One can be satisfied in their depression or current apathy, no? — Shawn

I don't think one can be depressed, apathetic, and satisfied. But I could be wrong.

To be fearful of desire, or desirous of escaping fear is to be caught up in the world.

Be caught up in the world, therefore, while you can. There will be time enough to be a stoical corpse. — unenlightened

Hmmmm. I think I agree. And here I was, hoping I might find magic in stoicism. Maybe I should forget that shit and just get on with life. Embrace the suck, if you will.

There were leftists who wanted to leave and presented decent arguments, but they could not organize effectively enough as the right did. — Manuel

True. The right is more susceptible to the fear/paranoia/conspiracy factor; and they make good, blind followers with a strong leader. The left is like herding cats and they disagree with everything and conflict with each other as much as they conflict with the right.

I'm not a big believer in the concept of "deserve" but I kind of think we deserve what we get. Kids, not so much.

:100: He was also making a deal out of Pete Buttigieg and breast feeding. The whistles are no longer dog. It all quite out in the open now. Pretty soon it should be legal to . . . . never mind.

I actually was just googling Tucker to see if he was married. It seemed so unlikely. But the answer gave truth the old saw that there is someone for everyone. :roll:

A large part of it feels to me like a "fuck you" to the establishment, which is understandable. — Manuel

Completely understandable. It's just too bad that folks who want to send that message can't look around and find within their ranks a person of honor, honesty and courage. I mean, it's completely understandable that the estabilishment can't find such a person. After all, they are all politicians. But you'd think a group of "fuck you" people could find one. If they did, then the "fuck you" people on both the left and the right could get behind them.

On the other hand, I'm probably wrong. We couldn't get the right behind Sanders, so . . .

By which I mean that it takes quite a lot of effort to quell the anxiety of making money enough for one's needs or taking care of a family or making time in one's schedule for appointments and family, AND on top of all this behaving in accordance with virtue. — Shawn

I might be living in an alternative universe, but I never saw the stoic as concerned about money, family, schedules, etc. I saw more proximity between stoicism and the houseless under a bridge than I did with the average wage slave.

Why do you think big government that can be controlled by a handful of people is a good thing? — Athena

I don't, and never said as much. Democratic socialism is the ass opposite of that.

What can be done to increase the power of the people? Almost lost in this thread is the notion that strong families have something to do with the people having power over their government. — Athena

Democratic socialsm will return the family to it's seat of power and make government beholden to it.

That is a good idea. In a way, he was a wonderful President because he gave us wonderful feelings of patriotism. — Athena

Conservative feel-good politics is BS.

I love your reasoning and it is my understanding too, except we have a little difference of opinion about helping the lazy. — Athena

It's a different way of thinking altogether. The genious of the indigenous, tribal view toward helping cannot always be understood by one who has been raised in, steeped in, the very culture of greed they abhor. Working with horses, or dogs, will make clear how feeding the lazy does not enable them. It is other, outside forces that are undermining your (and your city's) efforts. But those forces are powerful and have people believing the lie about enabling. After all, fingers must be pointed anywhere but at those forces and they are masters at deflection.

I think under socialism the locus of control is the government. — Athena

It is! But under democratic socialism, government is the people. That is a good thing, not a bad thing.

For sure I question what culture has to do with addictions and the destruction of the family. — Athena

Pretty much everything. Change the culture, change the empty search for fullfilment denied by the old culture. Again, I think of the horse. Virtually every rider will chose the soft-broke horse from the remuda over the one with the broken spirit. Comparing people to horses, and the use of the word "soft-broke" may be off-putting until one understand the terms and the culture involved. Then the light goes on over the brain pan.

It is not just the Plutocracy that is causing a problem. It is also religion! — Athena

Religion is just another tool used by the Plutocracy to deflect from them, provide solace to the masses, like opium, booze, etc. Follow the money.

Well, there we disagree. — Athena

I don't think we do. You just keep looking at the symptom instead of the cause. The MIC is not government. It is private sector control of government. Maybe an example is in order: The family might be a good thing, but if it's controlled by an asshole, not so much. We can ask why an abusive spouse/father is the way he is, or we can just say the family sucks. I prefer the former.

Do you find yourself tired or relentlessly under siege with discerning what life or fate has in store for you? — Shawn

No.

Do you actually read to yourself affirmations every day about what to purpose to yourself in terms of ancient philosophy your intent towards and for what need? — Shawn

No. But maybe I should.

Due to this, do you struggle with a philosophical apathy to try to surmount the issue with an attitude towards life? — Shawn

Yes, but not due to that.

If so, then how did it work out for you? — Shawn

I'm too patient, and too lazy, hoping it happens without putting in the work.

Is this something the reader finds worthy of commenting in the positive or negative? What are your thoughts? — Shawn

I'm not so sure metaphilosophically analyzing the self is the right way to go about it. But I can definitely see how that would lead to apathy. I don't think cynicism follows from the inverse, though I myself suffer from it and do find some peace. So maybe I should not opine on the matter until such time as I eschew my cynicism. Waiting.

Do you think that it's true that the stoic attains inner calm or peace through apathy? Is this a natural unavoidable attitude? Is apathy and attitude towards life worth displaying in your opinion? — Shawn

I don't think so. I think objectivity (view from 10 million feet and 10 trillion years) is what will provide the inner calm or peace.

I don't like hearing that stoics have angst in their community, much less themselves. I want them out there holding the universe together and on the right track with their prayers and solemnity. Come on guys, get with the program. Jeesh!

And to think, I thought I held promise to join the ranks someday, after I pulled my head out of my ass.

Reagan scapegoated our poor for our economic troubles and he lied to us about not needing to conserve, so he could slash the domestic budgets and pour everything into military spending.
Who benefits? — Athena

:100: As Dennis Miller once said "If trickle down isn't fair warning that you are about to get pissed on, I don't know what is."

Reagan was a nice, likable guy, but he should have been providing sing-alongs around a campfire with a guitar at a camp for kids with cancer.

P.S. The thread title should not be "Socialism or families?" It should be "Socialism is families." Or "Socialism and families."

The EU should do what France did when we fought King George. If Trump can turn to Russia for help in his insurgency, certainly we can ask the EU to ally with the United States against that insurgency.

I have to question the right of feeding lazy people. However, it could be argued getting rich by what one owns rather than by working. is just as much a problem as feeding a lazy person who owns nothing. — Athena

We don't feed the lazy for them, we feed the lazy for us. We don't honor our agreements for the benefit of others. We honor our agreements because it is good for us to honor our word. I've oft used the example of Indians: We should not honor our treaties with them because we want what is best for them. Forget them. We should honor our treaties because our own Constitution provides that treaties shall be the supreme law of the land. We do it because it is who we want to be. We feed the lazy because we are good, right, strong, and not lazy. This is how we set standards that people want to aspire to. There will always be lazy, but there will be fewer of them when everyone looks around and says "Hey, would I rather be lazy and get something for nothing? Or would I rather be that guy who carries the lazy with broad shoulders and a smile on his face, embracing the suck, leaning into the load and enjoying the burn as he works his body?

but I am not sure what socialism is? — Athena

It is the family writ large. It is community.

Where is the locus of control? — Athena

The people, not the Plutocracy. The Plutocracy forfeited their right to the status of people when they created the corporation. It was only then that they created laws making corporations people. But they are not. Only the people are people.

I want us to replace the autocratic model of the industry with the democratic model, and put the locus of on individuals working together rather than authority above them. — Athena

Yes!

Family dysfunction is caused by many things. Alcoholism and drugs are big causes of dysfunctional families. — Athena

It is not the alchol or the drugs that cause the dysfunction. Ask what kind of culture causes people to turn to drugs and alcohol?

Cultures can make families strong or weak and right now our culture in the US is doing many things that make families weak and this why I started this thread. — Athena

I think you and I are saying much of the same thing and the agreement is there.

this is a fight against the government's control of education. — Athena

That is only true because government is controlled by the Plutocracy. There is nothing inherently wrong with goverment control of education. The problem lies in who controls government. Our foundind fathers believed in public education and they were right, in my opinion. But what happened to civics, etc.?

If people do not realize the changes made by Roosevelt and Hover working together to create big government, and how this became the Military-Industrial Complex we have today, then there is no hope of correcting the problem. — Athena

Again, big government is not the problem and never has been (in the U.S.). The problem is, who owns the government? Money, or people? FDR was on the right track. But it was NOT government that created the MIC out of thin air or a vaccume. It was the private sector monied interests that did it. To kill government is to cut off your nose to spite your face. Kill instead the monied ownership of government. You see the giant turn in 1958 but money has sought to own government since the founding.

Might as well say goodbye to each other, because some asshole from West Virginia cares more about money than the future of his grandkids — and the human species. — Xtrix

That's the difference between the left and the right. The right presents their elected representatives with substantial, credible threats of physical violence to them or their families if they don't vote the way Trump would have them vote. Thus, even if they disagree with Trump, or have an ounce of independence or honor, they stick with him. That's why so many are on board. They are afraid. Very afraid. It's not because they actually agree with him. Some do, but not all. And the right knows who is waivering, so they muscle them.

The left won't do that to Manchin or Sinema.

The last thing a third party sitting with Mr & Mrs America would want would be to take sides in this heated marriage quarrel. — ssu

:100: That is spot on, as far as allies (sitting with) are concerned. Putin, not so much.

:100:

If you are an academic who has been trained to read more, shall we call it 'technical' writing, then your reading experience is different. Abstruseness/complexity are relative terms. — Tom Storm

I'm no academic, and I'm lacking in a lot of philosophical terms of art. This forces me to write things out "long hand" if you will. But the idea might still be there.

:100:

My philosophy of fiction reading, and I think it's probably a bad one, is, if it doesn't pull me in in the first few chapters, to heck with it. — T Clark

That is what a person of self-discipline will do. And that is what I tell myself I should do. And, it is what I have been told by others to do. And I resolve to do it. Faulker taught me.

I've also heard he has other good stuff. I just wish that when I was doing my research for a good book, I would have been told to read his other work. But yeah, I slog through, thinking all along "Well, it has to get better! I mean, people said how great this is. They can't be wrong!" Some movies are that way too.

Hopefully I've learned my lesson.

I am 100% behind pulling one's self up by their own boot straps and my different point of view on this, probably is my age. — Athena

My mom and dad both grew up in the heart of the Great Depression. I'm pretty sure no human being in the history of the Earth ever defied the laws of physics by pulling themselves up by their own bootstraps. That's just another myth that keeps us striving for the 1%.

We must do the right thing because it is the right thing to do. — Athena

Yes, and many would argue that taking care of the weak lame and lazy is the right thing to do, and what strong people do. Those who argue "teach a man to fish" often don't know how to fish. They are still eating fish caught by others. And let's not forget the fish itself. If we are to turn our backs on, and ostracize the lazy, we should start with the 1% who spout shit like "bootstrapping" and "fish."

I have gone through life not thinking what it is in for me, but rather is the right thing for me to do for my family, and community, and country. — Athena

Bingo! And I tip my hat to you. That is what democratic socialism is all about.

I can also see, when people turn their back on family, the family is more apt to need government assistance. That is where family taking care of family is also about democracy, liberty, and our country. We are good citizens because that is how to have a strong nation and a good citizen takes care of family. — Athena

Family disfunction is not caused by a government that is there to provide a safety net. That disfuction is the result of an economic system that devalues the family and defunds community, democracy, liberty and government. The need for government assistence is created, and then not funded, so those who need it hate government instead of the system that drove them to it. That system is afraid of a strong nation, good citizens and family.

But I think our Plutocracy problem is government supporting industry. — Athena

Government supports industry because industry owns government.

I hope someone can correct me or explain what I am saying better than I have. Whatever, this is not the old plutocracy, this is a stronger trinity of military might, industry, and government. And the taxpayers are paying for it. — Athena

You said it just fine. But it's not new. See "War is a Racket" by Smedley Butler. This MIC stuff has been going on for well over a hundred years.

:100:

Who benefits from efforts to undermine and demonize a government's assistance to its people? — Ciceronianus

The interestng thing is, the haters are all about socialism when it comes to the military. But it's the MIC that benefits when government's assistance to it's own people is diverted to it. Their denial is overwhelming at times.

The Plutocracy is necessarily and increasingly paternalistic. So it is no wonder that its most obsequious subjects are invariably callow. In the US, the Plutocracy uses the phrase self-relient “bootstrapping” to describe their scheme of keeping people in their cubicles. Now that’s a telling phrase: We all know it defies the laws of physics to bootstrap.

It seems likely to me that anyone living in that sort of system—raised in it, educated by it, paying for it—is nearly doomed to become dependant on it. And to be honest, I can hardly blame the man, his money stolen and used to build the wealth of others, when he seeks some sort recompense in the form of what it can offer. It’s not beyond the point of repair though. We can raise and educate our children to be what the family used to be, before it was nuclearized to benefit the Plutocracy with lies of independence.

As stated earlier, socialism (democratic) can be seen as the family writ large. Any paternalism is just all of us acting as a father-figure to those obsequious, callow, petulent kids who come running home when the world gets tough, but run away, acting all tough, when they don't like when daddy says "our house, our rules." They want all the benefits of society but they don't want to contribute. Oh well, they can run away to their cubicle and get to work for their masters.

Thank you bison, for growing my heart with the seeds you have sewn.

I was in search of something to read that would blow me away. Rising to the top of the list was "The Sound and the Fury" by William Faulkner. I read it. At first I thought it was the most worthless piece of shit every written. Worse even than the King James version of the Bible.

But then I pumped the brakes and confessed that maybe there are just some things I don't get, and don't want to invest the time and energy to get. I try to remain open to the possiblitlity that some things are beyond me.

What pisses me off are professorial questions about something I meant in something I wrote. I'll sit down and point my finger to a sentance in my writing that directly and specifically answers the question asked. Then scratch my head as to how a person with an advanced degree could have missed it.

I've always been a champion of the record created by a writing. That way, no one can ever claim they were not told. But alas, it is not always possible to communicate with written words. Maybe that is why we love the parable, the story told around a fire. There is not enough of that these days.

I'd say art is the objective absense of waste. All other waste, present or absent, is subjective.

If only! :rofl:

:up:

Our politics are now as reactionary as Germany's politics were when Hitler came to power and thugs roamed boldly in the streets. — Athena

Yes, and I look to our Jewish brothers and sisters to let us know when it's time to start kicking ass before it's too late. They should have a good feel for that now. But so far, everyone seems to be content with relying upon the rule of law. So I also look to the DOJ, the FBI and others. Assuming they are not corrupted from within by sympathizers with the thugs, and can keep their own house clean, they should be out nipping these racist white nationalist fascist thugs in the bud.

Time will tell.

Automatically (e.g. dao, tát tvam ási ... or Tipler's "Omega Point") or through life-long cultivation (e.g. mokṣa, gnōsis ... or Spinoza's "infinite intellect")? — 180 Proof

I'm not sure on that one. My wife talks about levels (?) and some folks are closer to this or that than others. I'm not sure I'm into all that, but if that's the way it works, my narcisism likes to fancy itself as on the highest level :rofl:. But it wouldn't have to be that way. It could be just automatic. I'm inclined to think that we aren't important enough to be part of a system that earns chits for the next tour. But I could be wrong. Automatic sounds more reasonable to me.

I imagine it's so perfect being All that most parts don't want to come back for another tour of duty (as a rock or a human, or a molocule on the back side of that distant planet that we'll never know exists); but it's possible we do want to come back. Probably not out of bordom with perfection, but just stepping up. After all, somebody has to do it. I mean, if the universe is going to experience itself, it needs parts out there being parts.

You believe in an afterlife of sorts? — Manuel

I do, but it's not what I hear most folks (who belive in an afterlife) opine.

I believe that we are right now part of All, but we are merely a part of it. When we die, we become it.

A pretty moving piece. My takeaways:

1. I'm lucky, in that I don't think death is the end, with nothing thereafter. Could be, but I doubt it. Thus, I'm not afraid of death. I'm afraid of dying. I hope it's quick and painless. Other than that, it sounds like a trip. The ultimate trip.

2. His helper deserves $175.00 per hour.

3. In the end, his wife was real. The trees were real. They mattered.

Thanks for sharing.

The idea that Trump is not hawkish is, if true, limited to foreign states. I have no doubt he would not heistate to turn his brown-shirts loose on Americans if they threatened his ratings with his sheep.

As to the EU, anyone who wanted to bring the U.S. to heel need only come up with a viable PetroEuro or PetroYuan. We'd be a third world country overnight.

In the system I work in treatment is free. — Tom Storm

I've got no truck with the money . . .If it works. Big-bucks per hour is a good investment if there is an end result and in the end it works. But if it takes more time than an average chemo/radiation treatment (six months? A year?), then I'd supsect a scam.

Hopefully you get good results for the person with issues.

I know, it's a complex field, working with the human mind. It takes time. But after a certain point the idea that it is a "practice" becomes a little to real. At some point it's time to quit practicing and start on the real work and getting the job done; and I'm not talking about the patient. We all know they have work to do. I'm just not so sure they are helped or hindered by someone who's practicing on them.

I don't profess to be an expert in these areas. But I do have an aversion to the idea of some person recognizing their own issues and then, instead of spending $175.00 per hour per week for twenty years to lay on a couch and have someone say "And how does that make you feel", they figure they are too smart for that, and can figure it out on their own if they just go to school and study psych. Then, when they get out of school, they charge some person $175.00 per hour per week to wax on while they just ask "And how does that make you feel."

It's just my outsider-looking-in supposition. Better they all go study philosophy.

Americans want everything and they want it now, and they want it easy. If I recognize I'm sick, or might be sick, because I have a hankering to be a serial killer, then I want to go to a shrink, tell him what's up for an hour, have him/her tell me which switch to flip, pay him/her, walk out, flip the switch and move on with life as a healthy, happy, non-serial killer. But I damn sure don't want to lay on a couch and cough up my life savings for 20 years, and for what? The same thing I can get from the bar tender, or an attorney if I need confidentiality.

Most philosophers I'm aware of are poor. To the extent phych is a step-child of philo, it's an ugly one that figured out how to get rich instead of tending bar.

End rant.

So it's a gamble. But with these types of problems, most things are too. With psychology or psychiatry, if you get stuck with a wrong professional, it can really fuck you up. It's still a work in progress... — Manuel

:100: :up:

if such a person is feeling depressed, then bumping into the thought of Camus, Schopenhauer, Mainländer or Cioran, among others, might well be the push the sends them off the cliff. — Manuel

And if they use a gun, we will blame the gun.

My experience is anecdotal. I've seen folks who had "issues" and sought to better understand themselves by pursuing a degree in psychology. They didn't seem to make any headway on their issues but were then saddled with student debt and thought "Meh", I'll just get a license and try to pay it off." I wouldn't ask these people for help if my life depended upon it. I'd rather go to a saloon and talk to the bartender with the philosophy degree. But yeah, I'm sure I'm over-generalizing. Just thought the meme was funny and insightful. People who pound on the philisophical greats seem too perplexed to kill themselves.

I’m interested in the large divide between those who cannot stand being alone and those who cannot stand to be forced to engage with others. I wonder why there is this discord in such a populous and typically social mammalian species as humans are believed to be. — Benj96

There are swings to the extreme in all communities. I don't know if the bell curve is illustrative but it sounds good to someone like me who doesn't really know what it means. Anyway, I've heard that if you put too many rats in a cage, they will start eating each other. It's not that they are "social pack animals" like wolves, or loners, like bears, but everyone and everything needs a little elbow room to move around. Some folks, like me, need more than others. Personally, I get the heebie jeebies in a crowd.

Here's me at a party:

Education for a technological society with unknown values has made our democracy an unknown value and we just assume everyone is fighting everyone else because we have conflicting interests. — Athena

I don't know about the dates, but I agree there was a shift. The plutocracy wants schools to produce good little producers and consumers; thus, they emphasize STEM, and de-emphasize the Liberal Arts (philosophy, reason, logic, language, history, political science, social studies, civics, etc.). It's interesting that a good foundation in the Liberal Arts actually stimulates an intellectual curiosity for STEM. I would think a kid going for STEM because he/she was curious about it would be the critical distinction between us and other countries (China?) that drill down on STEM as the be-all and end-all of education. But a kid that can think analytically and critically and logically and philosophically presents a substantial, credible threat to the plutocracy and we can't have that! Hell, even mom and dad don't want little Billy and Sally to come home from school and 'larn them; so they don't champion schools either.

Biden and Trump may both be caught in the web, but Trump loves the web and wants to be the spider. He'd make the trains run on time all right, but not for everyone.