So we're going? Posty McPostface you should change the thread title! — Srap Tasmaner

Changed it. Currently digesting what both @MetaphysicsNow and you have said.

I'm not sure anything meaningful can be said when one brings up an idealized driven concept of having the right character or morals for some job or position. And so ad hominems and straw manning ensue.

The trolling is real.

Cool. Thanks, I figure more will be gained from freedom from constraints of any companion.

Thanks again.

Appreciated MetaphysicsNow. Looking forward to getting this started.

Did you decide on any companion to the Tractatus or just play it by ear?

I think it's V. 457 B-466 D

It's from Francis MacDonald Cornford, Oxford University Press, The Republic. Sorry if I don't know which book it's from. It starts with The Abolition of the Family by the Guardians if that helps.

Something interesting is happening inside the Republican party. Members are questioning what it means to be a conservative given the current state of affairs. To think that it took so much effort (read 'cognitive dissonance') to get them thinking, and all thanks to Trump.

Thanks Trump!

What if we included words like, "crazy" or "dysfunctional" into the discussion. Would that better address the issue in any way pertaining what is thought to be "normal"?

Another doctoral dissertation worthy thesis paper question. No idea. But, I believe chapter XVI of The Republic illuminates the question in regards to recent events...

Chapter XVI of the Republic answers this question in case anyone wants a definitive answer in regards to Marriage Regulation and Child Birth.

@MetaphysicsNow, any progress or updates?

Thanks.

Yeah, I think my health has taken a downturn. I need to focus on myself more. Until further notice take care. I'll just lurk from a safe distance.

Unenlightened told me your an OK dude. I need to chill, hate emotions and all that, haha.

If anyone has TimeLines email please let me know at her permission. I don't feel very safe here anymore. Must be a personal problem... Anyway, thanks folks.

Given that you probably had something to also do with @anti social sociopath, who sent me an ambiguous video "to share with my family", I think I've overstayed my stay here, along with with the above poster hiding as a moderator...

Thank you for making this place uncomfortable to further post in.

Thanks, mystery mod!

I'm going to sleep. I have no idea what we're even arguing over.

Some interesting topic worthy questions from this discussion:

How to spot a pretentious philosopher?
When does worshiping a philosopher turn into pretentiousness?
How do you illustrate that someone is being pretentious if he or she worships a philosopher?
Does worshiping a philosopher necessarily mean that one is being pretentious, if so how?
When do you know your being pretentious?

And so on...

But if you want to give you an example of such a fan, then Posty might be the closest I've seen here. If you want actual quotes, I can provide them.

Then according to you I am being pretentious. Fine, then.

Oh, well. I don't mind either way.

No, but, it does apply to me too as Πετροκότσυφας is trying to point out... As he has stated that I am a prime example to this matter.

So, the whole point seems to me to be that I am too being pretentious in my worshipping of Wittgenstien. Is that correct?

No worries dude. I don't take these matters as personal. It's philosophy not politics after all...

Yeah, you are right. The sad face was the expression of awareness of my own hubris about being a Wittgenstein worshiper, haha. Though, I definitely wouldn't call it pretentiousness, maybe the early Wittgenstien though not the latter one.

Sure, fire away.

I don't think that using others' points to support ours is pretentious in any straightforward way. — Πετροκότσυφας

It can be. When does the referencing stop and authentic philosophy begin though, to put another way?

That's a little hard for me to imagine as I never formally studied philosophy in College; the crisis of formulating my own philosophy came after I left Christianity, which I suppose could be an analogy to graduating with a degree in philosophy, in it's own metaphorical way. — Noble Dust

I guess it can be the inverse, as your saying. Namely, some set of entrenched beliefs get challenged or questioned which I associate with myself, and then get challenged in the appropriate settings of sorts.

So, then what? What's next is clearing away the bullshit. — Noble Dust

Yeah, I do like Harry Frankfurt. Have you read his, 'On Bullshit'?

What matter? — Πετροκότσυφας

The matter of hiding behind a veil of quotes and/or maxims to justify one's prejudices or beliefs about the world or other people.

The only thing I was interested in and asked for was actual examples of people doing what you said. — Πετροκότσυφας

I'm not going to point fingers and say he did this or that. But, from my own experience, we use philosophers as crutches to stand on and justify our/my own beliefs about the world.

This forum must have plenty of such examples, If you or noble don't want to give me a couple, that's fine. — Πετροκότσυφας

Isn't the fact that philosophers are quoted at length to support and entrench beliefs, as prime example of this?

Thanks for the explanation but it does not explain anything. I didn't quote your first post. I quoted you agreeing with Posty, no jokes there. I don't think that prompting me to your joke was in any way relevant to what I asked for, since I asked examples of other people using W. to hide their own pretentiousness. I didn't ask for an example of you imitating W., even if this was supposed to be a representation of how others use him to hide their own pretentiousness. If your agreeing with Posty was a joke too, then fine. You could have said. — Πετροκότσυφας

I think, I elucidated the matter in a short exchange with Noble Dust in the above referenced thread. If you want to continue this over, there I'd be glad to.

Think of it as playing devils advocate throughout the whole process of academic philosophy, and then comes the crisis of formulating your own philosophy or interpretation of what philosophy is. Then what?

So, then how does one differentiate between what is true (supposedly, the process of academic philosophy), and believing in what is true (associating what is true with one's self)?

This is an idea I've tried to argue here ever since I joined. — Noble Dust

Yes, please formalize it so I can better address this pertinent point.

But to treat philosophy as a way of life...is a much larger concern. What does that mean, treat it as a way of life? — Noble Dust

Essentially, it means the process of internalization of philosophy into your being or self. I can't think of any other way to put it. Or the formation or molding of the super-ego through philosophy.

I don't know. I'm just tilting at windmills here. Don't mind me.

In case you guys want to continue this in a proper thread:

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/3614/academic-philosophy-and-philosophy-as-a-way-of-living

Still unsure about the title...

What does "ism" have to do with people using his profundity and intenseness as a veil of pretentiousness? — Πετροκότσυφας

From what I gather, you take an individualistic stance on philosophy. So, that assumption is put to question when I assert that everyone ought to derive their own philosophy, but not doing so by living by maxims and profound quotations made by other philosophers, yes?

Yeah, it's a hard one. I figure I'll meditate over it a little and see what I come up with. Feel free to start a topic if you're feeling inspired. I might, though I have no idea how to qualify the subject into a title. Any suggestions?

Anything ending with an 'ism, I suppose.

Always willing to hear your thoughts, over here. — Noble Dust

Thanks, I was once told by a teacher of philosophy upon being asked what would be good advice to adhere to if I wanted to delve into academia, was that she told me not to associate one's self or ego with philosophy.

Going deeper into the issue, is the deep dilemma of treating philsophy as a way of living whilst adherent to that sentiment. Trying to reconcile the two seemingly incompatible notions.

Quite difficult.

No, you're onto something with people using his profundity and intenseness as a veil of pretentiousness, I think.

Not feeling very philosophical today anyway so I don't have much to say.

I'm tired of all this Witty worship. — Noble Dust

:fear: