So thinking well in philosophy — Sam26

Thinking well is an interesting objective criteria. What we have here is a competition similar to figure skating or synchronized swimming. Can I be a judge? Or do we need judges to pick judges?

In general, humans continue to amaze me in their desire to have Kings of Hills. It's like it is the only way to bring meaning into a life. In Yoga it is who can twist themselves into the most contorted pretzel. It's interesting to observe.

The four noble truths are linked to Karma and its influence on our lives in Samsara. The 8 fold path is, in a manner of speaking, the way out. — TheMadFool

No. The Four Noble Truths stand as a philosophical insight. One can simply accept them as they are. One approach, my approach, is moderation (The Middle Way). I'm not trying to escape anything. Just accepting. But if one wishes to extend the Truths into something more, one is free to do so and I doing so create a tree within Buddhism. Karma itself can be interpreted in many ways. For me it is simply a way of describing the learning process of evolving life.

Consider the life-and-death cycle no different from the awake-sleep cycle except for a certain loss of personal memory (some is retained in the form of inherited characteristics and skills). Mind (life) is never destroyed. It just keeps evolving. It is the Universe.

Not sure what sect if Buddhism you are drawing from but your OP is equivalent to conferring upon Catholicism the beliefs of a Born Again Evangelistic religion.

The core of Buddhism are the For Noble Truths and Eight Fold Path, the interpretations of which lead to enumerable limbs on the Buddhist Tree. Reincarnation and Karma are not core and are subject too all kinds of differing beliefs and interpretations.

We are all creating all the time. One only needs to observe it.

Considering that one does not have immediate access to all their memories at once, in virute of what is there this distance between our memories and awareness (self-consciousness)? But such a distance seems to require mediation. So we obviously don't have direct access to all of our minds.

As well: what would "immediate" realization even look like? Do we mean intuitions without concepts, or with concepts? If the prior, what are intuitions without conceptions? If the later, it seems as though this require mediation. But this seems to evoke distance. — Marty

Memory is jyst there and it's basically being filtered for the task at hand by the mind. There is no separation. It is all one.

Immediate is what we feel as the passage of time.

You just created a paragraph of an idea.

Each person can do what they want with their own body.

There isn't a sharp divide. It is a subjective judgment and is very fluid.

So you figure setting oneself on fire is going to change the views of the Vietnamese government? Sometimes reading history books is more helpful than meditation when it comes to government repression. But, if someone wants to set oneself on fire because of their meditation, then who am I to argue.

As a simple example one must know the truth that a gun can kill for you to be careful around it. — TheMadFool

What a funny truth. A gun can kill? I thought it was the bullet? Or was it the person who pulls the trigger. In anycase a gun without a bullet can still kill, or is it the person who uses it to hit someone with? For that matter, pretty much anything can kill including microbes in the water we drink. Soon we become paranoid from truths.

Lots of truths that are constantly changing. Pretty soon every observation becomes a truth which makes finding truths pretty easy and we don't have to make much about it.

I mean we all make observations but for some reason people like the idea of truths and pay money to all kinds of institutions and people to know these truths. It's pretty interesting to observe.

Well if you can find a truth then exactly how long does it remain a truth if everything is changing?

Simple observations are not truths. They are simply observations.

Truths were conjured up early on as a marketing gimmick. People pay money for truths. The practice continues today in all fields of endeavors. It is interesting what people pay money for.

Yep, including my own statement. Just my observations.

Now, if you want to really show how great you are at philosophy, tell me where you observe stagnation in the universe. I'm interested in learning something new, not being cute about the limits of language.

Yeah, well people are becoming more prone to poor mental health due to various factors that living in modern day society entails. So, perhaps if there is a benefit in treating or preventing mental health issues would be to behave morally or with ethics in mind. — Posty McPostface

Well, prime certainly are taking more drugs as every behavior is now considered and abnormal for marketing reasons. Somehow there is a direct correlation between pharmaceutical profits and the number if new diseases that the industry creates. Maybe it is the drugs that are affecting behavior?

You brought truth into it, not me. Just my observations. If you can tell me what you observe that is stagnant, then everything changes - again. This is the essence of philosophy.

Life without purpose is not a bad thing, but we all seem to be sharing the same purpose, to create.

People are just living their lives. Some fit in better than others.

That's not true. — creativesoul

It wasn't intended to be. It is an observation. If you observe stagnation anywhere in the universe, let me know.

Lots of research on the effects of mediation on physical body activity. Just go to google scholar and search for meditation.

I've practiced mediation of various varieties for many years and yes it does make for a healthier spiritual, emotional, thoughtful, and physical life when practiced in moderation. When taken to the extreme ... well I guess you may end up setting yourself in fire.

Indirect, because we only have mediated access to our own mind — Marty

One has to ponder this. The mind has mediated access to itself?

The mind is creative thought that is filled with its own memory. There is no mediating between the mind and itself.

There is no way to define mental health from a philosophical perspective. Health is holistic and simply the ability to physically persist and is it's necessarily different for each individual.

However, the legal system does have its subjective guidelines that are used to determine the mental health of individuals and this changes by judge and jurisdiction.

There are no truths in a Universe that is in constant flow. There cannot be.

Philosophy is about learning to navigate our lives and understanding our own meaning within this flux.

Life is just one big competition - or not. Apparently we have a new one, thinking better. Sounds like an Olympic sport. We can have judges judging on execution, originality, speed, and of course hubris.

Personally, I'm open to forum competition. Anyone interested in nominating themselves as Bestest Thinker?

Sorry, and this is not intended as a dig, this forum shows, if it wasn't obvious already, that some people do think better than others. — T Clark

Lol. The gift of hubris.

Humans create some mobile phones and self-congratulatory abundance call it "intelligence". A bee creates a beehive and water creates the Grand Canyon.

The greatest creation of humans is hubris. In essence it is all the same, though for marketing reasons, educational institutions have managed to convince us that it is otherwise. Exactly how much money should one pay for a Ph.d, so that s/he can claim to be more intelligent?

Reason creates its own natural hierarchy. — apokrisis

Yep, the answer is always that it is "natural". The core of "scientific" biological reasoning. Coincidentally it is also the core of racist thinking. Something to ponder?

People are going to come to their own actions irrespective of any self-proclaimed privileged position. One can simply state their views, and act upon them, without the need for a hierarchy of "truth". With that said, observe the amount of hypocrisy among the legions of environmentalists. Observing the nature of humans is interesting enough without invoking superiority.

What does such a question mean?

Everyone is evolving in their own way. For some reason, using reasoning, some people just absolutely insist on some artificial hierarchy. It's part of some people's way of seeing things.

People just think in different ways. Some just prefer to think that they think better. It is a hierarchical thing without substance. I'm amused when those of deepest faith and dogma claim to be using reason for their own reasons.

How can you determine whether or not reasoning is valuable when you have to rely on the conventions of reasoning to come up with a reason to value it? — MonfortS26

If course you are correct. Reasoning is entirely self-congratulatory and had no meaning or validity beyond that.

Would you say that is unique of God, or does that purpose extend to his creation, since we also have the ability to create, albeit not quite as impressively? — Qurious

In this regard we can posit that we are all "gods" if this is the nomenclature that one wishes to use.

I red your post -past,I write my post-present, you will read my post-future. But all this is in my mind not in yours or in other people's minds.This proves that there are not any time periods for people as a whole. — vesko

From observation one can say that we experience changes in memory that feels like personal (psychological) time (duration). This is the time we experience. Since it is all memory, we can call it what we will but most c specifically it is there sense of memory evolving.

Call it what you wish, it is if no matter to me. Anytime anyone claims they know the shape of the Earth, I shrug. Every subject has subjective elements.

Dude I think even flat-earthers know it's a bit lumpy. What's your point — unenlightened

The point is that however anyone describes the Earth shape is in error. Anyone. It is an entirely subjective point of view whatever description is used.

Why do we call it a "heartbreak" if not for the feeling — Harry Hindu

Yes, it is a feeling. There are no instruments that can measure feelings or the nature of any experience for that matter. Feelings are an internal experiences which often confound the experiencers themselves.

It also seems the most tortured. If enough people agree that the earth is flat, then they are all mistaken. — unenlightened

In which case, everyone is mistaken about the shape of the Earth, since the Earth does not have a shape. The best we can do is to approximately describe it with error. Everything is constantly changing so any description will always necessarily be in error. Some more so than others depending on the prevailing wind.

This idea of consciousness/Mind playing hide-and-seek with itself is a recurrent theme in mythology. It would be manifestation of what Jung called the collective unconscious. Whether or not Hegel intuited the idea or was somehow influenced by Eastern philosophy (the concept of thesis/antithesis/synthesis is straight out of Daoism) is unclear to me. Either cases are certainly possible.

In case no one has noticed, this passage is pretty much what Hinduism Maya is all about with a sprinkle of Ascetic Hatha Yoga.

If God exists, does God have a purpose for existing? — Qurious

To create.