What makes a life examined is the continued practice of examination and the correction or amendment my thoughts and actions and attitudes when it seems appropriate. — Fooloso4

Appropriate to what, by what standards?

I think that for one's moral stance to be strong, one has to believe that it's not merely one's own, subjective, partial, biased view, but that it intimately has something to do with "how things really are", ie. that it is objective, beyond mere subjectivity.
— baker
Why does my lone perception carry less moral validity than some one's imagined consensus with the universe? — Cheshire

I'm not sure whether you're actually asking this, or whether it is just part of your discussion.

And yet you provide no philosophy at all, just a lament your excuses aren't taken seriously. — Hanover

What excuses? Copy-paste them.

How could it possibly end well??

Democracy is what brought us a police state and cutthroat capitalism.

Note I said "most universal" not 'only or absolutely universal'. I meant universal in the sense of general. Do you have a criticism of those criteria, instead of a caricature? Can you outline alternatives that are as or more universal? — Janus

I see now you meant 'universal' in that sense, not as in 'most present in various lists of criteria for how to examine one's life'.

And that is why it cannot be reduced to a formula. Each case, each particular, must be examined as to whether it should be regarded as such. But this cannot be done with also questioning what the good, and just, and noble are. Socrates was not satisfied with what is said to be good, just, and noble, he spent his life inquiring about such things. — Fooloso4

I want you to spell out the assumptions you're working with. Ie. your assumptions about what it is that makes a life "examined".

I imagine Hitler, for example, spent quite a bit of time in self-examination.
Why shouldn't his count as an "examined life"?
What are the assumptions based on which it is assumed that someone like Hitler did not live an examined life?

We have capitalism. End of story.

And you wonder why there is a negative image of psychologists ....

Read again what I said.

It's not possible to justify moral realism while being a consequent moral realist.

It is not lost if we believe in it. Probably in a capitalist Era is difficult but we can work together and establish some moral and ethical principles. — javi2541997

But on the grounds of what? It serves the purposes of capitalism if people are willing to be violent toward eachother, if they are competitive in a life and death manner.

I've been through periods of cynicism myself. Like when I discovered Chogyam Trungpa had died of alcoholism after I'd been telling everyone how great he was, and when that book about Krishnamurti's affair with Rosalind Rajagopal Sloss came out. That would have been in the early 90's, I think or maybe it was the 80's. I also had an encounter with infamous guru Adi Da, mainly through his books, although did actually even go and meet his emmisaries, before the scandal broke. — Wayfarer

It's not cynicism. I grew up in a traditionally Catholic country where it is normal for the priest to have illegitimate children, or a least be an obvious glutton or drunkard. I guess it's hard for an outsider to understand how ordinary this seems to us. So when I got older and saw other spiritual leaders get involved in scandals with sex, drugs, money, and guns, this seemed nothing out of the ordinary. But what gets to me is how they make excuses and justifications for being that way. I understand that people routinely don't live up to what they preach, and I don't take much issue with it. It's when they invent justifications for being that way that I can't quite stomach it. But what is the absolute deal breaker for me is blasphemy. I just can't get past that. For example, I can get past a Theravada Buddhist monk handling money, drinking alcohol, or having a girlfriend, but I just can't get past it if he doesn't have a respectful attitude toward Buddhist sacred objects. Like if he bows to a Buddha statue in haste, or puts the paper with a Dhamma talk on the floor. I feel a visceral revulsion then, I see such a person as someone toward whom to keep an absolute distance.

A lot of what goes on, or at least some of it, in that space is delusional and self-seeking, that's for sure. But ultimately, I realised there must be a real dimension to it. 'Without gold, there would be no fool's gold' is an oft-quoted saying.

How did you realize that?? By implication?

Just because people seek the Holy Grail doesn't mean the Holy Grail actually exists, or that it is what they originally set out believing it is.

I hadn't heard of 'nordic walking', although I intend to do a bit of bushwalking myself the next couple of months, we have lots of nice trails in our area.

It's good to use poles, so that the arms do some of the work.

We have to develop a better educational system and teach how bad the violence is. I feel we are living in an Era where people literally do not care about harm others. For this reason, it is time to focus on Ethics and provide more empathy along our relationships. — javi2541997

As long as we live in a capitalist society, the above is a lost cause.

I've heard variations on Tolstoy's assertion for decades too. People who chase higher consciousness and unification with the divine are often crass, status seeking individuals, as wracked by anxieties and ambition and as willing to scorn their 'inferiors' as any other group. — Tom Storm

I've become inclined to think that this is actually what spirituality is all about, and what it means to be spiritual -- but sans the anxiety.

Ah, why do I bother.

*sigh*
What a right-winger. Always blame the other person. Always place the whole responsibility for the quality of the communication on the other person. Just vote for Trump, honey.

The original data showed that the vaccines had an effective rate in the 90+%, J and J slightly lower. Had enough people vaccinated, covid as it existed then would have been eradicated. — Hanover

Enough people couldn't have vaccinated early on, even if they wanted to, because there wasn't enough of the vaccine, and in many countries, there still isn't. Like India, where Delta is from.

The reintroduction of masks and threats of shut down are caused by the irrational decision of the anti-vax people, who have convinced themselves that their right to die of the delta variant is sacred. If I were permitted to let you die and not be forced to heroically exhaust common resources to treat you, I'd buy into your Randian libertarian wet dream and let God sort out your bad decisions. But we don't live by that ethic today. If today's ethics require I protect against Darwin, they require you play along too.

Oh god. Millenia of philosophy down the drain.

Mankind will probably recover from covid, but less likely from the stupidity and hostility with which so many people respond to it.

Oh, what a spiritual person you are.

*sigh*
I'm saying that the gender differentiation in sensuality biased toward the female form isn't nearly as pronounced as you claim it is.

*sigh*

Since, let's say, 1900 (the period in which the vast share of human fine arts, knowledge and technologies have been created and accumulated), I wonder what the percentage of intellectual leaders (i.e. confirmed & influential geniuses) from across all academic disciplines are/were elite-born and raised. I'll bet my last two bit(coin)s that even a cursory survey shows it's less than 10%, thereby refuting baker's notion, if I understand her/him correctly, that tertiary education is best left only to the elite-born & raised since working class and middle class aspirants only dumb it – civilization & culture – down and are good for nothing more than "vocational training". — 180 Proof

Please remind us how global warming and global pollution have come about!

Now with this kind of voter population, you think a functioning democracy can be created with voters following politics and choosing better candidates from others? — ssu

Why should the Afghans have democracy? Can you justify?

We have democracy, and what good has it done us?

*sigh*
The popular perception of incest is what this thread is about.
Popular perception is not based on statistics.

*sigh*

As a raving heterosexual with mostly like-minded friends, this divorce between gendered sensuality and gendered sexuality is slightly mysterious to me. — Kenosha Kid

It's more that it is culturally acceptable for men to talk openly -- and crudely -- about their view of the female body, but not so much for women to talk about their view of the male body.
Clearly, you don't have enough female friends/don't spend enough time with them.


Other than that, by default, people are obsessed with their own bodies, they see their own bodies as objects of sensuality/sexuality. Because of this, they see the bodies of others also as objects of sensuality/sexuality. If one doesn't see one's own body as an object of sensuality/sexuality, one will not see others as objects of sensuality/sexuality.


For more, I'll just quote the Buddha on this:

A woman attends inwardly to her feminine faculties, her feminine gestures, her feminine manners, feminine poise, feminine desires, feminine voice, feminine charms. She is excited by that, delighted by that. Being excited & delighted by that, she attends outwardly to masculine faculties, masculine gestures, masculine manners, masculine poise, masculine desires, masculine voices, masculine charms. She is excited by that, delighted by that. Being excited & delighted by that, she wants to be bonded to what is outside her, wants whatever pleasure & happiness that arise based on that bond. Delighting, caught up in her femininity, a woman goes into bondage with reference to men. This is how a woman does not transcend her femininity.

"A man attends inwardly to his masculine faculties, masculine gestures, masculine manners, masculine poise, masculine desires, masculine voice, masculine charms. He is excited by that, delighted by that. Being excited & delighted by that, he attends outwardly to feminine faculties, feminine gestures, feminine manners, feminine poise, feminine desires, feminine voices, feminine charms. He is excited by that, delighted by that. Being excited & delighted by that, he wants to be bonded to what is outside him, wants whatever pleasure & happiness that arise based on that bond. Delighting, caught up in his masculinity, a man goes into bondage with reference to women. This is how a man does not transcend his masculinity.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an07/an07.048.than.html

He then goes on to explain how femininity/masculinity are transcended.

The typical hourglass shape coveted by men is a sign of good reproductive health; wider hips allow childbirth to be easier, for example. — Pinprick

Not relevant anymore.

Hormonal contraceptives (widely used) change the distribution of fat on a woman's body, so she doesn't have a(s much of a) hourglass shape anymore, but looks more like a man, with the torso going in parallel lines from shoulders to hips. You can look at the latest research as to what shape of a woman's body is most appealing currently. It's not the hourglass anymore.

More and more births in the developed word nowadays are by C-section (by some estimates, about a half), not vaginally. The wide-hips argument is becoming obsolete.

How is it possible to be a “non-committed” theist? — Jan Ardena

You're one, per your own admission:

So are you a functional member of a religious community?
— baker

Not at the moment. — Jan Ardena

No, but it's not morality either, which involves how we ought to act toward each other. If there's no other (either in one's reality, or in one's calculus) then there's no moral question to answer. — Isaac

So you wouldn't consider, for example, masturbation a moral issue?

But if University is free then perhaps that part won't matter? — Tom Storm

It always matters. Even if university education is free, one would still need considerable resources in order to be able to keep up with those who could readily afford the tuition, so that one could still viably compete for internships, network, etc..

This is esp. pronounced in the humanities and esp. in the arts when students are aiming to graduate from knowledge of a culture to which they cannot afford to belong.

I'm trying to establish if you think there is something about poor or 'not rich' people intrinsic to education other than access to resource or potential connections.

I don't think poverty mentality is intrinsic to poor people, as long as they stay within the bounds of what is realistically possible for them. But it rears its head when a person tries to live far above what they can afford.

Like in the above example of finding yourself calculating how many hours you need to work in order to be able to pay for a theater play ticket: sure, you might still go ahead and buy it and go see that play. But your experience of it will be marred with the knowledge that you had to make sacrifices; you will not be able to "enjoy" the play. Eventually, you'll end up resenting the theater, or idolizing it. Either way, you won't be able to establish a critical attitude toward it, the way you're supposed to according to art theory. It'll be too personal for you.

Back when I was in college I took a class in philosophy and one of the philosophies touched upon was the eastern philosophy of Zen. Part of the Zen philosophy is about "living in the moment" and a classic story in the Zen philosophy is a story where a man is being chased by a tiger, he comes to a cliff and he's hanging over the edge of a cliff by a vine. He sees a strawberry on the vine, he plucks it and pops it in his mouth, it is wonderfully delicious. — HardWorker

I heard that in an older version of the story, there is no strawberry, but a poisonous fruit, and that a Buddhist teacher, wanting to appeal to a Western audience, made some changes to the story.

Also, the imagery is symbolic: the first tiger represents one's heedless desires that drive one to the edge of a dangerous cliff; the second tiger below are the looming dangers of having acted on those desires; the two mice are the passage of time; the strawberry is the distraction from looking earnestly at one's situation.


Be that as it may, let's look at an early Buddhist sutta and what it says about how to have a good day:

You shouldn’t chase after the past
or place expectations on the future.
What is past
is left behind.
The future
is as yet unreached.
Whatever quality is present
you clearly see right there,
right there.
Not taken in,
unshaken,
that’s how you develop the heart.
Ardently doing
what should be done today,
for—who knows?— tomorrow
death.
There is no bargaining
with Mortality & his mighty horde.
Whoever lives thus ardently,
relentlessly
both day & night,
has truly had an auspicious day:1
So says the Peaceful Sage.

Note how the text talks about things one should do and those one shouldn't do.

The text then further explains the key terms:

“And how, monks, does one chase after the past? One gets carried away with the delight of ‘In the past I had such a form [body]’ … ‘In the past I had such a feeling’ … ‘In the past I had such a perception’ … ‘In the past I had such a fabrication” … ‘In the past I had such a consciousness.’ This is called chasing after the past.

“And how does one not chase after the past? One does not get carried away with the delight of ‘In the past I had such a form’ … ‘In the past I had such a feeling’ … ‘In the past I had such a perception’ … ‘In the past I had such a fabrication” … ‘In the past I had such a consciousness.’ This is called not chasing after the past.

“And how does one place expectations on the future? One gets carried away with the delight of ‘In the future I might have such a form’ … ‘In the future I might have such a feeling’ … ‘In the future I might have such a perception’ … ‘In the future I might have such a fabrication” … ‘In the future I might have such a consciousness.’ This is called placing expectations on the future.

“And how does one not place expectations on the future? One does not get carried away with the delight of ‘In the future I might have such a form’ … ‘In the future I might have such a feeling’ … ‘In the future I might have such a perception’ … ‘In the future I might have such a fabrication” … ‘In the future I might have such a consciousness.’ This is called not placing expectations on the future.

“And how is one taken in with regard to present qualities? There is the case where an uninstructed run-of-the-mill person who has not seen the noble ones, is not versed in the teachings of the noble ones, is not trained in the teachings of the noble ones, sees form as self, or self as possessing form, or form as in self, or self as in form.

“He/she sees feeling as self, or self as possessing feeling, or feeling as in self, or self as in feeling.

“He/she sees perception as self, or self as possessing perception, or perception as in self, or self as in perception.

“He/she sees fabrications as self, or self as possessing fabrications, or fabrications as in self, or self as in fabrications.

“He/she sees consciousness as self, or self as possessing consciousness, or consciousness as in self, or self as in consciousness. This is called being taken in with regard to present qualities.

“And how is one not taken in with regard to present qualities? There is the case where a disciple of the noble ones who has seen the noble ones, is versed in the teachings of the noble ones, is well-trained in the teachings of the noble ones, does not see form as self, or self as possessing form, or form as in self, or self as in form.

“He/she does not see feeling as self, or self as possessing feeling, or feeling as in self, or self as in feeling.

“He/she does not see perception as self, or self as possessing perception, or perception as in self, or self as in perception.

“He/she does not see fabrications as self, or self as possessing fabrications, or fabrications as in self, or self as in fabrications.

“He/she does not see consciousness as self, or self as possessing consciousness, or consciousness as in self, or self as in consciousness. This is called not being taken in with regard to present qualities.


This is what "living in the moment" is about. But this certainy isn't the popular image of it.

I agree that Westerners, and perhaps people in general, tend to pick the easy bits and ignore the discipline and the hard work. — Apollodorus

Not only that. But many people interested in Zen seem to think that Zen is a kind of "anything goes"; that if they are "just doing their own thing", they can call it "Zen". It's bizarre. How did it come to this???

I'll put it that way: If you find yourself calculating how many hours you need to work in order to be able to pay for a theater play ticket or a book of philosophy, then you're too poor for art and philosophy.

That people are educated is a really important issue. — ssu

The question is, educated in what? "Educated" as in being a member of the socio-economic elite, or as in vocational training?

↪baker Interesting. I personally agree that way too many people go to university and that many attain degrees and remain impervious to both knowledge and wisdom. — Tom Storm

Not simply impervious to knowledge and wisdom. But in order for knowledge to have a chance to become wisdom, the person has to meet the socio-economic requirements for such a process. The poor usually can't meet those requirements. There is a kind of misery that only the educated poor know.

This is not to say that the poor cannot be wise about anything; it's just that they cannot be wise about fancy academic topics.

allowing for (more) nepotism and cronyism
— baker
Not sure i understand how that helps. Trump University?

Democarcy and egalitarianism are harmful, counterproductive for academia, which is by its nature elitist and competitive.

Don't be a dickhead. — schopenhauer1

*sigh*
I couldn't be if I wanted to.

We follow our own ethical guidelines all the time. I didn't say it has to be enforced by an outside entity. You can argue that no one follows ethical guidelines, only what is in their self-interest at the time, but you have not presented that. All ad hom, no philosophy. Come back when you want to offer something.

*sigh*
You're the one asking about whether something is permissible or not.

Well, my compassion is limited, and you've maxed out on it.

If forced to choose one institution, which would you choose as the most powerful in the world today? — Xtrix

The institution of contempt.

Putting births aside, incest is extremely hardwired in most cultures (all?) as being unacceptable. If it weren't for the babies part, what makes it feel repugnant? — Manuel

Taboos tend to have to do with things that people are assumed to want to do, but which collective social wisdom says it would be better not to do it.

So from this perspective, it is a sssumed that as a given, people want to have sex with some of their close blood relatives, and that this desire must be kept in check, via a taboo.
Similarly the way small children need to be taught not to put just anything into their mouths, even though they want to.

Or, more generally, it is a sssumed that as a given, people want to have sex, and that this desire must be kept in check, via a taboo, and that people must be taught who is a suitable prospective sex partner, and who isn't. This suitability is understood in terms of biology/physiology as well as in socio-economic terms.

You could say this same ...
— baker

You could, I wouldn't. — Fooloso4

Why not? I summon you to clarify your criteria for what type of examination counts as proper examination, and what doesn't.
Because your earlier formula is too general, it applies both the likes of, say, Hitler, and to the Dalai Lama.
You need to be more specific, so that your formula cannot be applied to what would generally be considered cases of psychopathology.

It cannot distinguish good from bad, just from unjust, noble or ignoble. The examined life requires more than a method of division. In fact, without consideration of the good and just and noble, division itself can lead to doing what is bad and unjust and ignoble. — Fooloso4

Exactly.

Now, the question is, what in particular is good, just, and noble.

The idea that the biblica sacra is to be interpreted metaphorically was at the back of my mind but that point of view does more damage to the Abrahamic triad than my accusations of incest, no? Much of the evidence for God, miracles to be precise, wouldn't amount to much if it were all symbolism. — TheMadFool

But that's because you don't have the Holy Spirit inside you and you don't understand things properly!$#632""!!!

So in the face of that, it can be hard to believe in the principle that incestuous couples are more likely to produce genetically defective offspring.
— baker

Because one couple didn't? This is doing statistics wrong. — Kenosha Kid

Public opinion about a topic isn't based on statistics, but on what comes through as the most vocal.
And in the end, public opinion matters. That's why they burn witches.

When the vaccines were introduced, they made clear the efficacy against the spread of the disease was not certain. Its protection against its effects was. The idea was that if enough people would be vaccinated at least they wouldn't end up in hospitals and cause an overload of the hospital system.

When has this aim changed? — Benkei

When the matter became so politicized, so ideologized that the public opinion became "Vaccinated people are perfectly safe."

Come forward with a more nuanced opinion, and you're branded as an antivaccer.