it is very easy to show how even natural rights are not self evident. — ernestm That proves natural rights are NOT self evident. — ernestm Any chance at all of finding out what your understanding of "self-evident" is? — tim wood

'Self evident' is a tag used by an author to indicate that they are unable to justify or rationalise their conclusion.

There follows discussion of 6 criteria:
1. Trust
2. Accessibility
3. Arguments
4. Not for profit
5. Plagiarism
6. Noblesse oblige

https://crookedtimber.org/2013/07/15/what-makes-a-popular-philosophy-book-a-good-book/

Your thoughts ? — Amity

Biased criteria written by someone trying to maintain the pseudo elitism of professional philosophy.

One really can't argue with the wisdom of Australian bush philosophers, especially when they are holding a medium to large knife.

It is not impossible!! I just factored 10**1000 as 10**500 x 10**500 in my head. — A Seagull
I say numbers, and you give me one number. At least put in the effort and provide numbers. — boethius

You just don't get it, do you!

Yeah, but shame it doesn't include some info on how to throw a boomerang. — A Seagull
You just chuck it sideways, right? — frank

I wouldn't know. :(

something completely impossible such as factoring thousand digit numbers in your head — boethius

It is not impossible!! I just factored 10**1000 as 10**500 x 10**500 in my head.

Yeah, but shame it doesn't include some info on how to throw a boomerang.

If you want to have laws then you have to have enforcement.

So do you prefer anarchy or some form of retribution?

One of my favorite poems, by Lewis Carroll — Frank Apisa

I do think that Lewis Carroll is under appreciated as a philosopher. Perhaps this is because his writings are more a satire of philosophy than a philosophy of satire. (Though I daresay that the Mad Hatter or one of his friends would say that they were the same thing.)

For example. his: 'What I say three times is true' ; 'you are nothing but a pack of cards' and his grin which can exist independent of a face are deeply meaningful and philosophically significant.

A Seagull ? — Pantagruel

Maybe it was just an echo.

You are repeating yourself. Presumably you can do this endlessly — A Seagull — Pantagruel

Liar!

The barter system. — A Seagull
So how did the seller get the item they're bartering? — Isaac

That's none of your business.

It isn't hard to understand the idea of the hedonistic infinity. Consider anything you like or find pleasurable but do keep to higher pleasures - things that engage the intellect, aesthetic sense, etc.; then ask yourself why you find that thing plesaurable. You will have an answer. Ask the same question of that answer and so on. — TheMadFool

You are repeating yourself. Presumably you can do this endlessly.

So far as I can recall astronomers have searched for the same object they see in one part of the sky in the opposite part of the sky, but have not found any corresponding object.

Certainly the analogy of a finite universe as the surface of a sphere is a good one, with the actual space of the universe being a 3 dimensional surface in a 4 dimensional hyperspace.

I explain why I think good, bad, beauty, horror, tragedy, etc. can only be emotions — TranscendedRealms

Words are labels. They are not things in themselves, nor emotions. Though they can be labels for both.

Wonder is too young to understand. Wasted words. — neonspectraltoast

Or perhaps you are just too old?

communism, like it's foundational father socialism, is grounded in covetousness and theft. — Contra Mundum
And there's an economic system that isn't? — Isaac

The barter system.

Well is there ANYTHING that cannot be made into an infinity in this way? Give me an example. — A Seagull
That I don't have to do so long as you accept hedonism leads to an infinity of causes for happiness. — TheMadFool

As I have pointed out before happiness is. End of story.

Your idea of infini9ty of causes or at least an infinity of questions can be applied to any idea. Your failure to provide a viable counter example shows that you implicitly agree with me, albeit perhaps not consciously.

↪A Seagull
One of the things I find happiness in is learning about the universe. — I-wonder

Me too. It is totally fascinating. Which is why I keep doing it.

↪A Seagull
I think you are all right.
I'll try, I hope I'll accept it finally, maybe with more of Spinoza and Epicurus.
BTW, what do you think about Spinoza views on god as nature? — I-wonder

If you want to have a god, then nature is good.

But then learn about nature.

And why does posting that post make you happy? — A Seagull
That's exactly the type of question that kickstarts the hedonistic infinity. — TheMadFool

Well is there ANYTHING that cannot be made into an infinity in this way? Give me an example.

Um, that's exactly my problem, and my question is how can I face the loss of this amazing gift called life. — I-wonder

By living it to the fullest extent of your ability.

An individual life is what is experienced between birth and death. One cannot lose a life, one can only shorten it.

My take on Gödel's incompleteness theorems is that they start with an initial assumption of completeness - ie that every statement that relates to a specific system S is either true or false. The proof (which incorporates basic maths) then leads to an inconsistency. Conclusion: no system that includes basic mathematics is complete.

Yes. that would end the regress but you don't know WHY? X makes you happy. — TheMadFool

And why does posting that post make you happy?

Not to speak for Fool, but I would conclude that there simply is no essence of pleasure. IOW’s it can’t be reduced at all. It is what it is. — Pinprick

Well that would be simplest, and probably undeniable too.

If I say that something, say x, gives me pleasure, it is perfectly ok for someone to ask me "what about x gives me pleasure?" Pfhorrest asked me that exact question. From this it's a small step to the next question "what about that about x, that gives me pleasure, gives me pleasure?" The third question is wating in the wings and so is a fourth and a fifth...ad infinitum. — TheMadFool

So what? What do you conclude from that?

It certainly does not mean that pleasure is infinite, nor even infinitely reducible.

Just because you can ask an infinity of questions, that doesn't make hedonism either infinite or looped. What makes you think that it does? You can ask an infinite number of questions about anything.

Women are good, good enough to start a war. — TheMadFool

I remember seeing a cartoon long ago of Golda Meir and Indira Ghandi, each with a machine gun in her hands, with the by-line : "Women's work is never done'.

↪A Seagull Or maybe because you're traumatized and broken inside and fundamentally incapable of enjoying things that should be intrinsically enjoyable. — Pfhorrest

Yes well that is tragic. People need to fix themselves. But following flawed philosophies and believing lies is not going to help.

Philosophy is like sex, if you are not enjoying it, its 'cos you're not doing it right.

in various Facebook boards, almost all of the 100 replies I got within 3 days were criticisms, were certain, in NO UNCERTAIN terms, that all four gospels are entirely made up, from beginning to end. — ernestm

Just shows you shouldn't believe everything you read on fb, in fact you shouldn't even take any of it seriously.

Interesting point. So how do you particularly think the lying promotes alienation? — schopenhauer1

As I said, but perhaps somewhat ambiguously: 'When people convince other people of the truth of their lies, their (The other peoples) model of the world becomes distorted with the inevitable consequence of alienation from the world. If their world does not make sense, they will feel alienated.

"Man's feeling of homelessness, of alienation has been intensified in the midst of a bureaucratized, impersonal mass society. He has come to feel himself an outsider even within his own human society. He is terribly alienated: a stranger to God, to nature, and to the gigantic social apparatus that supplies his material wants.But the worst and final form of alienation, toward which indeed the others tend, is man's alienation from his own self. In a society that requires of man only that he perform competently his own particular social function, man becomes identified with this function, and the rest of his being is allowed to subsist as best it can - usually to be dropped below the surface of consciousness and forgotten." — Zeus
Good quote, Zeus. The only addendum here I have to add is this quote implies that there is some solution or salvation to be had. "If only we designed society like X, we can get out of this". — schopenhauer1

Well yes I like this quote too.

My only suggestion for a 'solution' - if there is one - (and worth no more than 2p I expect), is that people at least try to speak the truth. And for other people not to believe the lies. When people lie and convince other people of the truth of their lies, their model of the world becomes distorted with the inevitable consequence of alienation from the world.

And everyone lies, from politicians to sales people and including moralists, theologians and even philosophers.

There is nothing that can be understood, known or experienced outside of consciousness. Therefore, consciousness is all that exists. — h060tu

Solipsism in a nutshell.

I think it´s pretty obvious. It´s a sideeffect of neurons firing information. — InfiniteMonkey

'Obvious'? How so?

The OP is like a recipe for an omelette that insists that no eggs must be broken in the process.

Communism is a lie.

↪Banno ↪A Seagull

Since he apparently is directing his question to himself...

...I wonder why he does not have an answer? — Frank Apisa

Who knows? Everyone is entitled to their dreams.

Where is the flaw? — bizso09

There is no flaw; I am entirely convinced. ;)