And his way of coping with his underdog status was to be convinced he is of divine origin with special powers and special rights.It being Easter, there was a famous underdog, born into lowly circumstances, died a horrible death, betrayed by one of his supposed friends. (Forgive me, I’m hazy on the detail.....) — Wayfarer
And his way of coping with his underdog status was to be convinced he is of divine origin with special powers and special rights. — baker
Jesus was not 'convinced of his divine powers'. When asked, he demurred - 'It is not I that is good'. And when he suffered on the Cross, he cried out 'why have you forsaken me?' — Wayfarer
John 16:28
I came forth from the Father and have come into the world; I am leaving the world again and going to the Father.”
John 6:38
For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me.
John 14:31
but so that the world may know that I love the Father, I do exactly as the Father commanded Me. Get up, let us go from here.
John 5:19
Therefore Jesus answered and was saying to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, unless it is something He sees the Father doing; for whatever the Father does, these things the Son also does in like manner.
John 10:30
I and the Father are one.”
John 6:44
No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day.
John 14:28
You heard that I said to you, ‘I go away, and I will come to you.’ If you loved Me, you would have rejoiced because I go to the Father, for the Father is greater than I.
John 8:49
Jesus answered, “I do not have a demon; but I honor My Father, and you dishonor Me.
Source: https://bible.knowing-jesus.com/topics/Jesus-Christ,-Relation-To-Father
That's a shame.Anyway, that's my 'Easter thought', I'm not going to pursue this as a philosophical debate. — Wayfarer
I have heard, from critical scholarship, that the 'eye of the needle' was a gate in the wall of the Old City, and that the camel in the parable was fully laden. Which still illustrates the same point, but somewhat less hyperbolllically. — Wayfarer
It goes without saying that the winners are happy — baker
Is there a theory of how even the losers and the underdogs can have some peace of mind and some sense that their life is worth living? — baker
Is there a philosopher or other author who has written about this? — baker
What do you mean by "right"? Winning something does not make one right. It simply makes one a winner. There is more than one way to win at something -brains can win out over brawn in many instances. Just look at humans vs neanderthals. Who is now extinct?So might makes right. Some people become the winners, some the losers. — baker
It being Easter, there was a famous underdog, born into lowly circumstances, died a horrible death, betrayed by one of his supposed friends. (Forgive me, I’m hazy on the detail.....) — Wayfarer
I used to have a quip that went something to the effect "That which is consumed by the fittest must itself have been fit." — James Riley
"One farmer says to me, 'You cannot live on vegetable food solely, for it furnishes nothing to make bones with;' and so he religiously devotes a part of his day to supplying his system with the raw material of bones; walking all the while he talks behind his oxen, which, with vegetable-made bones, jerk him and his lumbering plow along in spite of every obstacle." — tim wood
Is there a theory of how even the losers and the underdogs can have some peace of mind and some sense that their life is worth living?
Is there a philosopher or other author who has written about this? — baker
So might makes right. Some people become the winners, some the losers. — baker
It goes without saying that the winners are happy, convinced they are living worthwhile, meaningful lives.
And that the losers, the underdogs are not. But they still live, somehow, they keep going. — baker
Yes. Non-religious "theories" that come to mind: Hellenic Cynicism, Epicureanism, Stoicism, Pyrrhonism ... Chinese Dàojiā ... Indian (non-Vedic) Śramaṇa tradition of e.g. Jainism, Buddhism, Charvaka ...Is there a theory of how even the losers and the underdogs can have some peace of mind and some sense that their life is worth living? — baker
The mainstream tradition of Western Philosophy (Plato-Aristotle-Aquinas + Descartes-Kant-Hegel) is "written by the victors" but there's always been counter-traditional writings by e.g. Hellenes, Nominalists, Immanentists (i.e. radical secularists), Freethinkers, Libertarians, Pragmat(ic)ists, Absurdists, etc ... Daoists and Śramaṇaists in China and India, respectively.(Or is philosophy, like history, written by victors?)
And his way of coping with his underdog status was to be convinced he is of divine origin with special powers and special rights. — baker
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/19322/19322-h/19322-h.htm—The fate of the Gospels was decided by death—it hung on the “cross.”... It was only death, that unexpected and shameful death; it was only the cross, which was usually reserved for the canaille only—it was only this appalling paradox which brought the disciples face to face with the real riddle: “Who was it? what was it?”—The feeling of dis may, of profound affront and injury; the suspicion that such a death might involve a refutation of their cause; the terrible question, “Why just in this way?”—this state of mind is only too easy to understand. Here everything must be accounted for as necessary; everything must have a meaning, a reason, the highest sort of reason; the love of a disciple excludes all chance. Only then did the chasm of doubt yawn: “Who put him to death? who was his natural enemy?”—this question flashed like a lightning-stroke. Answer: dominant Judaism, its ruling class. From that moment, one found one’s self in revolt against the established order, and began to understand Jesus as in revolt against the established order. Until then this militant, this nay-saying, nay-doing element in his character had been lacking; what is more, he had appeared to present its opposite. Obviously, the little community had not understood what was precisely the most important thing of all: the example offered by this way of dying,the freedom from and superiority to every feeling of ressentiment—a plain indication of how little he was understood at all! All that Jesus could hope to accomplish by his death, in itself, was to offer the strongest possible proof, or example, of his teachings in the most public manner.... But his disciples were very far from forgiving his death—though to have done so would have accorded with the Gospels in the highest degree; and neither were they prepared to offer themselves, with gentle and serene calmness of heart, for a similar death.... On the contrary, it was precisely the most unevangelical of feelings, revenge, that now possessed them. It seemed impossible that the cause should perish with his death: “recompense” and “judgment” became necessary (—yet what could be less evangelical than “recompense,” “punishment,” and “sitting in judgment”!). Once more the popular belief in the coming of a messiah appeared in the foreground; attention was rivetted upon an historical moment: the “kingdom of God” is to come, with judgment upon his enemies.... But in all this there was a wholesale misunderstanding: imagine the “kingdom of God” as a last act, as a mere promise! The Gospels had been, in fact, the incarnation, the fulfilment, the realization of this “kingdom of God.” It was only now that all the familiar contempt for and bitterness against Pharisees and theologians began to appear in the character of the Master—he was thereby turned into a Pharisee and theologian himself! — link
Is there a philosopher or other author who has written about this? — baker
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.