With trembling hands, Bimble reaches into his pocket and pulls out an icosagon die, then casts it for a 7. "Fuck!"

“If you want to take a look at Joe Biden’s America, take a look at Portland last night where they had a riot, take a look at the woman who punches the other woman in church yesterday, take a look at the 51 shootings in New York and the four murders,” Giuliani said.

It’s currently Trump’s America. :chin:

He champions the individual because it is what needs to be most respected in a functioning society. — thinkery

Sounds like an ideology, and a rather extreme one at that, like Libertarianism. Societies depend on collective cooperation, so that needs to be respected as well, right?

Yes, I know that, which is why I brought it up. You're trying to lecture me, when I've already demonstrated that my understanding of these particular issues exceeds yours by a wide margin. — Hippyhead

There are several issues that you're trying to juggle, but the heart of it seems to be about forum moderation. The only practical way to deal with that is to raise the level of your contributions. You can whine, moan, and rationalize til the cows come home but it won't help.

There's also the fact that you've been deliberately obfuscating from the start. Your OP concludes with the following.

If you can't figure it out, I will continue... — Hippyhead

Silly, and yet you claim to be serious. I honestly can't tell if you're goofing or serious.

Biden aced the nomination speech. Almost brought a tear to my eye.

He mentioned efforts to strengthen unions and the working class, which doesn't sound too corporate-friendly.

If you’re as serious as you claim to be I suggest that you start a new topic, arguing that the “more is better" relationship with knowledge is outdated and dangerous. That would be a good place to start, I think, and if done well could generate a good amount of interest.
— praxis

Been there, done that already.

And, I'm doing it again, right here, right now. — Hippyhead

In fact, you are not, and this significantly relates to the issue that you've brought up in this topic. I believe that any of the current moderators (I'm not a moderator, by the way) could write a strong OP argument that is consistent with the guidelines that I've pointed out. It appears that you could not, and your failure to produce one SCREAMS the point that their tossing your topic to the lounge dustbin in entirely justified.

I think the only things Trump cares about is people liking him and making money. — Michael

That can’t be true. He could be the most ridiculed man that’s ever lived. I think he only cares about attention and money/power.

Whatta I gotta do to break this thread out of Lounge jail? — Hippyhead

If you’re as serious as you claim to be I suggest that you start a new topic, arguing that the “more is better" relationship with knowledge is outdated and dangerous. That would be a good place to start, I think, and if done well could generate a good amount of interest. By done well I mean constructing an OP following a guideline such as this:

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/7110/how-to-write-an-op

Right, so what's there to philosophize about?
— praxis

I don't understand your question here. Expand a bit? — Hippyhead

You wrote:

Food is beneficial. Food is essential. But eating as much as one can as fast as one can is not.

This is quite simple and straightforward, as you've said, so what use is a philosophy pro in this or a similar case?

At this point, I think a glass of wine is in order.

Enjoy!

I don't see them [philosopher pros] addressing a very easily understood, easily shared, dramatically dangerous example of where a simplistic and childlike relationship with knowledge can take us. — Hippyhead

Right, so what's there to philosophize about?

If I understand you correctly, you essentially believe that 'knowledge' is dangerous. If that's your belief then the most straightforward action to take is knowledge regulation, similar in principle to the regulation of firearms or nuclear weapons.

Campaigning for knowledge regulation may not be the best career move for an aspiring philosopher, or the best use of their time.

I'm moving this topic to the lounge. There it can thrive in the company of those who claim that there are no unicorns, amongst other baseless assertoins.

I didn't bring up the subject of morality, and was attempting to side step it, as such directions often lead to unproductive conflicts. — Hippyhead

You have a prescription for what our relationship with knowledge should be. What is that and why do you believe it would be efficacious in preventing a nuclear holocaust or other man-made existential threat?

If on the other hand one believes that philosophy has some purpose other than service to human beings, then philosophical activity would have to be measured against how well it is serving that purpose. — Hippyhead

I'd say that philosophical activity generally promotes wisdom and that's how it is "service to human beings." Not sure how evidence could be gathered to support this belief.

I don't object to an ethical conversation, but I wasn't that inclined to head in a moralistic direction. I was more interested in the question of whether philosophers have the ability to think rationally, as I defined that above. — Hippyhead

I think your confusion centers around the blurry vision you seem to have between morality and rationality, generally speaking.

Other than that, I don’t see why you hesitate to inform us what our relationship with knowledge should be. I can’t speak for anyone else but I for one am fully prepared to have my mind blown.

A suitable topic for philosophers to discuss in regards to nuclear weapons.

Wouldn’t ethics be most suitable?

According to Hippyhead, philosophy is "the application of disciplined thought to the advancement of human welfare," so that kinda-sorta answers what things are relevant to do and if philosophy pros were to theorize about such things it would kinda-sorta be an indication of irrationality.

For the average man and woman in the street, I could agree that their primary responsibility is to their children. So if they're working around the clock so they can get their kids in to college, and thus don't have the time or energy for such a large topic, ok, I can see the rational basis for that. — Hippyhead

It's rational to work around the clock to fund your children's education, with a gun in your mouth?

I'm genuinely interested to see if anyone here can paraphrase your [Hippyhead] position correctly. — Judaka

Philosophy pros are irrational because they don’t focus enough on existential threats.

The Rolling Stone article also says that Trump claimed for the seventh times over the last several years that he received Michigan’s ‘Man of the Year’ award. Some jokes never get old, I guess.

A stoic would just have "accepted fate" and tried not to fight against it but focused on what they "can control" like being a good slave or being a good secretary, — Gitonga

A stoic slave would indeed have very little control over their life. They would have control of their virtue, however. If a stoic slave were ordered to do something that they considered to be unvirtuous, and there was a price to pay if they didn't perform the unvirtuous act, what they did would show how much of a stoic they were. Is it shameful to be a poor stoic? No, because it's not about social status, it's about attaining eudaimonia. Selfishness doesn't lead to eudaimonia. On the other hand, dying because you refused to follow an order doesn't lead to eudaimonia, either.

Bimble drinks dragonwell green tea, a habit he developed from serving it to his master every day while in training, but that’s another story...

One day while roaming aimlessly through the countryside after his mother threw him out of the house Bimble happened upon an old beggar. It should be noted, by the way, that Bimble’s mother evicted him because he was 15 years old at the time, and back in those days that was considered middle-aged. It simply became too embarrassing. Anyway, this beggar that Bimble met on the road was quite old and looked to be from the Far East. Not wanting to part with any of his money Bimble put his head down as he passed the beggar. "You lost," said the beggar as Bimble tried to pass. "Oh, how would you know?" said Bimble. "I know, you lost. Me show you! You come follow me." Not having anything better to do, Bimble followed the beggar and shortly after became Master Zeo's (part-time beggar) devoted student.

Master Zeo knew of Bimble's grit deficiency and therefore didn't teach him in a conventional manner. In fact, he didn't teach him anything at all and just used Bimble as a servant. After awhile Bimble became frustrated and eventually confronted the master. "Master, I've been doing your bidding for five years like a servant, or no, like a slave, and you haven't taught me anything." "I teach you patience," said the master. "I've been patient!" "No, I show you patient," said Zeo, and then gave Bimble a karate chop that knocked him unconscious.

Things went back to normal for a few years after that incident, then out of the blue Master Zeo asked Bimble, "what you know?" Not quite sure what the master was asking but excited that he finally took an interest, Bimble said "I know lots of stuff. What do you mean?" "What you know!!" Zeo asked again. Thinking about it for a second, Bimble replied "Well, I know how to juggle and I know a little magic." "You combine and become a-okay fighter," replied the master. "How do I do that?," asked Bimble. "You go now," said the master. Not wanting to miss his chance Bimble immediately left. He would have left at the mere hint of a dismissal.

"Thank God I'm rid of that old phony," thought Bimble as he packed his things and left the masters shack. In time, Bimble did combine his juggling and magic and became an okay fighter. He learned a spell that would transfix an opponent and leave them open to attack. He would have to start juggling and then yell "mesmeradi," then he could throw juggling balls at his opponents. He could materialize a new ball with the magical incantation "juggal mea neo spherico." Unfortunately, that spell is kind of a mouthful and hinders rapid-fire. It's also rather irritating for anyone within earshot to hear that repeated over and over again in quick succession.

Now that Bimble was a fighter and ready to make a name for himself he dreamed of quest and glory.

Bimble is the son of a Swedish midwife and an only child. He never knew his father. Whenever Bimble asked his mother about him she would only say that he died many years ago. She never said how or exactly when he died. When pressed about it she would become flustered and abruptly remove herself saying “I just remembered...” and trail off in muted mumbling. She did this countless times over the years. Who is she trying to fool? Bimble would ask himself. Clearly she was hiding something, but what?

The other mystery, which everyone who encountered Bimble would ponder, and that could potentially be related to his father, was the extraordinary size of his hands. They were enormous, but at the same time extremely nimble. Even though they were the size of dinner plates he could thread a needle as adeptly as the most experienced and skilled seamstress.

Growing up, the one thing that defined Bimble, besides his gargantuan hands, was his complete lack of grit. Whatever he put his mind to, no matter how insignificant or crushingly important, he would become instantly discouraged at the slightest setback and drop whatever he was trying to accomplish. As a result of this he never got very good at anything. He had a wide range of interests though, from juggling to magic. Well, actually he just had those two interests. As for magic, he dropped out of wizardry school after one of his professors caught him using an invisibility spell in the girl's shower room. Apparently the spell wasn’t strong enough to cover his huge hands entirely.

His mother gave him a juggling kit (three balls and an instruction booklet) for Christmas one year. He vowed to himself that he would master the art by the year's end to prove his grit. He gave up before the end of January of course, but he could juggle by that point.

A late bloomer in most respects, romance was no exception. Bimble’s first sexual encounter was with an English art student that he met at a village barn dance. Though considerably older and possessing a brash egocentric personality she was nevertheless attractive and a willing partner in both dance and sex, though she was oddly controlling in the latter. A sign of past sexual abuse, Bimble thought. The roll-in-the-hay (behind the barn and literally in the hey) was understandably awkward being his first time. Other things that robbed from the pleasure of it was all the mead they’d drank that night and the fact that nighter of them liked the other.

Character development to be continued...

No doubt many do, with warmth and perhaps some boisterous rodomontade.

... if existence is building blocks from what came before, and nothing comes after, and all we've accomplished is what lesser beings have done, than how can we feel special? — TiredThinker

I don't see how a finite or everlasting existence differs in this respect. A static afterlife would be dead and meaningless, as I see it.

praxis: "Does a morning of studying a gray seascape make the afternoon more beautiful?"
Never tried that, and i prefer studying a tropical seascape, it changes the landscape around me. Unfortunatly, to dry is not so good for the grass... But if i would persist, my garden would become a beach. — Koen

I prefer tropical seascapes as well but I'm stuck with semi-arid for the time being. Tropical seascapes can be gray, by the way, on a cloudy day, like in May.

Good luck with your beach.

A milestone that a woman of color was chosen for such a high position. That’s all good.

could the sensation of fear which you feel in your body when you are afraid be a mental representation when given to an object of the imagination? Or are mental representations just images and sounds? When one imagines oneself being afraid without being in an actual fearful situation, would the replica be complete without that body sensation? — Daniel

Not sure what you mean by "when given to an object of the imagination." The 'sensation of fear' is inextricably tied to the body and therefore is not entirely a mental representation. So, the 'replica' could only be incomplete if the mind were severed from the body, and since minds don't exist without bodies to support them, I guess the answer is no.

I would hesitantly take nostalgia one step further and say that, not only is it sense data memory -> emotional response, but there's one further arrow, which is -> meaning. Nostalgic experiences feel like they get at the root. It may be a total illusion, and maybe that feeling is just a more complex emotion working unconsciously. — Noble Dust

Good point, nostalgias link to our personal narrative would make it more core and meaningful, I would think.

Right, emotions respond (hopefully adaptively) to experience or situations. A brain in a vat could be feed sense data (raw experience) which could include social constructs.

If there is no afterlife can we assume life had no meaning? — TiredThinker

If there’s no life after the afterlife can we assume the afterlife has no meaning? If there’s no life after the afterafterlife can we assume the afterafterlife has no meaning? If there’s no life after... I think that I’ve made a point.

The sense data of the ocean, a turntable, or an ice cream shop may contribute to the feeling of nostalgia, which may be better described as a socially constructed emotion concept than a mental representation. Mental representation like the smell of the ocean are independent of emotion concepts and any sort of social consensus.

Does a morning of studying a gray seascape make the afternoon more beautiful?

Mucho plaudits, that word’s a keeper. I’ll have to concoct a repast this evening that is conducive to the production of tittynopes just so that I can spring it on my unsuspecting dinner companions. Corn on the cob perhaps. There’s always a kernel or two left with those.

I’m in the middle of an entertaining tome about an entitled Mr. Vertigo. At least I assume that’s the case, it’s full of twists and turns and it’s hard to predict what will happen next. Many the tawdry diphthongs, I will add.

Heart accounting is both impossible, because you can’t twist an abacus into the shape of a heart, and incredibly easy because the heart cannot lie. Its beats are like the notes to a song, some skip short and others diphthong long.

Mr. Vertigo by Paul Auster

A Handbook for New Stoics by Massimo Pigliucci

The Myth of Sisyphus by Albert Camus

Sunset Park by Paul Auster

There’s no accounting for esurient hearts.

You can thank @TheMadFool who was using it to argue that the mind isn’t physical, somehow.

When I'm flying in a dream, for instance, I know that it's me flying.
— praxis

Really? You remember your dreams. That seems to contradict the well known fact that to remember dreams one has to be woken up in the middle of it. — TheMadFool

I woke up last night in the middle of a dream. I was chitchating with an attractive woman while waiting for an impromptu salsa dance competition to start. At one point in the conversation she called me a creep because of something that I said. It was unjustified, I felt, though I don’t remember what I said, and upsetting. It seems pretty clear from that that I had a sense of self while dreaming, as well as an ego to bruise.

what's the defining characteristic of mind?

Not sure.

The fact that in REM sleep we're not conscious of ourselves, like we are when awake, means that the defining characteristic of mind, self-awareness, is missing in it. Ergo, this ability to recognize our own existence can't be a brain-activity phenomenon. — TheMadFool

For one thing, self-awareness isn't missing in REM sleep. When I'm flying in a dream, for instance, I know that it's me flying. The same neurons for self-awareness are firing awake or dreaming. Also, I don't believe that self-awareness is the defining characteristic of a mind.