• The Problem Of The Criterion
    think the idea that we identify concepts by ‘essential features’ is a myth we use to constrain the reality of experience to rational, consolidated forms. — Possibility

    Can you expand?
  • The Problem Of The Criterion
    The concept ‘dog’ is constructed in our minds with the help of language in relation to instances. So, a ‘dog’ may be initially understood in terms of a relational structure of shapes, size, sound, texture, etc. - depending on whether those early instances are a family pet, pictures in a book, or sounds from next door. — Possibility

    Yes, nice. Truth in the end is an umbrella word used to describe a very wide range of relationships. We don't know anything much about truth but we know how to justify beliefs. Everything is what it is by virtue of its relation to everything else. You can't capture X in it's purity. There isn't anything to X except those relationships.

    Dogs are one thing but we also know what a Muppet is (well, some of us do). This is something that doesn't even exist in nature and is a time-limited, made made artifact. But there is a grammar of Muppet design and it is possible to recognize the visual patterns and even context of their appearance, even if we have never seen a Muppet in the real world or watched a TV show with Muppets in it. When you say this is a Muppet you are not reflecting some platonic ideal of a glove puppet in the world of universal puppet forms. You are simply connecting to one or more visual aspects of the object which adds up to a Muppet. Of course none of that stopped our 6 year-old calling the mop at our place a Muppet.
  • Is the underlying basis of reality infinite?
    The reality which we can know is finite. — Proximate1

    How do you demonstrate that?
  • Know Thyself, is it the beginning of all wisdom?
    Turns out I was wrong. And that realisation comes after a period of standing back and reflecting. — Amity

    That's a courageous thing to say.

    My own view is that people do not reflect often enough on two things. 1) on how much they really know about something and 2) how they are coming across.
  • Why do people need religious beliefs and ideas?
    My book would be about people with values succeeding and people taking a ride on their success and destroying the geese that lay the golden eggs. — Athena

    This idea is much in the public discourse already. Even just those people who write interminable complaints about Disney and its vacuuming up and vandalism of the Star Wars franchise. The idea that commercial forces hijack a good idea and destroy it in their rapacious quest to make money is a commonplace. But if you can do something brand new or unexpected with it, great.
  • Why do people need religious beliefs and ideas?
    What are the names of those theologians, so I can look them up? — Athena

    Most theologians, priests and preachers I have met hold this view.

    For some famous examples of Christian thinkers, in chronological order

    Paul Tillich
    Thomas Merton
    Bishop Shelby Spong
    David Bentley Hart
  • Why do people need religious beliefs and ideas?
    I would enjoy doing a book about how money has corrupted the forces of morality we once had. This being the result of organizations based on values, being bought up for by people only interested in profits. — Athena

    I think many books have been done on this subject already. Das Kapital being one of the more famous examples. I think this this is one of the great recurring tropes in popular culture too.
  • Why do people need religious beliefs and ideas?
    I am not really opposed to Christianity at all, just find it conjures up so much fear, but I feel so really stressed if I go into an old church. — Jack Cummins

    Don't forget that many forms of Christianity do not accept the idea of a devil or demons or any of the cartoon violence in Revelation. For many Christian theologians the Bible is allegorical and not to be taken literally under any circumstances.
  • In Defense of Modernity
    ↪TheHedoMinimalist


    It's generally the job of philosophers to be critical of their times and the ideas in current circulation. Society is so atomized these days that it must be hard for philosophers to know where to begin or what to rate as important.
  • Do atheists even exist? As in would they exist if God existed?
    That's not what I'm saying. I'm sorry if you see it that way, not the intention. — Paul S

    Ok. What are you saying then. It isn't clear to me.
  • Thoughts on why we might hate when people think we're just simple
    If so, then how does the simplification of one's identity hurt one's vanity? — Nagel

    I wouldn't take it for granted that this is a given. If you are getting to the essence of a person then this is frequently appreciated by them. Getting to the essence is often a form of simplification too. Not everyone hates being understood in concrete and/or elemental terms. Generally it is only when the 'understanding' is seen as reductive that it rankles.

    People quite like being stereotyped, judged and pigeonholed if those categories conform to their understanding of themselves. For instance, if I say to my friend Joe that he is an aging, Star Wars fanboy who refuses to grow up. He says, 'You got me there, Brother.' Someone else might find this offensive if they visualize themselves as something different or more elevated than this. Joe does not.
  • Do atheists even exist? As in would they exist if God existed?
    ↪Paul S
    I wasn't interested in that argument, just the steps you were taking. The steps people take are often more significant than their destination.

    All you seem to be saying is that theism allows for more mystery than atheism.
  • Monism or Pluralism
    ↪PoeticUniverse


    Interesting claim. How would you demonstrate this?
  • Do atheists even exist? As in would they exist if God existed?
    It remains the case that there is no stronger a case for atheism than there is for theism.

    That isn't the point we are addressing. The point is; what basis do you have for accepting a proposition? If a person said atheism resonates with me better than theism, that's why I believe it, that would be inadequate.     — Paul S
  • Do atheists even exist? As in would they exist if God existed?
    In my opinion discussions are not about being right. It is about a satisfactory experience for both interlocutors. I hope we can keep it that way — TaySan

    Of course. I am regularly wrong about most things.
  • Why do many people say Camus "solved" nihilism?
    It doesn't really give you a key though. Camus is still dodging by assigning meaning and value to living. Nihilism says there is no meaning or value. — Darkneos

    I don't see the connection between there being no meaning or value and not having any personal meaning or values. The entire point of Camus is that if there is no transcendent meaning then we are radically free to choose our own. Millions of people have done this with no problems.
  • Why do many people say Camus "solved" nihilism?
    amus doesn't matter. The relevant one is Jean Genet. Life is not a pleasure, but suicide consists of a low level of serotonin in the nervous system. — Miguel Hernández

    I like some of your points here. No doubt that a person with a reason for living will more likely endure even in a concentration camp. Therapist Dr Victor Frankl devised Logotherapy as a consequence of his time in a concentration camp (he wanted to understand why some people survived and others did not) and his ideas are far more relevant that what we can offer.

    Camus used suicide as a frame for his version of existentialism. It's a device.
  • Why do people need religious beliefs and ideas?
    ↪Ken Edwards
    Is religeon primarily concerned with human Morals? Or primarily with religeous Ritual? Or primarily concened with advice about mundane concerns of day to day living? Or primarily concerned with group activities such as Bingo games or picnics? Or economics? Or all of the above in equal amounts? — Ken Edwards

    Unanswerable questions. Depends on the religion, the country, the culture, the individual.
  • In Defense of Modernity
    Well, what is the difference between modernity and modernism? — TheHedoMinimalist
    Yeah. There is a thesis in this subject and we have yet to define terms. Modernism is long gone and was a hugely influential movement that ultimately led to post-modernism.

    This original statement:

    have noticed that there seems to be quite a few philosophers who have a tendency of spending a lot of time criticizing modernity. — TheHedoMinimalist

    I think this lacks precision. Thinkers across millennia are often critical of the era they live in. Each contemporary era has its preoccupations and ideas worthy of criticism. What is it about the present era that sticks out for you?
  • Do atheists even exist? As in would they exist if God existed?
    ringing up bigotry as somehow intrinsic to any of this is confabulation. Who is really comforting themselves here? No offence. — Paul S

    You really don't understand my point. I like your use of the word confabulation.

    Paul, you made a rather dubious observation that you believe because it resonates. I simply stated that things resonating are not a good pathway to truth. And yes this is the same approach that is used by some racists to justify their position.

    If you think this is saying that I am associating racism with your point then I can't help that. How about this: people believe that Mohammad was the profit of Allah because it resonates with them. They are certain that Jesus was merely a man, falsely described as God by some. They hold this position because it resonates better with them. It just feels right.
  • The Origin of the First Living Cell with or without Evolution?
    So the mystery of the origin of life is very real. — Gary Enfield

    No one denies this. Responsible scientists do not. The best answer to the question of abiogenesis is we don't yet know how it happened. But filling the hole with a fantasy because don't yet have an answer is not cool either. I recently spoke to some people who are certain life on earth was manufactured by aliens.
  • Do atheists even exist? As in would they exist if God existed?
    Okay. So fairies aren't real, you say. But if someone were to experience a fairy, doesn't it make it real to them? Imagine your child has had a very vivid dream about a fairy. Wouldn't it be cruel to say the experience isn't real? — TaySan

    Really? We were talking about epistemology and now you are talking about parenting. Where is the connection? Would you tell a child that their dream about a monster taking them away in the night was true?

    Just because someone has an experience of something doesn't mean it is real. And a world that encourages everyone to 'experience' their delusion as 'real' is not helpful.
  • Do atheists even exist? As in would they exist if God existed?
    Okay. Then give me an example of a linguistic concept that isn't real, if you can. — TaySan

    A fairy.
  • Do atheists even exist? As in would they exist if God existed?
    You're cherry picking. That's not at all in the spirit of what I was getting at. — Paul S

    Inaccurate use of the term cherry picking. I was simply restating the point you made and providing an assessment of it.

    The fact that you also have other ideas is not lost on me. In relation to one of these:

    Theists are open to the possibility that something divine or supernatural can interfere with an experience and effect the outcome - that's very like an indeterministic outlook of the universe.

    Atheists are not accepting of a divine or supernatural influence on experience that can effect an outcome - that's very like a deterministic outlook of the universe.     — Paul S

    That's limited. Some atheists only hold that there are no grounds for accepting the proposition that a God exists. They do not say they know everything or that everything is knowable. Some theists are very closed to new ideas. Unless it is as per theri version fo scripture is is untrue.
  • Do atheists even exist? As in would they exist if God existed?
    What do you think about my argument that God exists as a linguistic concept. Therefore God exists as a construct in our mind. Therefore God is real? — TaySan

    This kind of idea comes up all the time, doesn't it? Lots of things exist as linguistic concept already but that doesn't make them 'real', it makes them a concept.
  • The Dan Barker Paradox
    To all The Bible can't be held in one mind... — TheMadFool

    The list of books for which this might be true would be immense.
  • Maintaining Love in the family
    ↪Thinking
    I was reading that 80% of marriages end up soon after in divorce and that 10% are unhappy that they are married. — Thinking

    This is not necessarily a bad thing. What is the reason you are dismayed by this?
  • Why do many people say Camus "solved" nihilism?
    here is love and Camus does speak of it... — Cate

    Perhaps we are to assume he was too busy being estranged from life, experiencing absurdity to truly see other people.
  • "Persons of color."
    I prefer Non-Whites — 180 Proof

    There are other problems inherent in defining groups only in opposition to another (in this case dominant) group.
  • Do atheists even exist? As in would they exist if God existed?
    ↪TheMadFool


    I've explained it several times. Let's move on. :smile:
  • The Dan Barker Paradox
    The best way to become an atheist is to read the Bible — Dan Barker

    I've heard this quote for decades attributed to many people including Twain.

    “Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived.” Isaac Asimov

    Many people have agreed with this though bitter experience. Especially those Christians who leave their faith. I heard a Jesuit priest putting it in reverse:

    "The stronger the faith, the less likely it has been spoiled by knowledge of Scripture."
  • Favorite philosophical quote?
    "The situation is hopeless. We must take the next step."
    - Pablo Casals - cellist
  • Do atheists even exist? As in would they exist if God existed?
    Theism just resonates more with me and feels more like how it really is, at least for me. It's at the edge of perception, or what an Atheist would call delusion, it's subjective and fuzzy so it's not like I can really support my view. — Paul S

    I think that is a decent insight. Your belief is not supported by a strong epistemology and amounts, if you don't mind me saying to: "I believe because it's more subjectively comforting to me."

    One problem with this approach is that this is the same justification people often use for racism or any number of bigotries. 'It just feels to me that X race of people are inferior to the rest of us - this just resonates more with me.' It can be a trap to hold a belief merely because it is comforting or because you were socialized to think it.
  • Do atheists even exist? As in would they exist if God existed?
    Well, as far as I know, what is said must stand on its own, who said it is irrelevant. Ref: Epicurean dilemma. — TheMadFool

    I'm sorry I am not able to make this clear enough. My fault. What I'm trying to say is that God is an occult notion and Socrates (even if he never lived) is merely a dramatized method of philosophy.

    There is no preexisting requirement that you believe Socrates existed. All you need to do is read the material and it speaks for itself. You cannot say the same thing about God in the Abrahamic tradition. Belief is the first step towards taking a moral position - without this you won't accept any of the 613 commandments, let alone the famous 10. As the believer will often argue, an atheist can follow the ten commandments but is still a sinner unless he believes in and loves God.
  • Is Man's Holy Grail The Obtaining Of Something For Nothing?
    ↪synthesis
    I hear you.
  • Is Man's Holy Grail The Obtaining Of Something For Nothing?
    ↪synthesis
    was saying that it seems like (most) people will do just about anything to obtain something for nothing (and the great majority of it is perfectly legal). — synthesis

    Minimising work is often a key driver of human behaviour - I suspect we are hard wired for shortcuts. This seems to be the wellspring of most technology. We are a time saving, effort saving species. Given that you have defined a problem or situation, do you have some suggestions towards a solution?
  • Why do people need religious beliefs and ideas?
    ↪Jack Cummins


    Fair enough. Fundamentalists are monomaniacs and it is generally beyond our capacity to address this, whether it be political fundamentalists or Jungian versions :smile: . Once a person is fully infected by a doctrine, they see the world entirely in those terms and anything which contradicts their 'certainty' is viewed with rancour. These sorts of monomaniacs are pretty common on discussion forums. The irony is, to be human is to dismiss ideas that don't work. In this activity we all need to take care not to become the kind of shrill pest I described.
  • Why do people need religious beliefs and ideas?
    What I don't understand is the way in which the whole area of religious thinking has to come down to those who see the central issues viewing in literal traditional ways(Christian or other views), or the other alternatives of atheism. Both seem so extreme. — Jack Cummins

    Not sure what you mean by the 'whole area of religious thinking' not sure such an area exists. Maybe you mean the common or general discourse on religion and spirituality. But is that in fact an accurate account? Fundamentalists abound in all areas - from economics to religion. There are many more nuanced discussions on theism and atheism e.g., David Bentley Hart for one.
  • Why do people need religious beliefs and ideas?
    ↪Jack Cummins


    People often get lost in comparative religion and see what they want to see. Given that the subject is crammed with vagueness and deepities and unverifiable premises and centuries of symbolism and ambiguities, how exactly will you tell good from bad and what are you hoping to get from this?
  • Why do people need religious beliefs and ideas?
    I think that the better question would be is what evidence do you have to suggest that Jung was a 'crank'? I think it is difficult to measure his ideas and probably the only way you could do this would be to measure the way in which his ideas or Jungian therapy have a positive impact on people's lives. — Jack Cummins

    Jung was a 'psychologist' whose interest in myth ran away with him. His collective unconscious idea has rarely been taken seriously except by artists who use it in many ways because it feels right to them. It is no different to astrology - which persists despite the evidence. Jordan Peterson has made Jung popular again in some circles.

    It's not unusual for bad or false ideas have a positive impact on people's lives, that doesn't mean this is a good thing.

    What makes you think it is necessary to try to classify or group together myths in the first place? What precisely does this provide you?
Home » Tom Storm