• How May Esoteric Thinking and Traditions be Understood and Evaluated Philosophically?
    "Effing the ineffable" is the job of art and poetry, not rigorous philosophical discussion. Poetry may be evocative, but it presents no arguments. That which cannot be tested empirically or justified logically is outside the scope of rational argument. That doesn't mean it has no value ...Janus
    :100:
  • How May Esoteric Thinking and Traditions be Understood and Evaluated Philosophically?
    the core of the OP's question. The esoterica of the gaps....Tom Storm
    :up:

    I think it ironic how often Socrates' claim of ignorance is ignored. [ ... ] We remain in the cave of opinion. It is not that we do not know anything, but when we do not know what we do not know and believe we do know we are no longer even in the realm of opinion but ignorance.Fooloso4
    :up: :up:
  • How May Esoteric Thinking and Traditions be Understood and Evaluated Philosophically?
    We can know nothing whatsoever about whatever might be "beyond being". The idea is nothing more than the dialectical opposite of 'being'. Fools have always sought to fill the 'domains' of necessary human ignorance with their "knowing". How much misery this has caused humanity is incalculable.Janus
    :100: :fire:
  • Israel killing civilians in Gaza and the West Bank
    Boundless arrogance?
    — tim wood

    Israel is the law
    — tim wood

    :chin: Kind of making my point for me there, buddy.
    Tzeentch
    :smirk: :up:

    Netanyahu has no right to speak of deradicalizing anyone. He's a radical himself. Hamas is his baby. The murder of Yitzhak Rabin is his brain child. The death of Israel will be in large part his doing.Tzeentch
    :100:
  • How May Esoteric Thinking and Traditions be Understood and Evaluated Philosophically?
    'Esoteric' is [ ... ] an insight into the whole of existenceWayfarer
    This "insight" is partial because existents are only part(icular)s of – ineluctably encompassed by – existence and is, therefore, only "a glance" of an illusion of "the whole". However much a lightning flash momentarily illuminates in the night, the enveloping darkness – the unknown unknown – always remains; an existential reminder that one always already knows that one cannot know ultimately (e.g. Socrates, Pyrrho, Epicurus, Montaigne, Spinoza, Hume-Kant-Wittgenstein ...), which is why philosophy, consisting of questions we do not know (yet) how to answer, always only begins. Btw, Wayf, I don't think it's helpful to further conflate, or confuse, philosophy with mysticism (or with woo :sparkle:) as @Jack Cummins' OP suggests.
  • Israel killing civilians in Gaza and the West Bank
    Bibi's policy of supporting Hamas since 2004 has been expressly to sabotage any "Two State Solution" by keeping the Palestinian population divided between the secular PLA in the West Bank that accepts 'Israel's right to exist' and a religious extremist militia in Gaza that strives to destroy Israel. Netanyahu & co have spent decades creating their own excuses, or pretexts, for systematically massacring and eventually driving the Palestinian population out of Palestinian lands. Lebensraum / Manifest Destiny aka "Greater Israel" policy! What the Irgun & co started in 1947-49, Bibi's Zion-über-alles regime is bloodthirstily hellbent on finishing in 2023-2025.

    ↪180 Proof You're just biased and the guardian is a leftist rag.Benkei
    You're damn right, comrade! :mask:
  • I’m 40 years old this year, and I still don’t know what to do, whether I should continue to live/die
    I don’t know why my mind keeps thinking there’s no real reason to liverossii
    I'm unaware of any "real reason to live" other than that which one gives oneself by taking caring of – investing time in –anything or anyone other than just oneself.

    Maybe it stems from my ethics? - which I found out could be considered negative utilitarianism. It also means I don’t want to cause suffering to others, but I can't seem to ease my own suffering.
    IME, as a fellow negative utilitarian, I've found that anticipating & preventing or reducing just one other person's suffering (or nonperson's pain) daily helps to reduce (or "ease") my own suffering daily. Once it's habitual, rossii, disutilitarianism feels like and becomes a win-win practice (i.e. virtue).

    Besides, killing oneself is a gamble, not a guarantee (or even ascertainable likelihood) that not existing will be better than existing, or that death will end your suffering or despair or interminable boredom. Thus, IMO, it's an irrational act because one (non-pathologically) commits suicide out of blind hope.
  • How May Esoteric Thinking and Traditions be Understood and Evaluated Philosophically?
    Metaphorical thinking may ...

    Images may ...
    Jack Cummins
    ... and they may not. Which is it? What are you talking about, Jack? :roll:
  • How May Esoteric Thinking and Traditions be Understood and Evaluated Philosophically?
    I'll venture to say that those who so dismiss metaphorical thinking can only be hypocrites, for - as per my initial post - they live and breathe in metaphorical thinking just as much as anyone else does.javra
    :100: :up:

    Metaphor, however, is not synonymous with esoterica.


    https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/877179
  • How much Should Infidelity Count Against the Good Works of Famous Figures?
    "great" men like FDR and MLKRogueAI
    "Beware lest a statue slay you."
    ~Freddy Zarathustra
  • How May Esoteric Thinking and Traditions be Understood and Evaluated Philosophically?
    I'm not a Jungian / Campbellian or transperonalist, etc so clarify for me in layman's terms, Jack: Why is "living out mythic aspects of dramas" "extremely important"? Why is "trying to bring together mythos and logos" worth obfuscating them both?
  • How May Esoteric Thinking and Traditions be Understood and Evaluated Philosophically?
    So then you don't have any "tangible examples" of the difference the distinction between "exoteric and esoteric" makes particularly in philosophy?

    Tell me/us why "exoteric" philosophy is not sufficient or in principle, if not practice, fails to do what it sets out to do.
  • How May Esoteric Thinking and Traditions be Understood and Evaluated Philosophically?
    :fire: :up:

    the nature of esoteric forms of philosophyJack Cummins
    Mythos as light that casts shadows of Logos on the cave wall ...

    ... in other words, "esoteric forms" in contrast to reflective (and defeasible) reasoning?

    In this way, the ideas of the esoteric may involve more of a demystification rather than clarification of ideas and understanding.Jack Cummins
    IMO, more like mythification of ideas, etc.
  • Israel killing civilians in Gaza and the West Bank
    Addendum to
    https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/874592

    If the Netanyahu regime walks like 'genocide / ethnic cleansing propagandized as self-defense' and talks like 'genocide / ethnic cleansing propaganized as self-defense' – while they mass murder tens of thousands (to date) and have mass displaced (via e.g. domicide) over two million Palestinian noncombatantsthen, as a US court has recently found (separately from the ICJ's interim report), maybe... :chin:

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/feb/01/genocide-gaza-israel-california-court

    @BitconnectCarlos @RogueAI @schopenhauer1 @tim wood et al
  • What Are You Watching Right Now?
    A first draft of history: "January 6th"

    Democracy on Trial
    Frontline documentary


    aired 30Jan24
  • Thomas Ligotti's Poetic Review of Human Consciousness
    Philosophical Pessimism is debatable...schopenhauer1
    So one can have, or acquire, reasons to choose or not to choose to be a philosophical pessimist (i.e. rationally committed to the idea that it is rationally worse ‐ more than merely not preferable – to exist than to not exist)? I've read a great deal on this topic (including all the "pessimists" cited by T. Ligotti & JF Dienstag) and the arguments either way seem ad hoc (or rationalizations) because the premises are often merely anecdotal.
  • How Different Are Theism and Atheism as a Starting Point for Philosophy and Ethics?
    ↪Corvus
    What is an example of an objective system?

    Each philosopher requires a lot of effort to hear what is being said. Is "objectivity" being able to answer simple questions without all that work?
    Paine
    :up: :up:

    Many folks are just intellectually lazy.

    Not asking for spoon feeding,Corvus
    :roll:
  • How Different Are Theism and Atheism as a Starting Point for Philosophy and Ethics?
    So, what does Spinoza's God do for Spinoza or for the rest of us in this planet?Corvus
    Each reader has to answer that for herself after studying Spinoza (or any other metaphysician) for herself. My spoon-feeding apparently isn't helping you better understand Spinoza's God (i.e. substance/natura naturans (re: reality)).

    Spinoza's substance (i.e. nature or god) is a metaphysical supposition , not an empirical theory.
    — 180 Proof

    How much credence should we give to this supposition?
    Fooloso4
    No more than its logical validity, or reasonableness, can bear.

    Can a finite limited part know the infinite unlimited whole?
    Spinoza argues in the negative.

    What are we to make of the significance of Spinoza's signet ring: "CAUTE"?
    Only that it was a personal reminder like wearing a skull ring or carrying a coin inscribed with "Memento Mori".

    He had good reason to be cautious, but he often seemed more daring then cautious. What was it that he dared not say or said only in a veiled way?
    For starters, that religious sects e.g. Protestant, Catholic & Jewish are merely superstitions which, lacking logically valid arguments (i.e. rationality), anthropomorphically project 'a supernatural personality that superintends the world it also transcends' that each tradition attributes miracles to, petitions with prayers and calls "God".

    I suspect this basic appeal to rationality – critique of Torah & Judaism as consisting of mostly irrational beliefs – got him excommunicated from the Jewish community of Amsterdam, and being a non-Christian outcast in a Christian country (even one as 'tolerant' as Holland) during an era riven by violent schisms and wars of religion who was expelled for irreligion was extremely dangerous – Spinoza's every word and deed, whether overtly irreligious or otherwise unorthodox in any way, were always at risk of being suspect by church and/or civil authorities. Since his philosophy mostly follows necessarily from this appeal to rationality (or PoSR),

    Spinoza's writings were circulated in strictest confidence among intellectuals/scholars he trusted and were, on the prudent advise of friends, published anonymously lifetime or published posthumously.
  • How Different Are Theism and Atheism as a Starting Point for Philosophy and Ethics?
    Spinoza's substance (i.e. nature or god) is a metaphysical supposition , not an empirical theory.
  • US Election 2024 (All general discussion)
    ↪180 Proof I agree:
    • SCOTUS will deny a former President has absolute immunity
    • Trump will be cash constrained at some point this year (not as early as you say)

    I disagree:
    • that Engeron will dissolve the Trump Org in NY; I expect only a fine, commensurate with his savings on interest due to receiving interest rates more favorable than his finances warranted. This will contribute to Trump's cash constraints.

    • that Trump won't be the GOP nominee. This is because 95% of delegates to the GOP nominating convention are committed to vote based on the primaries. They would be freed only if Trump were to drop out of the race - and that won't happen.

    • that the J6 conspiracy trial will have concluded before the election, but even if it is - pending appeals will keep him out of prison. If he's elected, he'll pardon himself and put an end to that.
    Relativist
    We shall see soon enough. :up:
  • How Different Are Theism and Atheism as a Starting Point for Philosophy and Ethics?
    My question is still is there anything which represents "substance" in the actual world?Corvus
    For Spinoza, speculatively substance is the logico-mathematical structure of the universe (as distinct from the empirical contents in the universe) aka "the laws of nature". In other words, Spinoza's substance is like a player piano and "the actual world" is like a waltz it's playing.
  • Thomas Ligotti's Poetic Review of Human Consciousness
    It's why the Trump and Israel threads are dumpster fires.Hanover
    :smirk: :up:
  • Thomas Ligotti's Poetic Review of Human Consciousness
    I also think that people gravitate towards arguments that support their preferences. These arguments can certainly be debated and explored. I think this is about all we have - a conversation that coalesces around personal experience, preferences and the values and beliefs which result from these.Tom Storm
    :up: :up:

    Yeah, reasoning be damned. Unfortunately, even tragicomically, your insight is quite true.

    Happy warrior! :strong:
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    I might have read this out of context
    Is it psychologically uncomfortable for you to ponder that soon Trump could be president again?L'éléphant
    and surmised that you believe it's more likely than not that Biden will lose the 2024 election. My mistake.

    if one believes the current president might not be president next time, things happen. Simple. He could suddenly keel over, for exampleL'éléphant
    IMO, it's merely wishful thinking to believe that the eight year losing trend of 'suppressing minority voters, misogynist anti-choice, The Big Lie propagandizing' Republican candidates will not be reversed merely by Biden dropping out of the presidential race. Like 2020, most likely voters still oppose Insurrection/Criminal Defendent/Rapist-Defamer/Fraudster-1 rather than support President Biden.
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    Why do you believe Biden will lose to a candidate he's already beaten once who has done everything since 2020 to shrink his electoral minority base of support and has not increased it (as well as lead the MAGA-GOP to lose almost every popular vote in general, off-year, midterm & special elections from 2016 to 2023 – AFAIK the most sustained losing streak in US electoral history)?

    :mask:

    Naw, he's just a fleshy manifestation of the American Nightmare.Vera Mont
    :love:
  • TPF Quote Cabinet
    All true emancipatory politics has to have a universal dimension in it. It doesn't mean you renounce your particularity, but you somehow read your particularity as a sign of what is wrong in our universality itself. — Slavoj Žižek
  • Nietzsche is the Only Important Philosopher
    [T]ell me how misinformed I am.schopenhauer1
    Well if you really want to be learn for yourself how misinformed you are ...
    https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/876624
  • Nietzsche is the Only Important Philosopher
    Look, I know he is a philosophical hero of yours, so me maligning might hit a nerve with you.schopenhauer1
    :roll: Again, you should know what you're talking about, schop. As I've posted probably hundreds of times on TPF, (if anything more than a freethinker) I'm an Epicurean-Spinozist and haven't been a Nietzsche fanboy since the 1980s. That your statements about N are ignorant, not that they are "maligning", call for a response. I'd do the same if you or anyone spouted uninformed nonsense about e.g. Heidegger or Derrida both of whom I loathe.
  • US Election 2024 (All general discussion)
    Btw, the J6 Conspiracy criminal trial in Wash. DC will conclude with a guilty verdict on all 4 felony counts by the end of August 2024 or sooner. I'm guessing (soon to be) Felon-1 will not be the GOP candidate by the Fall (or even by July).180 Proof

    "You know, we've got a lot of theories, we just don't have the evidence."
    ~Rudy Giuliani, Co-Conspirator-1

    "You gotta be kidding ... This is the clown show!" ~Rusty Bowers, former Arizona Speaker of the House of Representatives & Trump supporter
  • Nietzsche is the Only Important Philosopher
    I'm not here to "convince" you of anything, schop, just challenge (analyze) claims – expose nonsense, poor reasoning, falsity – and explore (untangle) complex ideas from which we both might learn something insightful in a dialectical exchange. Don't be lazy, man, know what you're talking about; there is no shame in "I don't know" or being attentively silent. :chin:
  • Nietzsche is the Only Important Philosopher
    Perhaps I misunderstand something, but Nietzsche seems at odds with himself. He seems to believe in the "overcoming" of oneself, and the embracing of Suffering in some aesthetic appeal to the Ubermensch who thrives on pain in the idea of manifesting one's own values (power) into the world.schopenhauer1
    :sweat: Yes, you're misunderstanding N completely – put down your dog-earred old copy of Nietzsche for Dummies, schop, and carefully read some of N's books (from The Gay Science onward).
  • How Different Are Theism and Atheism as a Starting Point for Philosophy and Ethics?
    Any idea what the "substance" meant in Spinoza? Could it be Aristotelian? Or something else?Corvus
    Spinoza's conception of substance is derived from – and, in his mind, critically corrects – Aristotle's / Descartes' "idea of substance". For instance, there is necessarily one substance argues Spinoza – thus, acosmisn – rather than many / two substances.
    I understand Spinoza to be (mostly) an acosmist (for whom the cosmos exists though it is not real, only "divinity" (re: the logico-mathematical structure of the cosmos) is real ...)180 Proof
    Simply put, Spinoza's "substance means" 'natura naturans (i.e. reality (which, as he points out, most traditions and his contempories superstitiously called "God")) as distinct from natura naturata (i.e. existents/things)'.

    Again, read Spinoza's Ethics or the SEP article:

    https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/spinoza/#GodNatu

    *

    Anyway, back to the OP's topic (as I understand it) which is the foreground of this thread discussion:

    https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/875902