Stoicism.

Because we are a social species endowed with the capacity of reason.

It's remarkable that you think this could be considered racial justice. Offhand, to me it sounds like the school is simply doctoring the numbers to look good or meet some standard. They're cheating (the minority kids most of all), in other words.
— praxis

I never committed myself to a position as to whether that policy would constitute racial justice. — BitconnectCarlos

That's what I found remarkable. But I didn't look into the case so I can't do anything but speculate.

I think the concept of racial justice is a suspect one in general... — BitconnectCarlos

Equal justice is generally suspect? How so?

... but if I were to accept it as a valid goal then blatant academic favoritism is not out of the question. — BitconnectCarlos

This sounds like a strawman, but I may be misinterpreting you.

In any case my broader point was more just about how difficult discussion can be when the fundamental values of two individuals can be very much at odds. — BitconnectCarlos

I don't think that our fundamental values differ much, actually. We just suppress or promote the values that are in accord with whatever tribe we belong to. A dedicated atheist can have a sense of the sacred, for instance, it's just that they revere something different than the theist.

The fundamental, and rather glaring, flaw in Hirstoff’s account is that everyone values truth and therefore it can provide common ground. I’m sure that everyone values truth to some degree, but the degrees vary, and some value other things above truth, and consequently motivations will also vary.
— praxis

Yes, some people cannot be argued with, but I think the majority of people actually do care quite a bit about what's true and what's not. They have to (at least on some level) because they wouldn't even survive otherwise. In the end reality always wins and will punish everyone for their incorrect description of it. Let's focus on all those people that do care about truth instead of giving up beforehand, because some people don't. — Hirnstoff

I didn't say it was impossible to reach others with different values/views, I said your approach is fundamentally flawed in assuming that everyone values truth to the same degree.

For some reason I expected you to be a better listener and more open to the ideas of others.

For example there was an article in the WSJ today about a school in Chicago which was pushing teachers to grant minority students artificially higher grades in the name of decreasing the achievement gap. Maybe this is racial justice, who knows, but it's not justice in the traditional sense. — BitconnectCarlos

It's remarkable that you think this could be considered racial justice. Offhand, to me it sounds like the school is simply doctoring the numbers to look good or meet some standard. They're cheating (the minority kids most of all), in other words.

You've demonstrated that you like other people to type things you can object to. — Hippyhead

Fine, if that’s what you want to believe then be my guest.

Objecting to things that other people type makes me feel like a big dog and boosts my fragile lil ego.

Can we return to the topic now? If you have any objections thoughts about any of my objections please share, I'd love to shoot them down.

The fundamental, and rather glaring, flaw in Hirstoff’s account is that everyone values truth and therefore it can provide common ground. I’m sure that everyone values truth to some degree, but the degrees vary, and some value other things above truth, and consequently motivations will also vary.

I said nothing about being bored by those topics. — Hippyhead

Don’t be an ass, I clearly said my caring for those topics. I’ve demonstrated that caring in this topic. I don’t care if it bores you.

Well, forgive me for caring about stoicism, Buddhist meditation, CBT, the difference between religion and philosophy, and whatever else fucking bores you.

There must be some strategy behind stopping the stimulus talks until after the election, however lame it might be.

When I'm bantering with my brother or my close friends, we will call each other names, and I often reach for American ones like dingus, dweeb, doofus, douchebag/douche, and poindexter (it's not all Ds).

There's an amusing ironic quality to the insults when I use those words, because they're not natural words for us to use with each other. They sound almost corny--we Brits pick them up from old movies and TV, of course--so they undercut the offensiveness of the insults. To use one of those words is to make oneself ridiculous, thereby introducing the classic comedy of a self-righteously angry but ridiculous person. — jamalrob

As those terms are pretty much passé they could have pretty much the same effect here. For example, I might say something with an English accent like, “Them lot over there is a bunch of bloody dinguses, ay guv’na?”

Dune — Nils Loc

Just reread it in anticipation of the new film adaptation and there’s a word I noticed that Frank used a lot, which is presently. He uses it in narration and in the dialogue of characters. I remember when noticing it that it kind of broke the spell of being lost in the story. I like the word though, and thought to try using it in everyday language, but I haven’t so far. I vow to attempt it presently, however.

What is that supposed to mean?

Should I cheer whatever someone posts because they merely participated, like this were a kindergarten classroom? And if that’s what you want, why have you failed to praise my contributions? Have I not made a sincere effort to correct misrepresentations about things that I think are important?

You’ve got a lot of explaining to do, Mr. Hippyhead. Or maybe this is only a gotcha thing and nothing of any substance.

The 30 second military salute was embarrassing also. It’s respectful for a civilian to place their hand over their heart... oh, I see the problem.

The closest western philosophcal doctrine to buddhism that I can think of is stiocism. Stoicism actually tries to do the same thing so now that I think about it maybe IT was the first rather than psychoanalysis but phsychoanalysis is definitely closer in terms of "methodology". It tries to figure out what to do about being in such a terrible world in terms of what you should do with your mind. — khaled

Your claims are oddly contradictory. Stoicism utilizes psychotherapy similar to modern CBT. This is not the same as phsychoanalysis.

Reducing maladaptive negative thoughts, such as "being in such a terrible world" is exactly the sort of thing that Stocisim, Buddhist meditation, and CBT try to accomplish.

The main thing a Buddhist hopes to do by meditating is to understand how his/her own mind is constructed. — khaled

No this is false, the main thing is to realize emptiness.

But as he/she understands more about the mind they become able to perscribe people certain meditations that help alleviate their stress just like a personal trainer perscribes a workout schedule. It will work regardless of whether or not you understand why.

That's the same as psychoanalysts... — khaled

Buddhist teachers are not psychoanalysts. I don't think that this can be stressed enough. Of course, a Buddhist teacher may be a psychoanalyst if they've gone through the training and have a graduate degree in the mental health field, but that must be quite rare.

Anyone could outline the basics of CBT, on the other hand, and it's a practice that doesn't require a psychoanalyst.

Other than that the west seems to have largely tried to deal with this issue by changing the world itself. That is the key. The East tries to deal with this problem by configuring our minds so as to deal with it best. Just look at the second noble truth, to the East the problem is in the mind not the world. The West tries to deal with the problem by "fixing" the world (results vary from crusades to scientific revolution, handle with care).

I think that's part of the reason why the scientific revolution showing how insignificant we are, and the weakening of the belief in God caused such a massive void in the West which existentialists, absurdists and Co tried to fix. You hardly hear of existentialism in the East. That's because in The East there was no belief that the world needs to be fixed for us to be able to live in it, no need for mankind to be the centrepiece of the world for it to be worth it, it was always believed that the world is fine and we should just fix ourselves to deal with it. — khaled

This is just a weird and confused way of saying that religious life is spiritual and secular life is materialistic. There is no difference between East and West in this regard.

Notice how most Eastern religions don't have any sort of afterlife or "great quest" or purpose or destination baked in unlike most Western religions and myths. You can argue Nirvana is... — khaled

:lol: Yeah, you could do that.

... but a Buddhist will never tell you "You must seek Nirvana". Nirvana is a state of enlightenment but there is no pressure to get there unless one personally thinks it's worth it. Unlike heaven where the only altenative is eternal damnation. — khaled

I guess you've never heard of the 'hell realms' or being reborn as a scarabaeinae (dung beetle).

To sum, your heart appears to have been pierced by the seductive arrow of Eastern Mysticism, a rather common affliction in the West.

Thanks. Impressive woodworks!

As for his little ride and wave, I just do not possess the same anxiety towards his actions, and I actually liked what he did. The response sounds like grasping at straws to me. I could care less if they translate to votes. — NOS4A2

Do you care if his actions translate to infections?

That’s really weird because Trump taking a joyride around the hospital, regardless of the consequences to others, and manic tweeting seem totally in character.

Next in the beverage series, the 8 x 10" still-life Dragonwell.

Right, is even the green new deal radical?

It doesn’t seem necessary to argue that radical change is riskier than gradual change.

I named myself after an exploded Klingon moon because, well, to be honest, I’m a raging nerd.

I don't think I have a higher ratio of deleted posts than most others. — god must be atheist

At least you’re not a lonely trash poster then. :snicker:

I for one can separate my feelings from my rational decision-making. I enjoy hearing about Trump getting sick the way I enjoy a villain in fiction being hoisted by their own petard. It makes me smile and laugh. Those are my feelings and I didn’t choose them, though neither do I feel guilty for them.

But I don’t actually think he ought to suffer or die, because nobody ought to. If I were in a position to be caring for him medically I would do everything I could to help him recover. — Pfhorrest

I’m sure that I’d be tempted to accidentally trip over a power cord or three, but, I probably couldn’t do it. Damn it all!

The notion that genes are selfish is an analogy. Accordingly, take note that a self-interested person is not necessarily self-conserving, and vice versa. If you eat too many KitKats you will get fat and die young. — unenlightened

Dying young from KitKat gluttony expresses mindless self-conservatism (analogical selfishness) which is only distinguishable from self-interest in that the latter rationalizes after the fact with a personal narrative, it seems to me.

It would be a classic ending for Trump to die of covid, in ‘a trickster eventually gets caught in their own net’ kinda way.

Considering that moral values in the all too Randian USA are determined by pure economic factors, these elderly and the actual 'virtually nobodies' are simply worthless and cost intensive commodities; thus Covid-19 seems to be a solution to a very American problem. — Mayor of Simpleton

We could honor the fallen as hero’s but for the well known sentiment that those who die for their country economy are losers and suckers.

US trolley problem — Mayor of Simpleton

The other day Trump mentioned that corona only affects the elderly or “virtually nobody,” so if these virtual nobodies (including the elderly Trump) are on one track and our big beautiful economy and the precious American Dream are on the other, he seems to suggest that there’s virtually no dilemma.

I was being facetious of course.

Streetlight, what is it exactly that you want in terms of government-type? You're not a liberal, but you say you're not a fascist either. Do you support democracy? Do you just want very considerable restrictions on free speech? — BitconnectCarlos

Not liberal, not a fascist, dubious taste for democracy, and a dislike of free speech. I got it...

Anyways I don’t care to debate this detail anymore because we can at least agree that the Kalama Sutta applies. — khaled

It does not apply to dogma, an issue that you brought up.

On the other hand, you know what they call someone who tries to reform Buddhist doctrine?
— praxis

Where did this come from? Who’s trying to reform Buddhist doctrine? — khaled

Anyone resisting religious dogma.

Instead he complained to the moderator and the crowd and said a few meek comebacks. — darthbarracuda

He spoke directly to the camera, notably, and I’ve seen reports that it was very positive with undecideds. I don’t think Trump is capable of that approach.

I get what you’re saying and think a lot of it has to do with the fact that Biden is uncomfortably feeble both physically and mentally due to age.

Both place pressure on following their doctrines while Buddhism emphasizes that it is strictly optional. — khaled

To be clear, dogma can be a take it or leave it (optional) proposition. On the other hand, you know what they call someone who tries to reform Buddhist doctrine? Not a Buddhist.

the 'kill the Buddha' thing is about transcending intellection and in that way very zen.
— praxis

I don’t see how it would be so I don’t think so. — khaled

I think that the wise nugget you were thinking of is from the Kalama Sutta:

Now, Kalamas, don’t go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, ‘This contemplative is our teacher.’ When you know for yourselves that, ‘These qualities are skillful; these qualities are blameless; these qualities are praised by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to welfare & to happiness’ — then you should enter & remain in them.

Take it or leave it (no corrections allowed).

What sort of sense does this make? — creativesoul

Not a sense thing but a feel thing, I imagine, to the Trump supporters. Empathy can be a powerful ally.

I have the suspicion that if I were to somehow be continuously pleased or fulfilled, or whatever term means the opposite of suffering, that I would have no need for desire. If correct, doesn’t this argument essentially refute Buddhism? — Pinprick

It's not possible to be continuously satisfied because, as the Buddhist say, everything changes. So in essence change is what causes dissatisfaction and without change there is no life. But is change, or anything else for that matter, real? If it's just an illusion then isn't it the illusion, or ignorance of our true nature, that causes suffering?

He’ll get more done in quarantine than Biden has done in 47 years. — NOS4A2

The problem is the attention span of the Trump rally-goer is probably about the length of a gnats, and that’s why he’s forced to do so many of them. In his estimation they must all be losers so it’s doubtful he enjoys their company.

Trump goes all over America doing massive rallies — NOS4A2

Speaking of which, I guess the Hitlarian rile-ups will be put on hold for at least two weeks. Ouch. :grimace:

I hope none of this kerfuffle (kind of a fun word that sounds like it contains popcorn) involves my brobdingnagian appendage. If so, sorry I’ve been dyspraxic (a bad praxis).

The main point of Buddhism is that belief in it is never dogmatic. — khaled

Granted I’m no fan of dogma but the cessation of suffer’n is a bit more appealing, to me.

There is a saying in Buddhist (or zen? I don’t remember) circles “If you see the Buddha by the road, shoot him” which just basically means don’t just follow authorities blindly. — khaled

What religion doesn’t have this take it or leave it attitude? If you decide to walk away from Christianity will they nail you to a cross or something? In any case, you're mixing metaphors, the 'kill the Buddha' thing is about transcending intellection and in that way very zen.

In fact, life is not chaos and disharmony. It requires order and chaos.

For some reason I have encountered a lot of resistance by suggesting that the opponent may have won. People seem to take it to mean that I wanted the opponent to win. — darthbarracuda

I think that’s understandable because by claiming that Trump won the debate suggests that you value his “stream roller” strategy or that your prefer a bully to a moderate. It was certainly a winning strategy for his base, but then he doesn’t need to win them. He already owns them. I think Biden probably did a better job at reaching the undecided, but who knows.

I thought Trump "won" — darthbarracuda

That’s remarkable for someone with 3k+ posts on a philosophy forum, if that suggests valuing truth and reason. I just rewatched the first two segments of the debate after reading your post to see if I missed something. The first question about the SC nomination went reasonably well, no interruptions by either debater, and to be honest Trump’s position and presentation was stronger, I felt. On the second question about healthcare Trump began interrupting badly, like the privileged man-child that he is, and had an extremely weak position (no plan after 4 years! and meaningless executive orders). Biden had the last word and a stronger believable proposition.

Don’t have the stomach to review further.