• Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    This hush money conviction is no big deal.
    — Hanover

    Is it?

    Trump isn't constrained by any moral code. The only constraint on his behavior is the legal code, and then - only if a solid case can be made. Prosecuting Trump for this minor crime reminds me of the prosecution of Al Capone, for tax evasion.     — Relativist
    :up: :up:
  • Is atheism illogical?
    ↪flannel jesus
    Sure, anything can be believed. My point (re: D), however, is inferred.
  • Is atheism illogical?
    A. Theism=I know there's a God;
    B. Atheism = I do not know whether there's a God;
    C. Agnosticism = I cannot know whether there is a God; and
    D. Anti-Theism = I know there is not a God.     — AmadeusD
    A. I believe in a God.
    B. I do not believe in a God.
    C. I do not know whether or not there is a God.
    D. I claim that 'theism is not true, therefore theistic deities are fictions, and therefore theistic religions (i.e. ritualized delusions) are immoral'.

    ABC are standard definitions and D is nonstandard (which I prefer).
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    I don't see these charges resulting in jail time anyway. — Hanover
    :ok:
  • Kant's ethic is protestant
    Kant was a Lutheran (Pietist) who strove 'to limit reason in order to make room for faith' and so his practical reason (e.g. deontology) was faith-based, no?
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    A simple change of venue would have been an appropriate fix. How would you go about finding an impartial court and jury? — NOS4A2
    The obvious lesson here, just as in the previous 3 civil law suits: DO NOT DEFAME, SEXUAL ASSUALT, DEFRAUD OR MAKE/TAKE UNLAWFUL CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS THAT YOU THEN HAVE TO COVER-UP in a jurisdiction – your hometown! – where you have been very unpopular (as a known bankrupted grifter buffoon & racist bully) for 4-5 decades. Not too effing bright! – and then you (and your "poorly educated" horde of cultists) whine whine whine on about it like most common criminals do. :sweat:

    First of all, the chance of Trump spending even a day in prison is zero. — Relativist
    Well, my guess (today, 31May24) is that Convicted Felon-1 will be sentenced to 2-4 years for each of the 34 felonies that will run concurrently (so that if only 1 felony survives the appeal process, he will still serve 2-4 years in prison), probably starting in spring 2025. The basis of sentencing will be Convict-1's (a) conspicuous lack of contrition, (b) 10 criminal contempt citations & (c) continuous post-trial attacks on witnesses, jurors, prosecutors et al as well as (d) the scope of the predicate crime (that his co-conspirator Michael Cohen was sentenced to a 3 year prison term by the Feds) that he covered-up in 20i6 & the need to deter him from committing the same 2016 crimes again in 2024.

    Also, those 10 criminal contempt citations violate the terms of Convict-1's pretrial release in each of the other 3 juridictions where he has been indicted. While it is unlikely his bail release in either Georgia or Florida will be revoked, it's quite possible that as early as July (after SCOTUS either punts (or does not) or rules that a POTUS has "absolute immunity"), the DC District Judge Chutkan can order Convict-1 remanded to jail until his trial starts. This happens everyday to thousands of criminal defendants, indicted for violent and nonviolent crimes, all across the US in local, state & federal courts – it'll be more egregious special treatment if Convict-1 isn't jailed for violating his pre-trial release (re: criminal contempt of court in NY 10 times).


    Political considerations aside, I wonder what TPF's resident lawyers think @Maw @Ciceroianus @Hanover (@Benkei) et al :chin:
  • Thrasymachus' echo throughout history.
    "Might makes right" now (i.e. zerosum); however, reciprocal might deters wrongs (i.e. non-zerosum). I suspect even Thrasymachus would agree.
  • The essence of religion
    Dogmatism can creep in anywhere. — Mikie
    True. However, dogmatism is always anathema to 'reflective inquiry' (or dialectics & contemplating aporias) and usually consistent with – follows from – 'faith' (or undecidable (e.g. merely subjective, supernatural) beliefs).
  • US Election 2024 (All general discussion)
    1. Convicted Whiny Bitch Felon-1
    2. Convicted Whiny Bitch Felon-1
    3. Convicted Whiny Bitch Felon-1
    4. Convicted Whiny Bitch Felon-1
    5. Convicted Whiny Bitch Felon-1
    6. Convicted Whiny Bitch Felon-1
    7. Convicted Whiny Bitch Felon-1
    8.Convicted Whiny Bitch Felon-1
    9.Convicted Whiny Bitch Felon-1
    10. Convicted Whiny Bitch Felon-1
    11. Convicted Whiny Bitch Felon-1
    12. Convicted Whiny Bitch Felon-1
    13. Convicted Whiny Bitch Felon-1
    14. Convicted Whiny Bitch Felon-1
    15. Convicted Whiny Bitch Felon-1
    16. Convicted Whiny Bitch Felon-1
    17. Convicted Whiny Bitch Felon-1
    18.Convicted Whiny Bitch Felon-1
    19.Convicted Whiny Bitch Felon-1
    20. Convicted Whiny Bitch Felon-1
    21. Convicted Whiny Bitch Felon-1
    22. Convicted Whiny Bitch Felon-1
    23. Convicted Whiny Bitch Felon-1
    24. Convicted Whiny Bitch Felon-1
    25. Convicted Whiny Bitch Felon-1
    26. Convicted Whiny Bitch Felon-1
    27. Convicted Whiny Bitch Felon-1
    28.Convicted Whiny Bitch Felon-1
    29.Convicted Whiny Bitch Felon-1
    30. Convicted Whiny Bitch Felon-1
    31. Convicted Whiny Bitch Felon-1
    32. Convicted Whiny Bitch Felon-1
    33. Convicted Whiny Bitch Felon-1
    34. Convicted Whiny Bitch Felon-1

    Not playing on Fox Noise, OAN, RT, Alex Jones or anyother MAGA/Putin propaganda outlet:
  • The essence of religion
    I see little difference between religion and philosophy— both ask very universal, difficult, extra-ordinary questions about existence. — Mikie
    In my mind that "little difference" is this: philosophy (logos) begins with questions we do not (yet) know how to answer and proceeds by reasoning towards more probative questions (re: reflective inquiry as a way of life :fire:) whereas religion (mythos) begins with answers we are "commanded" not to question and proceeds by faith in obeying such unquestioned answers (re: surrender as a way of life :pray:).
  • US Election 2024 (All general discussion)
    Now I can't wait for the June (debate") between Sleepy Dark Brandon and (probably no show) Convicted Felon-1. :lol:

    https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/907663
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    30May24

    Today in Trumpenfreude

    1. NYC felony indictment
    31Mar23 :up:
    "34 counts of Business Documents Fraud Crealing and/or Covering-up Felonies", etc

    https://apnews.com/article/trump-indictment-full-document-640043319549?utm_source=homepage&utm_medium=RelatedStories&utm_campaign=position_02     — 180 Proof

    "The Orange Turd" has been flushed! :party:

    https://www.politico.com/news/2024/05/30/donald-trump-guilty-hush-money-trial-00160460

    LOCK HIM UP! :clap:

    update:

    https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/907730
  • US Election 2024 (All general discussion)
    Simon Rosenberg on C-Span, 24May24


    Addendum to
    https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/895573
  • Israel killing civilians in Gaza and the West Bank
    By the way, Israel does not represent Jews globally. It doesn't even represent all Jews within its borders. Many are adamantly opposed to Israel's malpractices. — Tzeentch
    :up: :up:

    Jewish nation-state — schopenhauer1
    i.e. ethnonationalist colonizer-settler apartheid regime
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    ↪Punshhh
    :up:
  • Israel killing civilians in Gaza and the West Bank
    Fuck oppressor-apologists.
  • The essence of religion
    Purpose ... Perhaps? — Outlander
    "Purpose" in the context, as I've pointed out previously, seems to me a (sublimated) quest for symbolic/magical immortality (motivated (driven) by the fear of disease dying & death).

    ↪ENOAH
    :up:
  • The essence of religion
    ↪ENOAH
    What I understand the OP question about "the essence of religion" to mean pertains to the (speculative) cultural-anthropological origin of religion and not how contemporary people use religious practice in their daily lives. For some, perhaps religion functions as "seeking truth" as you say, ENOAH; I suspect, however, that several hundreds of generations ago primeval humans were in the thrall of profound ignorance of, and helplessness before, the fact of imminent decay dying & death (i.e. mortality) and told themselves self-consoling fairytales and made propitiating sacrifices to 'good fairies for "protection" from evil fairies' as ritualized anti-anxiety terror management (i.e. religion).
  • The essence of religion
    Death is only an issue if one first cares about dying. — Constance
    I.e. if one is a sentient, self-aware mortal.
  • The essence of religion
    I think it started as pure philosophy, then wandered into superstition and lost its way in organized religion. — Vera Mont
    What do you mean by "pure philosophy" and how does "superstition" follow from it?

    Religion, to me, is about, and rises out of, [ ... ] questions arise that cannot be answered leading to suffering. Many religions thus aim to reconcile this difference by denying it. Thus, ”all is one”, ”experience of self is an illusion” etc. — Jussi Tennilä
    :up:

    Fear of death is downstream from the realisation of this distinction between ”I” and ”other”.
    I differ with this only in the order of experience/realization: developmentally humans experience death¹, therefore instinctively fear it, long before realizing – those who do explicitly – that the 'I-world duality is irreconcible (or even irreparable)', which compounds the fear (i.e. suffering) that requires relief and succor in degrees of self-consoling reality-denial (e.g. dreams of / quests for symbolic / magical immortality) aka "religion".


    ¹After all, death was far more ubiquitious and impactful thousands of generations ago, long before language & culture took hold, and we have always consumed dead things in order to survive.
  • Imagining a world without the concept of ownership
    ↪Vera Mont
    :100:

    Folks might like to read 'The Dispossessed', by Ursula K LeGuin, for a plausible imagining of a cooperative anarchy. — unenlightened
    Terrific story. :up:

    In a similar vein, Iain M. Bank's Culture series of an AI-managed post-scarcity, interstellar civilization-wide anarchy...

    The background of the question is a kind of genealogy of ownership. — frank
    I think property, not "ownership" (mine-ness), is optional – a venn diagram from the least artificial and essential social arrangement to the most artificial and inessential: personal property (one's own mindbody (re: responsibilities), clothes, tools / labor, leisure), communal property (commons), public property ('republic', city / town, roads / waterways), and private property ('codified' scarcity-re/production, ergo class-caste conflicts) – [personal [communal [public [ private ]]]].
  • Is atheism illogical?
    hope is more of a religious thing.
    — Fire Ologist

    Wrong way around. Hope is a human thing and therefore religion.     — Vera Mont
    :fire:
  • The essence of religion
    ↪Tom Storm
    :up:

    The warning was "If ye eat from the Tree, ye will surely die", as opposed to "instantly die". — Outlander
    ... or as opposed to the truth: "I, the Lord thy God, shall condemn thee to suffer and die. :roll:
  • Israel killing civilians in Gaza and the West Bank
    [T]he corresponding UN Security Council resolutions make exactly this argument - that Israel was making any peace deal impossible by creating facts on the ground that are basically irreversible. That was exactly the goal of the settlement policy. — Tzeentch
    :100: :up:
  • Israel killing civilians in Gaza and the West Bank
    And that's why Netanyahu supported so eagerly Hamas, those Palestinians that are against a negotiated two state solution. — ssu
    :100:
  • Israel killing civilians in Gaza and the West Bank
    ↪Mikie
    :up: :up:
  • The essence of religion
    We start off with freedom. [ ... ] What do you want with knowing? — ENOAH
    There is no "freedom" without "knowing" (e.g. the difference between being free and not being free). To be free from ignorance is the capacity to be free for learning, knowing, understanding and then freeing others. I read the biblical creation myth this way: "Adam and Eve" were slaves punished with mortality by The Master for learning that they do not have to be slaves by learning to disobey (i.e. how to free themselves). :fire:
  • The essence of religion
    ↪Hanover
    I did not anwhere claim or imply your "religion in opposition to science" strawman. Also, read the OP and thread title: "essence" is @Constance's term and not mine. :roll:
  • The essence of religion
    religion deals explicitly with metaphysics — Astrophel
    Yes, death – ritually denying, or wishing away, its finality (i.e. anti-anxiety terror management (E. Becker)).
  • The essence of religion
    Isn't everything a magical quest for immortality ...? — Outlander
    Nope.

    ↪Moses
    Go away troll.

    ↪ENOAH
    :up:
  • The essence of religion
    ↪ENOAH
    I'm not "frustrated" with anything, least of all religion. Stick to what I've actually written as I don't have a hidden, or sublimated, agenda. The history of religious practices (e.g. oracles / prophesies, scaoegoating, heresies, martyrs, persecutions, schisms, missionaries, holy wars, etc) speaks loudly for itself – quests for magical/miraculous "immortality" (i.e. escape from (denial of) mortality). Maybe some religious folk "seek truth" as you say, ENOAH, but they are outliers and do not constitute, as several millennia of history shows, the essence, or raison d'etre, of religion as such.
  • The essence of religion
    The essence of religion is seek truth; and it holds true in its authentic practice. — ENOAH
    If so, then why are religions not founded on public impersonal objective truths and are not daily practices (celebrations) of rigorous public error-correction?

    After all, the Abrahamic tradition begins with a woman disobeying "the Lord" who forbade her from eating fruit from a "Tree of Knowledge" (truth): Hebrew (JCI) scriptures depict "the original sin" as a woman thinking for herself by "seeking truth". :naughty:

    Obeying "the Lord" (and his anointed/appointed pimps) in order to avoid punishment (fear), not "seeking truth", seems to me religion's historically manifest "essence".

    https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/904100
  • Vervaeke-Henriques 'Transcendent Naturalism'
    TN is the natural and common state of most [hep]cats. — tim wood
    :smirk: :up:
  • Wittgenstein the Socratic
    There is mental floss and there is philosophy. Mental floss can be part of philosophy, but in the way that doing math exercises helps strengthen your math abilities.. You aren't really a mathematician unless you use some of those skills for constructing proofs, etc. — schopenhauer1
    :up: :up:

    Questioning takes priority over answers. — Fooloso4
    a matter of inquiry not solving problems with definitive answers — Fooloso4
    ... these hypotheses do not put an end to questioning. They lead to and guide further questioning. — Fooloso4
    ↪Fooloso4
    :fire:
  • Vervaeke-Henriques 'Transcendent Naturalism'
    ↪Tom Storm
    :up:
  • Vervaeke-Henriques 'Transcendent Naturalism'
    I can make no sense of "Transcendent Naturalism." Does anyone here have the ambition to try make some sense of the term in a sentence or two, or three? — tim wood
    :wink: FWIW, here's a sentence:

    Plebian philosophical naturalist that I am, the only sense I can make of the term "transcendent naturalism" (pace @Wayfarer) is as a conception of beings-in-nature (e.g. embodied subjects) that is both (A) "beyond" subjective – neither anthropocentric nor egocentric (i.e. impersonal) – and (B) "beyond" super-natural – encompassed by unbounded immanence insofar as nature transcends whatever happens in nature because nature (and its constituents (e.g. embodied subjects)) cannot transcend nature (à la (e.g.) Epicureanism, Spinozism, Zapffe-Camus' absurdism & other anti-cartesianisms / anti-platonisms) – which is (C) epistemically consistent with (corroborated by?) human facticity, everyday ordinary experience, historicity-historiography and modern natural sciences ("Thus, we have art [make believe, magical thinking, woo-woo] in order not to perish from the truth" ~Nietzsche). :fire:
  • Hobbies
    If you are planning to visit Madrid one day, I am your trustworthy Local Guide user! — javi2541997
    :cool: :up:
  • Quantifier Variance, Ontological Pluralism, and Other Fun Stuff
    If there is something left for philosophy to do, I haven't been able to figure out what that is, and god knows I've tried. — Srap Tasmaner
    Idling semantic quibbles aside, do you mean "academic philosophy" or "amateur philosophy" or "way of life philosophy"?

    Consider this: these variations of philosophy each "do" different things with, at minimum, the same praxis: reflective inquiry – problematizing aporias, or what we do not / cannot know or understand about what we think we know or what we misunderstand – that reasons towards more probative questions we still do not know how to answer (i.e. philosophical truthes (?)). So, IMO, it does not make sense to apply the notion of "something left to do" to philosophy any more than it does to apply it to other interminable practices (which resemble J. Carse's "infinite games") like martial arts, public health & sanitation, natural sciences, history & politics, personal hygiene, logic & mathematics, fine arts, etc.
  • Wittgenstein and How it Elicits Asshole Tendencies.
    ↪schopenhauer1
    Idk, I've only taken "the blue pill" and suspect that "the red pill" only shows that all pills are "blue".
  • In any objective morality existence is inherently good
    What does 'rodeo clowning bulls' mean? — bert1
    The opposite of "trolling".
Home » 180 Proof