does not become trigger happy. Putin included.

    All countries with nukes are licensed to kill. But being licensed to kill does not mean your nuclear ambition and decision are your decision only.
  • How do we know if we know something?
    You’re not really referring to a specific argument. — Average
    I am speaking in general. What must be true if xyz is sound and valid -- certainty is true.
    Somehow, I've gotten tired of discussing JTB (justified true belief). It's been talked to death in another forum for years.

    ↪Tom Storm
    :up:
  • Ukraine Crisis
    I just wanted to say, the push-button knee jerk reaction on nuclear weapons is a fiction.
  • Introducing myself ... and something else
    I browsed through the posts here to try to understand how this introduction thread of a new forum member got to be 10 pages long. I don't mean to offend anyone, but I thought finally someone had the profound insight into what it is the rest of us was missing in our understanding of philosophical questions in metaphysics.

    @Joe Mello, sorry dude, but I tried reading your posts, but the more I read the more I get confused as to your point. And 10 pages later, no one has got a clue on what is being discussed. I don't mean any disrespect, but 10 pages of back and forth attempts at clarification went nowhere in the end.

    Could you summarize for me the philosophical view you're trying to articulate? Please be concise. I just really need to know because there's a lot of "god" and finite and intangibles being thrown around here. They are, to me, conflicting ideas.
  • How do we know if we know something?
    I don’t know what you mean by “ought”. — Average
    Probably I shouldn't use ought. But must. What must be true if xyz argument is sound and valid.
  • How do we know if we know something?
    ↪Average

    Obviously, you have some idea of what is true or false, else you wouldn't be questioning the information you come upon. Why don't you start there, define what ought to be true. Then, you can critique how we dish out "truths", which could be misinformation.
  • Romanticism leads to pain and war?
    I think I might be one of those people :gasp: so I really have to ponder that difference because I value liberty but hate the ugliness that results from the liberties some people take. I hope others have more to say about this. — Athena
    If you have faith in the natural ordering of state of affairs, then besides behaving reasonably, having good judgment, and having reasonableness in the way you see the world, you don't have to do anything else because the ordering of the ugly side of liberty will happen. This phenomenon has been observed in the natural world-- when groups have become unsustainable, whether by toxicity, overcrowding, and unrest, they naturally break apart into smaller groups somewhere else.

    As far as romanticism, @Gnomon had got a handle on it -- his post provides a brief description of what romanticism is.
  • Welcome PF members!
    place is going downhill fast at the moment. — Wayfarer
    I don't flag shit here. My posts could very well be flag-worthy. I think the most effective way to show your disapproval is to say it in the thread and explain why the post is bad.
  • How do we know if we know something?
    how do I know that the surgeon is real? — Average
    Then this is not about the OP anymore. If you wanted to discuss justified belief, be explicit. And I say this because in the OP, it reads like you wanted to sift though good and bad information and how to go about that. This is different from justified true belief.
  • How do we know if we know something?
    But how do you know that your experiences are reliable or that you are interpreting them correctly? — Average
    So if a surgeon told you about the surgery he just performed and which you just watched performed, you would still be skeptical of the account of the surgeon?
  • How do we know if we know something?
    But how do you verify the validity of experience? Do you need another experience? If you use experience to verify the validity of experience then that seems a bit circular. — Average
    By simply accompanying the person to the vaccine clinic and seeing the needle emptied in his upper arm.
    Seriously? Watch a surgeon operate then. How's that for experience?
  • How do we know if we know something?
    Most people have opinions on topics but how many people have knowledge? How would we recognize knowledge in the first place? — Average
    One way to know is experience -- a person talking has some or a lot of experience in it. If you got vaccinated, you know the side effects and how long they last. You could pass this information around. In fact, that's how the medical authorities know the side effects of a drug -- people experiencing it.
  • Pessimism’s ultimate insight
    So what is one to do? If suicide isn't a real option, there is only the perpetual cycle. The illusion is that it can be broken. Schopenhauer deigned freedom by asceticism. That was a nice consolation-hope to provide, but it's simply training the mind to live with the existential striving-after more easily. That is all- a mental technique. It is not a metaphysical escape hatch. We are stuck until we are not. — schopenhauer1
    Schopenhauer's view is gloomy, indeed.
    No one has a really good solution to this, only good suggestions. And funny thing is, after we're told by Schopenhauer, we turn to other philosophers for a silver lining. A mind can do wonders without altering our surrounding. Just the shift in mind. Although a change in surrounding can temporarily alleviate it. That's why we're all escapist in one form or another. Some bury themselves in art and music, others in paid work, and still other in hobbies.
  • Youth for longevity.
    ↪MAYAEL

    Infact one of my hypothesis I have as to the increasing mental health problems people are having is do to the constant bombardment we are receiving from radio waves I think we are starting to subconsciously pick up on them despite the fact that they are far past the range of the human ear I feel that we are developing a way of reading these signals phiscally and subconsciously it's creating anxiety. — MAYAEL
    Great hypothesis! I believe you. Find a way to do an experiment on that.
  • Youth for longevity.
    I feel that technology is killing us more then it is helping but I can't see this world giving up it's beloved technology any time soon — MAYAEL
    I hear ya, man. As someone who took a hiatus from city life, I had half an acre to myself to live in the bare minimum. I slept well and woke up with mental brightness and lots of energy to do plantings, build things, and fucking..cook..real food! I was also reading books, writing, and couldn't care less about the rest of the world. My hearing got sensitive -- I could hear sounds a lot louder. I didn't allow noise to invade my abode and my existence.

    Then I went back to civilization. First thing that bothered me were sounds of loud TV, the mower, and house alarms.
  • Is perfection possible?
    You’re a fortunate man if you’ve never had to encounter something that you detest. I wish I was that lucky. — Average
    Encounter is the wrong word. Try imagine. We could have a notion of perfection. Imagine something perfect. Although, I want to take back what I said that I detest perfection. There are a few things in life that are perfect, whose qualities I do not detest:

    Eggs -- are perfect. The shape, size, and nutritional value.

    Small birds are perfect, like hummingbirds.

    The moon looks perfect.

    Some pine trees are perfect.

    Some bells sound perfect -- like the big church bells.

    Some rock formations are perfect. The outcroppings of boulders are perfect to me.
  • The Moral Emotions: Can we overcome anger and blame?
    ↪baker
    I don't know what to make of your post because all the examples you gave are abuse of the moral senses. Before we could talk about that, let's talk about what had already been considered moral judgments.
  • Is perfection possible?
    Is it possible to live a life that is flawless or are we destined to live lives that are less than ideal? — Average
    I detest perfection -- whatever that means since I don't think I have encountered perfection ever. And I'm not even sure what a flawless life is. It's weird to use it in this context since we know we can't control everything in our life to make it work the way we envision.
    That said, I have no attraction to perfection. I am drawn to "flawed" people, whose flaws make them interesting. I am also fascinated by those whose bad decisions in life didn't deter them from continuing the path they've chosen and overcoming it.
    People who try to live a perfect life is boring to me.
  • The Moral Emotions: Can we overcome anger and blame?
    Is it really philosophically correct to take for granted that the party who feels wronged is automatically the arbiter of morality? — baker
    You do know what I mean. Are you saying that rape is justified sometimes? lol.
    No one could say, yes I raped her as a self-defense.

    How about we think before we take the neutral position or the it-depends position.

    What this discussion is lacking is an acknowledgment of the role of the power differential in moral judgments.

    The one who can punish is in the position of power.
    If punishment is justified, as a matter of principle, then might makes right. Do you want to go in that direction?     — baker

    First of all, I don't understand your post. Power differential in moral judgments -- what's that? Say we have a court functioning with integrity. Is it really that hard to discern fault here?
  • Need Help to Move On
    Why? I expect no such thing from anyone, least ways family members, as those are the most arbitrary relationships in one's entire life. I never did understand this. — Garrett Travers
    Liar! Or you're a school of fish! Gratitude is a common knowledge. :smirk:

    Like hell you don’t care. There’s a lot of anger and resentment in your choice of words here. — Possibility
    That's what I get, too, from his post.

    Time to say something about this:

    Hey guys! When you sound bitter, but you're not aware in your tone of voice that you sound bitter, then that means your natural emotion is showing. Often we don't smell our own fear. But others can.

    Not to beat a dead horse or parse words, but I think reciprocity would be included as a way to show gratitude. That's just the way I think I guess. — Tex
    You're mistaking necessity for sufficiency in reasoning. Reciprocity is sufficient to show gratitude, but showing gratitude does not necessarily contain reciprocity. I'll give you an example: We show gratitude to our parents for raising us. But this gratitude is never a reciprocity in the sense that we do perform an act in exchange to make it a mutual benefit. A true reciprocity is between friends extending a favor and returning a favor. Another example is a business deal.
  • Need Help to Move On
    but I can't shake the feeling that, now that this person has the means, that reciprocity would at least enter the person's mind and then act on it. How could it not, is the question I ask myself. — Tex
    It's a family member, so there's a whole different mindset. The reciprocity bias was never there to begin with. Gratitude is what one expects from a family member. Not reciprocity. That person didn't have gratitude. Very common occurrence. But, let's talk about you. Are you feeling this way because it is actually about the money but you're in denial? Let's say he never got the windfall, but he also never thanked you, and never showed up for your birthday, your most important occasion, or for your funeral. How do you feel now? Would you be as bitter?

    Explain this.... How so? Asshole? He asked for money, it was given to him. Do you think that purchased a part of him to be owned and an expectation to behave in a certain way towards the giver of the largesse? — Garrett Travers
    No, the person was an asshole even before I started giving money, is what I meant. I also said I don't feel anything when helping that person. So, there's that lack of expectation on my part.
  • Need Help to Move On
    I've always given and not asked/implied for anything and have never brought it up ever again. Just gave and that's that. — Tex
    Herein lies the problem. If you must give, give wisely. Ask questions. I don't know what's your relationship with this person, but if they're family members, then there's your answer -- lack of reciprocity bias because either they feel entitled to your money, or to their mind you just have too much money.

    Let's assume though that this person is not a family member:

    If you had been doing this for years to the same person, you made it clear to that person that it never hurt you to help him, so his reciprocity bias had become neutral -- he never developed the need to reciprocate. Nor did he try to think, he couldn't possibly repay you so he must stop asking.

    No matter how genuine his needs were, you were the enabler of such behavior.

    Ethics wise -- nothing to be said. But etiquette, yes he violated this cultural norm.

    Just tell yourself -- that money you gave him was made based purely on your own volition. You were not forced to part ways with the money. The windfall he got, that's never your money, so there was never a loss there either.

    Do this. Stop seeing or talking to that person. It could be years or never that he might want to contact you. That would be fun times.

    As someone who has been helping another person myself -- I'll tell you that that person is an asshole, yet I do not feel anything when parting with my money and sending over electronically, and paying the wire fee. I get a text, and I just do it. When I'm not in good mood, and I get a text for money help, I ignore it. Then the next time I get a text, I just send it. I really feel numbed about this person. I don't tell this to anyone in my family as this is as stupid as it gets. My ex broke up with me citing stupidity on my part as one reason for the break-up. Like a violent feeling of "You're fucking stupid!!" God yes, now that I think about it, that's why I don't date anymore. Because they might find out about this stupid thing I do. I don't even talk to this person. Okay, there's one dark reason -- which I'm going to divulge here. This person almost died by suicide. But this person is still an asshole!
Home » L'éléphant