• Ukraine Crisis
    So this is something I don't quite understand. Has Russia always sort of been "hollowed out" as a kleptocracy? Is this the way their culture is normally? Or is this an aberration?frank

    Russia at the beginning of the 20th century was still in the process of emerging from the medieval organisation of society. The liberation of the serfs only began in 1861, and was not complete at the beginning of the revolution. So about 500 years of social change in Europe since around 1400 or so, has been compressed in Russia into a single century. They may have missed some of the nuances of the development of the social contract, the enlightenment, the reformation, the development of universal education, the industrial revolution etc, etc, in the rush to catch up.
  • Striking A Balance Between Conceptualising Things in Terms of Fixability
    This is my method psychologically, but don't apply it externally; don't wait for the roof to mend itself, or even for yourself to spontaneously become a roofing expert. :wink:
  • Striking A Balance Between Conceptualising Things in Terms of Fixability
    Do you have the patience to wait
    Till your mud settles and the water is clear?
    Can you remain unmoving
    Till the right action arises by itself?
    — Lao Tzu again
  • Striking A Balance Between Conceptualising Things in Terms of Fixability
    (how would one become both sides of a conflict?Tom Storm

    Yes, that is where the words stop; there is no how, no method. You know, there are 'methods' for relaxing, but they are actually not methods but distractions that allow relaxation to just happen while Mr Analysis is concentrating on his breathing or some such and stops 'trying to relax'. Trying to be whole is like trying to relax, it has the opposite effect.
  • Striking A Balance Between Conceptualising Things in Terms of Fixability
    So long as becoming single-minded isn't something that can be attempted and failed, and you're allowed to only say it occurred after you see the result, then it isn't a real method.Judaka

    It isn't a method, you are quite correct. But if what I say is unhelpful, carry on by all means with your topic, and I will interrupt no more.
  • Striking A Balance Between Conceptualising Things in Terms of Fixability
    How does confronting a difficulty allow you not to experience it?Tom Storm

    I was hoping my post was an illustration of that. I don't think I can explain it much better. When one has a problem, it is generally the result of a psychological conflict. Such a conflict can be resolved instantly by seeing the whole of it from the inside, which means by fully, consciously, being both sides of the conflict. If I am the conflict, I no longer experience the conflict. As long as I am being one side of the conflict, I experience the other side of the conflict as the problem.

    Unfortunately, until one does it, this is just a pile of words that sort of might make theoretical sense, but doesn't actually do anything.
  • Striking A Balance Between Conceptualising Things in Terms of Fixability
    Wanting to avoid the health risks of smoking and wanting to smoke are logically consistent with each other, within the mind. The contradiction is in the incompatibility of these two desires in the real world. One isn't split between wanting to avoid the health risks of smoking and wanting to smoke, one wants both, they just can't have both.Judaka

    So because one does not live and smoke in the mind, but in the real world, one has to make up one's mind. Otherwise, one remains in two minds about it; that is in the contradiction of wanting to smoke and not to smoke.


    In cases like this, it is simply unthinkable for anyone to have seriously attempted something like quitting smoking, and never once resented their contradictory desire to do the very thing that they're trying to quit. The very thing that thwarts their efforts every time, what possibility is there that anyone wouldn't at some point wish it would disappear?Judaka

    In the case of smoking, trying to stop and failing, and then stopping with no difficulty at all, I speak from personal experience. It is simply a fact that not doing something that one no longer wishes to do is the easiest thing in the world.

    If it's so simple, is everyone who fails just weak-willed and a fool? How can failure deserve anything but derision when the solution is something a 6-year-old could come up with?Judaka

    It is that simple, but when one wants to want what one does not want, it becomes not just complicated, but painful and almost impossible. There is no derision on my part, though, because I have been in that conflict and contradiction, and have resolved it by understanding the whole of it from the inside rather than by trying to fix it.
  • Striking A Balance Between Conceptualising Things in Terms of Fixability
    practical themes in motivating us to conceptualise problems by their fixable componentsJudaka

    I'd like to distinguish first that a problem has internal aspects and external aspects; or mental and physical, if you like. Suppose for example, I problematise my hair in some way; I can try and deal with it physically, get a hair cut or a wig, or a transplant, or a hat; or I can try and deal with it psychologically by learning to love the frizz, or the bald patch, or whatever, and learning to not care so much about the looks and comments of others. I can even attempt a social change - start a 'slap-heads rights' movement or something (I count that as external to self).

    Fixable factors represent things like habits, routine, thought patterns, attitudes, methodology, education and any category typically characterisable as actionable.Judaka

    Here you seem to be focussed on internal aspects, and internal aspects cannot be operated on in the same way as external ones. In seeking to fix the mind, one necessarily creates a division in the mind between the mind that needs fixing and the mind that is going to fix it. This comes out very clearly when one seeks to deal with habits. The smoker, it is, who wants to stop smoking, and the smoker's will to stop is in conflict with the smoker's will to smoke. Whose will will be stronger? The smoker's of course, because that is the only one there is.

    Habits are formed by the mind, and in order to change one's habit, one has to change one's mind. How does the mind change the mind, without first changing its mind? On the other hand, it is very easy to change one's mind if one has a mind to, but the trick is to be single minded, and then one has no problem.


    In the universe the difficult things are done as if they are easy.
    In the universe great acts are made up of small deeds.
    The sage does not attempt anything very big,
    And thus achieves greatness.

    Easy promises make for little trust.
    Taking things lightly results in great difficulty.
    Because the sage always confronts difficulties,
    He never experiences them
    .
    — Lao Tzu
    (my emphasis)
  • Coronavirus
    The Termitinator for president! So much better looking than than the average average.
  • Coronavirus
    We don't know whether Kennedy is deliberately exploiting conspiracy theories or not.

    He says, as if he might want later to deny that he has anything against Kennedy at at all, whilst raising the spectre in everyones mind that the guy is either a nutcase or an exploiter of nutcases.
  • Is a prostitute a "sex worker" and is "sex work" an industry?
    Wherein there is a difference lies the answer to your question. The open minded liberal tends to be open minded and liberal about prostitution as long as it's "them" that's doing it.Baden

    But you haven't said what that difference is. Yes, humans are hypocrites. Perhaps we are all nimbys in our various ways—
    … I want ev'rybody to be free
    But if you think that I'd let Barry Goldwater
    Move in next door or marry my daughter
    You must think I'm crazy…
    — Bob Dylan

    And it is a dangerous and stigmatised profession, whereas sport is heroic, but the reason for that is — I'm not even going to say the word, I'm starting to bore myself... you do the gender maths, as they say.
  • Is a prostitute a "sex worker" and is "sex work" an industry?
    I think professional sports of all sorts are prostitution; why single out sex?
  • Deductive Logic, Memory, and a new term?
    I might be way off topic here, but...

    If you are interested in how deductive logic 'emerges' from neural networks, you might like G. Spencer Brown's The Laws of Form
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    But Trump said he did, so people believe it. They believe it even though it has been explained over and over again that the VP doesn't have the power to do this.GRWelsh

    I'm sure Pence is right in law; but he could have done it anyway. People do break the law sometimes. Trump clearly feels the function of the law is to be on his side, and he wanted the result overturned.

    But I'm not saying science is the same as politics, but that psychologically the same resistance to change operates. This is not an original observation on my part.

    An important scientific innovation rarely makes its way by gradually winning over and converting its opponents: it rarely happens that Saul becomes Paul. What does happen is that its opponents gradually die out, and that the growing generation is familiarized with the ideas from the beginning: another instance of the fact that the future lies with the youth. —  Max Planck
  • Why should we talk about the history of ideas?
    Ten bonus unenlightenment points for mentioning Robert Graves.

    He is quick, thinking in clear images;
    I am slow, thinking in broken images.

    He becomes dull, trusting to his clear images;
    I become sharp, mistrusting my broken images.

    Trusting his images, he assumes their relevance;
    Mistrusting my images, I question their relevance.

    Assuming their relevance, he assumes the fact;
    Questioning their relevance, I question the fact.

    When the fact fails him, he questions his senses;
    When the fact fails me, I approve my senses.

    He continues quick and dull in his clear images;
    I continue slow and sharp in my broken images.

    He in a new confusion of his understanding;
    I in a new understanding of my confusion.
    — Robert Graves, In broken Images.
  • Why should we talk about the history of ideas?
    Why should we talk about the history of this conversation?Srap Tasmaner

    Because there is more to philosophy than argument, and conversations that are all argument are not generally worth going over, but even here, there is other stuff; rhetorical questions, genuine questions, opinions wise and foolish, misunderstandings and understandings, eyes glazing and rolling, and occasionally even some communication. This, for example, is an opinion not an argument, to be considered or not according to taste. I will make no attempt to prove it, and I recommend that no one bothers to try and disprove it. Sorry to clutter up your thread, but you asked, and i have an answer, and this is it.
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    what I call the "reality warping" effect of TrumpGRWelsh

    I wonder if it is anything very different to what happens in science? There is a current theory that is accepted, and as anomalies start to appear, ad hoc additions are made to explain them - 'dark matter', 'dark energy' for examples, and it seems a bit uncomfortable to some but what can you do, until eventually someone will come up with a new theory that does not need these arbitrary additions to make it work, and then it is easier to change one's mind, but some are still reluctant..

    Conspiracy and deep state are like dark matter, and dark energy - ad hoc additions to save a theory in trouble. In this case the theory is that Trump is going to make America great again - just as soon as he's dealt with the pesky deep state, etc.

    I have a radical new theory that dispenses with the need for conspiracies — That America never was that great, at least in terms of giving opportunities to the poor, or freedom or democracy or morality; rather a few people made a lot of money from slavery and exploitation at the expense of a great many people's hardship and misery. And those days never ended, but continue unabated. I don't think it'll catch on though.
  • Climate change denial
    You all diligently buy nothing but certified organic or biodynamic food then I assume?Isaac

    I don't care what you personally do (unless perhaps, you're wanting to make the argument that no-one is hypocritical in this respect?)Isaac

    Respect dude.
  • Climate change denial
    The hippies were right as usual. Local vegan organic whole foods are more healthy for man and environment.

    The soil is also an excellent carbon sink, and nature is the best therapist.

    But alas, the machines have already taken over and their servants are our politicians.
  • Why should we talk about the history of ideas?
    By all means disagreeIsaac

    Thank you.
  • Why should we talk about the history of ideas?
    Would it?Isaac

    Yes.

    What do mean,"it's hard to dance with you" ? I don't dance, and if I did, I would dance alone.

    Oh, wait! In the context of the thread history, you are giving an example of something you think would be meaningful without the historical context. In context your meaning is clear, but out of context It would be bizarre.
  • Why should we talk about the history of ideas?
    It's just hard to engage with you because every argument you present quickly morphs into all of your arguments. We start out changing an oil filter and end up taking apart the whole car.
    — Srap Tasmaner

    Fair point, I'll take that on board.
    Wayfarer

    I find philosophy is always like that. As soon as anyone says anything they are open to all the big questions - how do you know? what do you mean? why should we care? etc? But a small point in favour of history; It is interesting to read the thread from the beginning and compare where it started, with where it has arrived. One might even claim that everything that is known is history, in the sense that it is known of the past, just as phenomena are of the present. Certainly the above quoted exchange would be hard to understand without the context of the thread.
  • What Are the Chances That This Post Makes Any Sense? A Teleological Argument from Reason
    I have read the entire op, and even some of the responses. Do I get a prize? There is a echo here of other threads - you seem to presuppose time. If the next moment everything is different, there is nothing to say that it is 'next', rather than any other configuration where everything is different. Time has no meaning unless there is continuity and change, that produces 'succession'.

    Fortunately, the glass of wine that I turned away from to write the above paragraph was still there at the end of it. God is good! At least, that is what my memory is telling me - that I sipped and wrote, and sipped again and now am writing again. *sip* Primitivo, a full-bodied plumy wine - a current favourite.

    The argument, such as it is, is an argument from ignorance; we don't know why anything should make sense, so maybe making sense came first, (God), because otherwise not making sense would make more sense, unless making sense is somehow necessary to existence.

    It is an argument aimed at science as if science held sway over reality. but science does not hold sway, but is on the contrary the humble servant thereof and seeks only to describe. But neither reason nor experience can prescribe nor proscribe God - is that much not already obvious? Well, clearly not, unfortunately.

    I suppose I should applaud the attempt to make room for teleological accounts of the universe, but it seems unambitious to the degree, that I have to wonder, supposing you are right – so what? The Great Programmer designed the universe to ... ?
  • Is Intercessory Prayer Egotistical?
    Prayer is a sacrament for you, not for me. Obviously my will is always done on Earth as it is in Heaven. And I already know what you want and the answer is going to be "No." except when you happen to want what I will. But you like to assuage your feelings of helplessness and even pretend to get your Mother Mary to ask me for for you. But really, all you need to say is 'sorry', and 'thank you' and even that is for your own comfort, not for my benefit. The Creator needs nothing from his creation. — God
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    And so are violent transfers. Because :—

    All political lives, unless they are cut off in midstream at a happy juncture, end in failure, because that is the nature of politics and of human affairs. — Enoch Powell
    .
  • Kant's Notions of Space and Time
    But, then, am I to conclude that the mentally spatialized universe is somehow located in my mind?charles ferraro

    No, definitely not.

    Crudely, he says that when we say that something exists physically, we normally mean that it is located in space and time "My greenhouse has been in my garden for the last two years; my lungs are in my chest and have been all my life." It follows, that we cannot locate space itself or time itself, and therefore they do not exist in the same way. Rather they are the categories by which we order experience.

    And apart from that 'in my mind' is not a location, but another category.

    Of course he didn't know about non-Euclidian geometry, and it turns out that these categories are not as 'necessary' as he thought, or at least they are capable of radical alteration. Nevertheless, it is a necessary condition of having any experience whatsoever that one has it here and now.
  • "All reporting is biased"
    It was a publisher who coined the phrase “without fear or favor.” That publisher was Adolph Ochs, who promised readers when he acquired The New York Times in 1896, that it would be his “earnest aim to … give the news impartially, without fear or favor, regardless of party, sect, or interest involved. — Google

    The good old days, when Adolph was just a name.

    But its conflicts can be recognized and subsequently guarded against.Mww

    And it comes down, pretty much to who does one fear to displease and who does one desire to favour?
    On the fear side one can be sure that it is power that will induce fear, the power of the rich, and the high status, or the power of the masses. and on the favour side, it will be 'people like us' that will be favoured.

    It is a fine ideal, that requires one to be honest with oneself about ones' motivations, but modern reporting is inclined to be motivated most of all by fear of appearing biased, which results in a feeble minded addiction to a notion of 'balance' that negates everything said with its opposite. The result is an equalisation of fact and fiction - Round Earth and Flat Earth, Climate change and its denial, etc.
  • US Election 2024 (All general discussion)
    I understand in individual cases actual democracy can be inconvenientBaden

    And fragile.
  • The matriarchy
    Your claim was that the fundamental driver was uncertainty of fatherhood. But apparently social bonds of mutual trust and fidelity are more important.Tzeentch

    *Sigh*. Ask yourself why it is so important to prove me wrong? Because your criticisms are getting desperate and feeble.

    DNA analysis is a rather recent option. Society is not therefore built around it. On the contrary, it is built around the state of affairs previously prevailing, which is (sorry to bore you) that men could not be certain of their offspring unless they could control women's sexual behaviour. Therefore, a patriarchal society can be expected to promote ideals of either monogamy or polygamy but almost certainly not polyandry.And this is what we find around the world, that polyandry is very very rare.

    The promotion, or at least the enforcement of these ideals can be expected to be applied more rigorously to women than to men, and stories about men's needs, and their inability to control them completely will abound, and this is the beginning of the induction of rape culture, that sows fear in the minds of women, and downplays the responsibility of men.

    But we are supposed to be discussing Matriarchy.

    Imagine therefore, a society where no importance at all is placed on fatherhood.It is not even a thing to be named and talked about. A child's important male role models will be his maternal uncles, who will be part of the matriarchal family in a way that unrelated males who share the maternal bed from time to time are not.

    Familial relations are not based on sex at all, in contrast to the patriarchal nuclear family which is founded and maintained entirely by the sexual relationship of mother and father. This makes for a much more stable and extended matrilineal family unit with a matriarch at it's head, with her adult children of both sexes, and the children of her daughters (her sons do not have children of their own, but are co-responsible for their sisters' children).

    Sex, whether consensual or non-consensual, loses its importance socially. Rape as a weapon of war is completely disarmed and just looks silly.

    The main point of going through all this is to emphasise that matriarchy is not at all a mirror image of patriarchy. We can argue about whether it might be better or worse in all sorts of ways from different points of view, but the main difficulty for people is to understand the necessities of the patriarchy that prevails at present, and take seriously the possibility of other ways of organising society.
  • The beginning and ending of self
    Is there not a difference to you, between stopping and starting again, and stopping and never starting again?Metaphysician Undercover

    Yes, there is all the difference in the world. I know, because i have done both. The first is difficult and painful because one is in conflict the whole time, whereas the second is easy because there is no conflict.

    One knows when there is no internal conflict. If one is unsure, there is conflict.

    Stopping is like dots at the end of the sentence, or the fading out of the music as the end of the song. You can't be sure that the story has ended - yet. And "yet" can be postponed indefinitely. There's a nice complication. Arguably, the end of a narrative is always, in a sense, arbitrary.Ludwig V

    Not all songs fade out, the best reach a harmonic resolution that completes and satisfies. Not all lives peter out incomplete; not all stories end in dots of unfinished business and regrets.

    "It was in that moment that Hirem Pawnitof, the highwayman, attained enlightenment."

    "And they all lived happily ever after."
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    Indeed, democracy is a bad system when most of the population is insane.
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    Interesting how your can theoretically pardon yourself. Very ethically sound.Benkei

    There is an interesting aspect. Bobby Sands was a member of the IRA who died in prison on hunger strike while an elected member of the British parliament. I cannot help feeling that such an event as the election of a known criminal can only be understood as a democratic indictment of the democratic system itself. One has arrived at the borderline between normal politics and civil war. The winners of a civil war don't need to pardon themselves, because they are the lawmakers. It is the losers that need pardons.

    Trump represents a constituency in rebellion against the government and the government needs to reach an agreement with that constituency one way or another. "Remember Bobby Sands!" became a slogan, and I always have. When a criminal gets elected, it is no good blaming the criminal. Something bigger than any individual is very wrong.
  • How Does Language Map onto the World?
    It looks to be an odd question, to me. If I asked how a map maps onto reality, the answer would seem to be 'by being an arrangement of symbols that corresponds to the arrangement of features of note in the world.' or something like. The proof of the map is that the competent orienteer can find his way to the local hostelry in unfamiliar territory without falling off a cliff or into the river.

    Maps have legends, that explain the meaning of the symbols. Cliff, river, bridge, hostelry. Things important to the traveller from afar. The legend informs those unfamiliar with the map, about scale and so on, but tells them nothing about the territory. The map does that.

    And so it surely is with language. One needs to know the legend, and one needs to read the arrangement of the words, and one needs the right map according to where one is.

    Here are a couple of arrangements to compare:

    1. Don't eat the yellow snow.
    2. Eat the yellow snow.

    I leave the interested reader to work out by practical experiment which arrangement provides the best guidance to travellers in Northern climes.

    (Those who have read the later work of Philip K Dick may be aware that there is a tradition of feeding reindeer with amanita muscaria and drinking their urine to enjoy the psycho-active benefits of the mushrooms without the upset stomach that one gets from direct ingestion of them. This is a legend.)

    I have a book on fungi from the good old days when men were men and women were grateful, that has infallible advice for telling poisonous from edible mushrooms: "Eat them, if you get sick or die, they are poisonous, and if not they are edible." They don't make books like that any more. This is a true story.
  • How Does Language Map onto the World?
    You have no proof.frank

    I have no proof that you just posted that. But evidently you did.
  • The 'Self' as Subject and Object: How Important is This In Understanding Identity and 'Reality'?
    It’s also weird you’re calling it unresponsive to the situation like there is some objectively correct way to respond to situations.Darkneos

    Not objectively correct, nor subjectively correct, but socially correct. But you're right, I am weird. But I'm not alone.
    All the world’s a stage,
    And all the men and women merely players;
    They have their exits and their entrances,
    And one man in his time plays many parts,
    His acts being seven ages. At first, the infant,
    Mewling and puking in the nurse’s arms.
    Then the whining schoolboy, with his satchel
    And shining morning face, creeping like snail
    Unwillingly to school. And then the lover,
    Sighing like furnace, with a woeful ballad
    Made to his mistress’ eyebrow. Then a soldier,
    Full of strange oaths and bearded like the pard,
    Jealous in honor, sudden and quick in quarrel,
    Seeking the bubble reputation
    Even in the cannon’s mouth. And then the justice,
    In fair round belly with good capon lined,
    With eyes severe and beard of formal cut,
    Full of wise saws and modern instances;
    And so he plays his part. The sixth age shifts
    Into the lean and slippered pantaloon,
    With spectacles on nose and pouch on side;
    His youthful hose, well saved, a world too wide
    For his shrunk shank, and his big manly voice,
    Turning again toward childish treble, pipes
    And whistles in his sound. Last scene of all,
    That ends this strange eventful history,
    Is second childishness and mere oblivion,
    Sans teeth, sans eyes, sans taste, sans everything.
    — Shakespeare
  • The 'Self' as Subject and Object: How Important is This In Understanding Identity and 'Reality'?
    I think you’re mistaken. I said I behave same no matter where I go, that “same” being who I am which is considerate.Darkneos

    Well if you are always considerate, again that is unresponsive to the situation; sometimes it is appropriate to be inconsiderate - to scammers and thieves for example.
  • The 'Self' as Subject and Object: How Important is This In Understanding Identity and 'Reality'?
    I act the same no matter where I’m at, same with others, so how do they explain that.Darkneos

    I don't know how they would explain it, I put it down to either a complete lack of insight, or an inability to modify responses according to the environment. People who cannot shut up during the two minutes silence, or show some consideration for others in social situations generally are not likely to do well socially. If you cannot or will not modify your behaviour between a party and a funeral, then I pity you, but not very much, I'm afraid.