Why is metaphysics not also a praxis? — Joshs

I didn't say it wasn't a praxis but not practical enough (at least in my own view) and that's why the metaphor of Mishima is excellent: it is a formidable building which lacks of a toliet.

What makes something a praxis and why do we value praxis? — Joshs

When we put it on in practice and then, we can check the results. I am agree in the basic fact that metaphysics starts the "beginning" of everything. I am not doubting that. But, sooner or later, we have to develop a praxis. For example: humans were always been debating about the universe. Centuries ago it was about metaphysics but now is about physics, because you can explain through laws and formulas which were born thanks to experience and praxis.

And what is useful is what is relevant, significant and meaningful to us? — Joshs

This question is object of another OP. But I would say, in my side, that a meaningful stimulus is death.

What motivates lemons to develop a. metaphysics? — Joshs

:sparkle: :eyes:

Do you think Kant’s ideas were considers useful , relevant and meaningful to him? — Joshs

I don't know. I wish we could know more about Kant and his life because we only debate about his works. I would not categorise those as "useful" but original.

then how do we understand the contrast between how humans and other animals live? — Joshs

I think Aristotle already answered this good question: Aristotle believed that animals, like humans, have purpose, and that telos is natural and unchanging. Aristotle’s Ethics and Farm Animal Welfare.

From this vantage, al even our most ‘practical actions are informed and guided by an implicit metaphysical worldview, and one could say the same for animals. — Joshs

:up: :100:

:sparkle: :100:

Understable. Good choice. But please do not forget to take substitutes of meat and animal food such as proteins. Otherwise, you could get sick without those.

Kant, I wonder what he would've said regarding the morality of torture. FYI, he was pro capital punishment. — Agent Smith

That's true! It would be interesting to see torture from a Kantian point of view. But hey, I see it coming: ethical metaphysics :eyes: :sparkle:

That's a superb summation! — Agent Smith

:up:

I (only) want to be a vegan — Agent Smith

Ethical motives or just a diet activity?

How we live. How we think. — 180 Proof

:up: :sparkle:

That's right, it is part of our nature and progress. We have two essential aspects: praxis and metaphysics.

If we don't take our life too seriously then it might be easier to deal with death. — Michael McMahon

:up: :sparkle:

You are approaching to Bushidō.

Well, you are right in the fact that understanding Mishima is complex. Nevertheless, I think we all are getting to the same point: German philosophy is pure metaphysical but lacks in a "real" practice. But it is interesting to show that Mishima is so influenced by German/Western philosophy anyway. That's the real paradox and the main point of why I wanted to start this thread.
Probably German philosophy is not practical enough but we cannot get rid of it. I mean it is one of the pillars of Western thought or philosophy.

A 'disembodied philosophy' is – has always been – incongruent with embodied agency. Mishima's correct: idealism is full of Scheiße yet lacks an asshole — 180 Proof

Well said! :up:

I like how Mishima points out German philosophy. Nevertheless, he was quite contradictory because he was influenced by Western/German culture/thought. He made a try on mixing them up with Japanese millennial culture but he discovered that idealism itself could destroy his culture then…

NASA’s Webb Reveals an Exoplanet Atmosphere as Never Seen Before

December readings:

• The Age of Blue, Yukio Mishima.
• The Guest Cat, Takashi Hiraide.
• Nip the Buds, Shoot the Kids, Kenzaburo Oe.

Re-reading: The Sailor Who Fell from Grace with the Sea, Yukio Mishima.

No. I never referred to average football fans but hooligans.

Actually I don’t care. Bye — I like sushi

If you do not care, why did you start this OP?

These hooligans I meant:


As you see some football "supporters" (hooligans) are neo-Nazis and promote violence.

the light from these stars, I simply can't believe, are from billions and billions of light years away! — Agent Smith

:sparkle: Beautiful how they show their brightness to us. Isn't it? :sparkle:

I think Socrates and other philosophers have already covered the problem of "The Qatar World Cup" in depth, and frankly, I can't think what else I could add. — enqramot

HAHA so ironic... but our posts are based on Lockean empiricism! not Ancient Greece philosophy! :lol: :sparkle:

hence asking people to ‘leave politics out of football’ whilst constantly meddling in politics and bribery. — I like sushi

:up:

Impossible to keep football out from politics when hooligans are political themselves. A lot of supporters are racist and support Fascism.

host nation has NEVER appeared in the world cup … well, that is just plain stupid. It has been getting into more and more of a sad state and I think more than simple words or ‘fines’ would help … perhaps the fans should boycott? — I like sushi

Good point on the fact that Qatar never appeared in a tournament. But it isn't an important fact according to FIFA because there are other nations which never played a big role on World Cups but they host a tournament (for example: Japan and South Korea 2002)
I see it so difficult a possible boycott from the fans. South Amercian national teams have very loyal fans. They would follow their wherever they go. They do not care if they play in Qatar or in an iceberg

All it will take is one major nation to step down (or players from a nation to refuse to play) … I hope one does. — I like sushi

Denmark has already done some steps down to prevent Qatar 2022 worldcup but nobody actually listened to them because it is not a "top" national team so nobody would care if they end up not going to the tournament.

Football is business and it goes where it can gets some benefits. FIFA does not care about political/social issues. According to your argument (or plea) World Cup would have never taken place in some tournaments as South Africa 2010; Argentina 1978 or Italy 1934 where these countries were far away from being a democracy.

What are your thoughts? — I like sushi

I would ban the championship. Nevertheless, I understand that it is a very important tournament for the players (and other interests involved) because millions and millions of persons will see these matches. It is even a chance for young players because if they play good, important teams would sign up some of them afterwards.

What I am doing is applying reason to the matter. I am questioning a basic assumption that many Christians make about the bible,but that is not in the bible. — Bartricks

Where is it then?

Yes, I understood your OP. That's why I explained that Christians use faith to encourage God's existence rather than reason.
It looks like that in your first post you try to explain Genesis and Christianity with reason or critical thinking.

• Japanese literature, cinema and arts.
• Poetry
• Eating Persimmons

If you are afraid of seeing how other users start doubting on Christianity, why did you start this OP then?

I think the main issue of your OP is that you are trying to explain Genesis with critical thought or reasoning. We have to keep in mind that "Genesis", "Bible", "old Testament", etc... are based on metaphors. These are the responsible to explain the creation of the world and why all are here.
Christians believe in God because otherwise would be contradictory. Christianity is based on the role of Jesus as a prophet and he spread his messages on one belief: the faith of God's mercy.
Without God, a Christian would be "naked".

It goes further than that. A Christian already believes in God's existence, he is not using Christianity to believe but encourage the existence itself.

Whether or not one believes in a god, cowardice is sin against oneself, and many, maybe most, are damned to remain cowards their entire lives. — 180 Proof

:up: :sparkle:

Nah, not at all. It would be an interesting discussion indeed. :eyes:

Numbering makes me mentally exhausted. It even limits the powerful of vocabulary. Where all the words would go if we only use numbers?

Yes, they are not afraid of experiencing 'things' after death. But they fear no longer existing, no longer experiencing, no longer being alive. — Bylaw

Fear depends on each individual. I respect those who are fear about no longer keep living for whatever reasons when death is approaching to them. Despite is an opened debate about how we should "handle" our last moments, I still think religion is not the answer. As you explained in your post, it helps for some people because it calms their anxiety down.
Atheists can be soothed too but with a different attitude. I personally believe that, sooner or later, we would experience a feeling where your own awareness says to you that there is no more time to keep living. Again, this is something complex that only experience all of those whose death is near.

And the people who lack a belief in god or believe there is no God, but are terrifed of death, they aren't real atheists? — Bylaw

It is not correlated. You are speaking about death but I was referring of what happens afterwards. An atheist would not have fear about the emptiness because he doesn’t believe in anything or the existence of a “heaven” or “hell”

It's better than nothing! — Michael McMahon

If I don't want an afterlife, then I don't find anything at all. It is contradictory. A real atheist would not find "peace" in Christianity (or other dogmas) because he already accepted the emptiness of afterlife.

What would happen if we meditated to Jesus instead of praying to Jesus? — Michael McMahon

What's the real difference? I have checked a quick research on the distinction between "meditation" and "praying" and I found out: The difference between prayer and meditation lies in the internal intentions of the person. Meditation is an exercise in practicing awareness performed to achieve a stillness or inner peace, and a separation of one’s identity from their thoughts. Prayer is usually an internal plea to a being or deity that absolves someone of the ill feelings regarding their current circumstances.

The definition is ambiguous indeed. But what I reach as conclusion is that meditation cannot be connected with Jesus because with the act of meditation we are separating ourselves from any kind of identity.
So, we can only "pray" to Jesus not meditate about him.

I don't know. I'm more interested in health than veganism, which doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the health of humans or of the world.

In the US, we need a government agency to start reorganizing the way we approach food. What we have is the result of industries that have profits on their minds instead of health. — frank

:up: :sparkle:

Now that the deficit of supplies is approaching, the government finally will make more reasonable decisions in order to consume food. We have wasted tons of aliments for decades and the water is getting scarce more than ever.
What makes me mad is that all the governments in the world are taking too late these solutions.

An independent Scotland would try to re-join the European union.
I would go further, I love the idea of a continent called the UPE, The United Peoples of Europe! — universeness

Sounds formidable! :100:

That's why the European Union was established. One of the main objectives was avoid both USA and Soviet block. It was not easy because Americans tend to have a lot of power inside economics. But the creation of common treaties and common monetary policies were key to fight against dollar. It is true that European Union is not perfect but we can be agree here in the fact that they did their best to develop a system where fits different languages, cultures, governments, policies, etc...
I wish Scotland will be a member in the future.

We have to stop competing as if we still have to live under jungle rules.
We have to stop competing at all levels, family level, local community level, city level, national level, international level, cultural level, emotional level, historical level etc etc.
We need to COOPERATE NOT COMPETE! Capitalism must be reduced very very significantly. — universeness

Agreed :sparkle: :sparkle:

But with countries like China and USA it would be impossible.

I don't think you are being negative about this thread. We have big problems in the wrold as we know today but at least there are aspects which are not based on numbering. That's the point I want to reach. I mean, it is not necessary to be so competitive in everything. Scotland has the best whisky in the world and I think this is due to Scottish land. If Scotland would be named "number ten" instead, we would never know the taste of Scottish whisky.

Cite a culture or society of any antiquity that completely lacks religious iconography or rites (i.e. storytelling aka "myths") — 180 Proof

I am thinking about Vascones, as a pre-Roman tribe. I have read an interesting paper called: some considerations on the christianization of Vascones. But you are right, even in Iberian groups there were some kind of "myths" around.
But that's far from Christianity or God. I would call those practices as pure rites.

Perhaps we could even use such a system of naming countries to silence all those people who think their country is the best country in the world! — universeness

Yes, it could be a rational solution.

But I still don't see appropriate to classify countries in just numbers. If you think it deeply this technique would let people live in more inequality than we consider it nowadays. Because a citizen who lives in a number one will always be more prosperous than a citizen from number one hundred. This is biased and relative. This is why it is impossible to put numerical standards. For example: China holds the highest GDP, so it would be named as "number one" meanwhile GDP of Spain is in the 14th position so my country would be called "number fourteen". Nevertheless, these digits are so relative because despite Spain (or "number fourteen") is poorer than China ("number one") the latter is sh*t at human rights and it is completely a dictatorship.
Paradoxically, you would live better in country fourteen rather than number one

I imagine a world more competitive than we used to know. Named the countries as competitive imperative needs some standards or basic notions of why one country is called "number one" but other country is called "number one hundred ninety seven"
It would affect us. Humanity will not be the same as we know it nowadays because everything would depend on digits instead other values which doesn't have measure. For example: how can we measure the standards of living in a country? Because all of this is so much relative. We can be agree here that Nordics have the highest standards in the world but they are not in the top in terms of economics. Then, who is lying here? The measure of the GDP or Gini index?

In the other hand, numerical ratings tend to have variations. Imagine our country is called "number three" but for some reasons it gets better and changes to "number one". I see this a nonsense because the culture and customs of one country tend to be static so numerical ratings would mean a world based on countries without culture. I imagine a homogeneous world instead of the diversity as we know nowadays.

Interesting thoughts.

I don't see a possibility to name the countries with just numbers neither the fact to classify them in terms of power or wealth. It is an opened debate which country is the number "one". According to GDP is between USA and China. But if we look into Gini index it is Norway the top country.

In the other hand, it is not only about heritage but history. Every country's name represents all of our ancestors and explains where we come from.
A good example: European Union. This name comes from Greek. In classical Greek mythology, Europa was a Phoenician princess. One view is that her name derives from the Ancient Greek elements εὐρύς (eurús) 'wide, broad', and ὤψ (ōps, gen. ὠπός, ōpós) 'eye, face, countenance', hence their composite Eurṓpē would mean 'wide-gazing' or 'broad of aspect.
As you see typing each nation or group with a name has a big importance. Doing the opposite would be worthless.

What I mean to say is that one country's name is not arbitrary. It represents a lot of culture and history on the citizens.