So, we could say that compassion is a whole way of perceiving need correctly. The vision of needs is perhaps central and is one which goes beyond superficialities and identifies the root concerns, such as poverty, or emotional suffering. These form the basis for action but the perceptual vision is the foundation for all else. Perhaps, we could say that it is more than a feeling, and more a feeling toned evaluation of suffering and need. — Jack Cummins
It appears to me this far into this thread that you are not interested at all in what compassion is, but instead what you "feel" or want compassion to be. The trouble is that instantly you're back thinking that what compassion is not, is - and that's confusion. What, for example, is "correctly"? Whose "correctly"? In service of whose or what agenda?So, we could say that compassion is a whole way of perceiving need correctly. — Jack Cummins
However, what I would add is that there has to be an emotional element to motivate the concern in the first place. — Jack Cummins
I believe that it has been thrown away, into the rubbish bin of philosophy ideas, just when we need it more than ever. — Jack Cummins
So, I am asking how relevant is for us to consider now? — Jack Cummins
But compassion, as a feeling, is nothing if it isn’t followed by good deeds. — NOS4A2
I actually thought that the debate would be more about whether people are actually able to rise beyond self interest. But, so far no one has challenged that but just queried the whole question of whether it is just a feeling. — Jack Cummins
As far as giving things up, surely this would only be about giving up that which involves harming others. — Jack Cummins
believe that it has been thrown away, into the rubbish bin of philosophy ideas — Jack Cummins
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.