He thought the idea of god/s were unnecessary and believed that religions generally led to conflict. He liked to garden and read books and preferred to stay out of arguments. — Tom Storm

What an intellectual man he was! :flower: :sparkle:

Man has the tendency to degrade things that were once very important but are not used any more to a considerable degree. And as I can see clearly, Philosophy is also included in them. Unfortunately! — Alkis Piskas

Agree.

I will never understood the tendency to degrade both philosophy and Greek mythology. My only guess is that some powerful people who control the education don't want to have critical thinkers.

What’ not ‘Which’. — I like sushi

English is not my mother tongue. I oftenly make some grammar mistakes

Perhaps a particular field but I have no idea what the ordinary person knows of 'mathematical formulas'? — Amity

It is true that an ordinary person doesn't care about mathematical formulas. Nevertheless, I assume that he or she gives more credibility to scientific evidences rather than philosophical papers. For example: the Moon was always been a subject of study to mythology but until the humans didn't end up there they didn't give a "real" credibility.

How is that 'out of phase' — Amity

What I mean is that probably my way of thinking is away from modernism or new era of virtual content.

I think I understand. You mean away from the extreme or inflexible dogmas/institutions?
I don't think that is the same as your original claim but never mind. — Amity

No. What I mean is the possibility to develop arguments and essays in a pure humanistic view. Not depending on scientific validity for verification.

Thanks for the conversation — Amity

Thanks to you as always! :flower:

've started threads that don't inspire others :groan:
But that's not my prime motivation. — Amity

I experienced the same feeling :cry: I remember starting some threads and didn't get any answer... but as you perfectly said: that's not my prime motivation and it doesn't affect my motivation either.

How many people find any kind of 'truth based on some mathematical formulas'? — Amity

To be honest, I personally think most of the people think in this way. In my view there are two different types of language: pure linguistic (fulfilled by philosophy, readings, mythology, religion, rhetoric, history, etc...) and mathematical (Physics, Chemistry, Maths, engineering, etc...)
Both groups have a common goal: understand the world and try to find out a meaningful life. I prefer the first ones rather than mathematical language.
Nevertheless, it looks like that there is a big part of the population who is sceptical about some theories if you do not show them with "essays" and "formulas"
For example: look how obsessed is the people with Artificial Intelligence or Metaverses.

I would sound "out of phase" but I think I will learn more about my life thanks to both mythology and philosophy rather than "AI" or robots resolving formulas.

Imagination is an inherent aspect of thought.
Imagination is involved in a wide variety of human activities,... — Amity

Agreed. We share the same point. Of course imagination is inherent to our thought. I was only claiming more "freedom" in our imagination trying to avoid taboos or limitations.
Thanks to imagination both mythology and philosophy developed through the years. But another important fact is how the thinkers/philosophers get rid of obstacles.

It's only tiresome if no questions are asked...and so far, the text has proved a useful starting point.
Thanks — Amity

Thanks for your kindly words, Amity. Appreciated them a lot.
Whenever I start a thread I am worried about if the users would like it or not...

A brief description of ideas and principles characteristic of the Friesian and other modifications of Kantian philosophy editorially recommended in the Proceedings of the Friesian School, Fourth Series:... — The Principles of Friesian Philosophy

I fully recommend you that philophical website. It is so interesting and there is a lot of information. You can learn a lot!

Thanks for the article. I noticed your OP lists only 4 out of the 5 characteristics of myth and changes in philosophy as listed. The 5th: — Amity

Yes, that's true. I didn't want to put the point number 5 because I was worried about being so tiresome. Nevertheless, I see you shared ir anyway, so thank you so much. Appreciated it.

How true is it?
Where is the evidence; how do you know? — Amity

Easy. Just check out what the millionaires spend their money: meta-verses, cryto-coins, fake internet worlds, artificial cells to live longer, private trips to Mars or Moon, etc...
Those "investments" are pure materialistic. There is not philosophy or imagination on it. I only see it as selfish people showing off their power and value over the rest.
I think we really missed what philosophy teach us: happiness, ethics, wisdom, reasoning, etc... and all of these virtues are not monetary.

lives on in QAnon — Tom Storm

I guess their followers see Donald Trump as Odysseus fighting against Cyclops.
Ivanka Trump as Penelope :joke:

. I wouldn't swap science for mythology. But I'm wary of hindsight and narrator bias. The ancients weren't dumb and we ain't too clever. — Cuthbert

Completely agree. Sadly, we currently live in a social context which depends on scientific materialism. It looks like the truth is based on some mathematical formulas but we forget and give up on imagination.
I am with you: I wouldn't swap science for mythology.
"mythopoeic," "mythopoetic," or "mythic" thought. "Mythopoeic" means "making" (ποιεῖν, poieîn, from which the word "poet" is derived) "myth" (μῦθος, mûthos). :grin:

The story I prefer to tell myself is one of metacultural development from mythos (infancy) to logos (adolescence) to ethos (adulthood) to philosophos (maturity — 180 Proof

:100: :sparkle:

You would be required to :pray: there, offer incense, and perform a small ritual before you begin your day. — Agent Smith

:lol: plot twist: countries with a deep tradition in Hinduism tend to have similar rituals. Such as India and Thailand: Hindus, though, aren’t the only South Asians to worship elephants. Buddhists, for instance, believe so-called “white” elephants, a light-colored variant, carry special significance. In Thailand, white elephants are considered the king’s property, and wars have been fought over these relatively rare animals. S15 EP7: THE ELEPHANT MEN Living Gods

If one wants to worship Sophia one has to do so half-jokingly nowadays (re the Flying Spaghetti Monster). If you don't, be ready to be the laughing stock of your colleagues. — Agent Smith

I don't get this :sweat:

So we've discussed the pros of mythology, what about the cons? Let's not forget its limitations too, oui? — Agent Smith

Sure, there are some cons towards mythology. A good example could be the lack of innovation.. Most of the tales pass through the story tellers without any doubt or criticism. I think this is due to the loyalty shown to the "Gods" who (according to Greek Mythology) are self-justifying and do not need approval from us. For example:Zeus then sets up the stone at Delphi, so that it may act as "a sign thenceforth and a marvel to mortal men"

But, philosophy shows more self-criticism during the transition of different periods. A good example could be Socratics vs Sophits

Well written, highly informative OP. A thank you from all of us to javi2541997. — Agent Smith

Thank you to you for taking part in my thread! :sparkle:

The other facet to myths is the personification of qualities e.g. war has a god Ares, death is Thanos, life is Phanes and so on... — Agent Smith

Another common personification: Sun has a God Rê in Egyptian mythology; Helios in Greek mythology; Utu in Mesopotamian culture, etc...

I think is important to highlight the fact that mythology also uses human representations. For example: Odysseus. He is a legendary Greek king of Ithaca and the hero of Homer's epic poem the Odyssey.

We might see ourselves at the end of a great tradition originated by them. Should we be more critical of our hindsight? The texts are minimal. That leaves a lot of blanks for us to fill in however we want. — Cuthbert

We were losing a lot of originality, indeed. I am agree with you in the fact that we should be more critical with our insight but... where is our real background? Everything sooner or after end up in Socrates, Aristotle or Plato works (thus, Greek philosophy which flourished from mythopoeic).
Then, we have to take part in mythology again if we want to be critical again.

Whereas the philosophical mind demands a reduction to some common cause that stands behind all things. — apokrisis

Agreed! This is a good difference between myth and philosophy too: the cause behind all things and arguments. That reduction of common cause come from a debate during decades among all the philophers. Whereas in mythology it didn't appear to be causes at all because there were multiple explanations without even logic. A good example is Egyptian mythology. The Gods and heroes are represented by different scenarios so randomly, without a common cause explained with argumentation.

Given your interest in the Japanese and mythology I thought this was an interesting coincidence. — Fooloso4

:up: :flower:

The myth of the metals in the Republic is called a "noble lie".

The muses tell Hesiod that they speak lies like the truth (Theogony 27) — Fooloso4

:up: :flower:

Related to muses there is also another interesting fact: there are no Muses of plastic arts (painting, sculpture, architecture), or of philosophy.
This must mean that the myth of the Muses was finalized before the advent of philosophy or of significant stone architecture.

Nevertheless, it is true that we use the word "Muse" to refer to a person (commonly female) who inspire us to make art.

We can see a good example in this paint which is called: The Sacred Grove, Beloved of the Arts and the Muses. They are represented by some artists with a connection to Ancient Greece or Greek philosophy.

What a great topic, thank you. — Cuthbert

:up: :yum:

I imagine archaeologists of the future finding the statue of Eros in Picadilly Circus and saying "Look, Londoners still believed in the ancient Greek gods!" — Cuthbert

Fortunately! I think this is the path we should to keep. Never forget where art, literature, myths, philosophy come from. One of our duties is to maintain those "proofs" of their existence.

He also said the world is full of gods. Just as we know there is no Eros and still put up a statue to him. — Cuthbert

Yes! But Thales tended to be more argumentative than poets or "story tellers" who spread the myth in Ancient Greece.
At least one of the main skills towards Thales was their ability to justify his thoughts rather than to put up everything as pure affirmative or "true"

Well, yes. I also think that the paper I shared fails to put mythopoetic in epistemology. But I didn't pretend to claim that I was agree with the author but the simple fact to consider how interesting other perspectives on this issue are.

Their effectiveness lies, at least in part, in providing beliefs that are taken by the listener to be true. Rather than validated true belief, Timaeus, in his own works, gives us "likely stories (ton eikota mython)". — Fooloso4

Exactly. As I typed above, myths tend to be self-justifying. The inspirations and beliefs about Gods or heroes are enough to ensure their validity without a basic argumentation.

Part of differences between myth an philosophy have to do with the transition of an oral tradition wherein myth originated, to a written tradition — ChatteringMonkey

That's a very good point, indeed. I wasn't aware of the process of transition. It is another big difference we have to consider of. It is true that (as you explained with the link you provided) the sense of the reading is clearly different. If we read a myth it sounds so poetic but if we check a Plato's work it gives other feelings.

The question of why Plato used mythopoesis is interesting. — Fooloso4

Yes, it is :up:

You already shared a link where that topic was discussed. Nevertheless, I found another paper who looks so interesting and I think it is worthy to attach it here: The Mythopoetic Mind of Plato: The Kingdom-Sage’s Muthos in Timaeus, The Republic, and The Symposium (Parts III & IV)

I found in the paper a very important quote about Plato: The safest general characterization of the European philosophical tradition is that it consists of a series of footnotes to Plato. by Alfred North Whitehead, Process and Reality, p. 53 [Free Press, 1969]; the painting is the School of Athens.

I think it could be important to consider Plato as the real evolution of mythopoeic.

Thanks for sharing. I am completely fool for forgetting Plato's work. Yes, he is essential to mythopoeic.

Stunningly perfect 'Einstein ring' captured by James Webb Space Telescope

I'm retiring to my aesthetic cave — Noble Dust

Enjoy your retreat, friend. Art can only be understood in loneliness. :flower:
May this song follow you, how you well taught me! :sparkle:

This is all to say that the deeply wise and invaluable practices (such as Alchemy) from our human and non-human ancestors have not been forgotten. In fact, their resurgence is guaranteed. — Bret Bernhoft

"Non-human" ancestors appeared again in another OP of yours but you didn't explain who are our non-human ancestors yet. So, if you pretend guarantee their resurgence it is better to start explaining who are those.

Personally I’m done trying to “define art”. My only interest is in whether a piece stirs something in me, makes me think differently, or makes me feel an emotion that i don’t feel every day. This piece did none of those things. — Noble Dust

:clap: :100:

So, by what definition is this art? — T Clark

As Noble Dust explained previously, it is necessary to makes us feel an emotion that we don't usually feel. After seeing the paint I don't feel anything. To be honest, when I saw I thought: "it looks like an old video game"
In the other hand, it is also true that the basic concept of art has changed so much that is even blurred. It is difficult to consider what is art in nowadays...

I think religious discussion can be as heated as political discussion — universeness

Agreed. These topics tend to be taken so personal from some users because those tend to defend their arguments and doctrines at any price.

Ok! I understand what you mean now. You try to elaborate or create something related as a new categories inside the threads, right?
I mean, whenever you start a thread you have to choose different categories to fit your new discussion. You propose a new category for "reading groups"
For me it is so interesting, indeed. Probably we can put up there discussions like "Thus spoke Zarathustra" or "Emmanuel Kant readings" etc... instead of trying to put them in specific categories such as "Metaphysics" "Epistemology" "Philosophy of religion" etc...

Recently, it was pointed out that 'book discussions are difficult to carry out in this forum'.
That is certainly true. — Amity

Well, to be honest with you I think book discussion are easier to carry out rather than political ones. Since I've been in the forum I took part in a lot of threads related to books. My OP's are even influenced by Mishima works and I never noticed big issues during the debate. I mean, the answers adjusted to the nature of the books.

Would it make book discussions easier, if there was a stickie with a clear and specific guideline? — Amity

What do you mean? Do you want a discussion related to linguistics rather than philosophy?

Yet how many years have there been this idea of that the European Union is finished? Or China is finished?

The fact is, country simply aren't finished. They can have a huge crisis, but they aren't finished. I think even Sri Lanka isn't finished. Even Somalia isn't finished, it seems to just hang on there... somehow. And actually, might be more than just hanging on. — ssu

:up: :100:

South Korea is another good example about how a country is never really finished and they can flourish from the ashes!

Pedro Sánchez is the current secretary of socialist party and yes, as you said he got into the power due to replacements. It amazes me his ability to survive each year inside Spanish politics because it seems nobody likes him but he stills remain in power.
He even wrote a book about this skill which is literally named as manual of resistance

There are other sectors of society which call him Mr. Handsome or Prince Pedro

Here we see him talking with (supposedly) his successor in the leftists: Yolanda Díaz.

Current Spanish PM:



Previous PM:



Minister of public order and prisons :death: :yikes:

Minister of Agriculture: — Baden

Irish potatoes, yummy :yum:

I keep reading to the master of masters.

After the Banquet, Yukio Mishima.

Death in Midsummer and Other Stories, Yukio Mishima.

Now that we know better how genetics work, don't you think heterosexuality should have a kind of social advantage because of the fact that they re the ones transferring their ADN to their children? Or you think this does not make any difference?

Good point but I think it depends on the perspective. There are some people who think it is not worthy to have kids at all.

The video scandal might say something, but she has shown the political inexperience in other ways too. I would grade her as a mediocre+ politician, not a stellar one. — ssu

Completely agreed :100:

Yet, if you read the news, it doesn't look all that bad, but who trusts the media these days? — Agent Smith

Agreed. News and media are in their worst time. They spread lies without any type of consideration. I no longer trust on journalism and I feel sceptical about all the news which come from China or Xi Jinping

Potential of Chaos :
"The modern idea of chaos—something totally without order and seemingly disruptive by nature—was formed during Roman times.
Before that, the Greek Chaos (Khaos) was understood as a gap filled with fertile potential from which everything and anything could come." — Gnomon

So interesting, indeed. :up: :100: