That would require one to be an epistemic autonomist, and to in fact be epistemically autonomous. Epistemic autonomy is not possible. Because, as you later say: — baker
Except that humans have developed such vastly different ideas of what counts as "thriving", "happiness", "peace", "harmony" that the above criteria are too general. People can thrive, be happy, live in peace and harmony while living under tyranny. People can also thrive, be happy, live in peace and harmony if they are politically correct androids. — baker
And what is more, spiritually advanced people tend to resent to be put to the test and their actions judged. — baker
Of course. But as ↪Apollodorus
points out repeatedely, acknowledgement of doubt and uncertainty can lead to a schizoaffective disorder. — baker
Better = That which gives more pleasure overall, taking into account space and time. — hope
If one is blissfully ignorant of how one's opinions came to be (and whom one got them from), then all is well in la-la land...I don't see why you say that. As I see it all it requires is not being concerned about the opinions of others and making up your own mind. — Janus
Oh really, and how do you know that? What criteria do you personally employ to enable you to judge whether someone is fulfilling their potential?I disagree. Sure people can make the best of bad situations, but I don't believe anyone with any self-respect would choose to live under any form of tyranny. As to being politically correct androids, I don't count failing to think for yourself as an example of fulfilling your potential and hence it also doesn't count as an example of thriving in my view.
Oh, so you know what my potential is?Note, I haven't said you have to agree with my view; you should have your own view which you have worked out for yourself, if you have the capacity for that at least; otherwise you will fail to reach, or even approach, your potential in my view.
I'm being both cynical and not. I've noticed that people who tend to describe themselves as "spiritually advanced" or who imply as much tend to resent to be put to the test and their actions judged. (Or their fans do it on their behalf.)And what is more, spiritually advanced people tend to resent to be put to the test and their actions judged.
— baker
Oh really, and how do you know that? What criteria do you personally employ to enable you to judge whether someone is spiritually advanced or not?
You've been operating out of some unstated premises, it's those I want you to spell out.Rubbish! Chronic and crippling doubt may lead to mental disorders, but mere acknowledgement of uncertainty is just being intellectually honest.
Your arguments are not convincing; surely you can do better?
Oh, how fresh you sound! How romantic!Of course! One of the things I've regretted in my adult life, is the paucity of my education in the classics of ancient literature and philosophy. I was always a poor student, for various reasons, but aside from that, hardly any of this material was on my curriculum. Later in life, I've come to realise just how profound the classical philosophical tradition is, even though my knowledge of it is fragmentary. In my view - which is shared with Pierre Hadot, who is a scholar of the history of philosophy - most of what passes for philosophy in today's world, has nothing to do with philosophy as understood in the classical tradition. Philosophy proper is a transformative understanding of the nature of life. — Wayfarer
The upshot of being born and raised in old-fashioned Europe is that one did get a classical education. But it's also an education that kills one's interest in the Classics. (There is a cynical saying -- "The Classics are those that everybody knows and nobody reads.") — baker
I don't think that's right. What I call 'red' at the two extremes of the range some may call 'orange' or 'mauve'. That would just be personal perception and choice; I can't see what it has to do with theory. — Janus
And yet precsiely those same people who demand the Universe to be a welcoming place for them, who demand it to be secure and comforting for them get to thrive in it. Because such people, believing they are entitled to security and comfort in this world, tame rivers, kill the infidels, and pursue science, in order to make the world a safe place for themselves. And they get it done. — baker
This is also a reason why "ancient wisdom" isn't so popular: to acknowledge ancient wisdom would be to acknowledge that one's ideas aren't one's own, but that one got them from others. Now, that's deflating. — baker
But as ↪Apollodorus points out repeatedely, acknowledgement of doubt and uncertainty can lead to a schizoaffective disorder. — baker
The problem is that those external points of reference are often hostile to us, and we have to find a way to rely on and trust people who, at the very least, don't care if we live or die. — baker
But if the first principles are provided by intuition, and intuition is not reliable, then how is it possible that we start from a higher level of certainty in our logical proceedings? — Metaphysician Undercover
"Since there is a science about nature, clearly it must be distinct from both a practical and a productive science. For the principle of motion in a productive science is in that which produces and not in that which is produced, and this is either some art or some other power. Similarly, the principle of motion in a practical science is not in the thing done but rather in the doers. But the science of the physicist is concerned with things which in themselves have a principle of motion. It is clear from what has been said that physics must be neither a practical nor a productive science, but a theoretical one, for it must come under one of these genera of sciences." — Aristotle, Metaphysics, Book Kappa, 1064a, 10, translated by Hippocrates G. Apostle
"Moreover, it is foolish to attend alike to the opinions and imaginations of disputing parties, for clearly those on one side must be mistaken.
This is evident from what happens with respect to sensations; for the same thing never appears sweet to some people and the contrary of this to others, unless in the one case the sense organ which jjudges the the said flavors is injured or defective. In such a case, we should believe those on one side to be the measure but not those on the other. My statement applies alike to the good and the bad, the beautiful and the ugly, and all other such. For the claim of our opponents does not differ from that of those who make each thing appear two by pressing below the eye with their finger, and say that there are two things, because two things appear, and again that there is one, for each thing appears as one to those who do not press a finger." — Ibid, 1063a
The anthropomorphic element is an important criteria to employ when comparing models of the divine. — Valentinus
What do you think is the relationship between models of the divine and models of the origin of the universe? — Fooloso4
If one is blissfully ignorant of how one's opinions came to be (and whom one got them from), then all is well in la-la land... — baker
On what basis would you say "it's red", rather than "it's orange", unless you are applying some sort of theory which enables your judgement? — Metaphysician Undercover
The interest in understanding this place where we are born, taken by itself, argues against seeing them as separate sets of models. — Valentinus
Regarding the status of the color red, the old Philosopher seems to be favoring Janus during this discussion of Protagoras' view: — Valentinus
It's not theoretical (for me at least). I would say it's red rather rather than orange if it seems to be red rather than orange. It's just a seeming or a feeling. as associated with my felt sense of my overall experience of colour, not theoretical at all. — Janus
You "feel" the difference between the meaning of two words, rather than thinking it? That's a new one on me. You call it "orange" because when you see it you get the feeling of orange from it?
I can't say that I know what orange feels like, but I think I can judge whether or not something is orange. When I make this judgement I do not refer to my feelings, I refer to my memories, so clearly my judgement is not derived from my feelings, it's derived from my mind. — Metaphysician Undercover
When I look at something and it feels or seems or looks orange to me I say it is orange. There is no right or wrong in this as there is no definite boundary between orange and red. — Janus
A "shared body of experience"? What do you mean by this? — Metaphysician Undercover
When you say "it feels or seems or looks orange to me", how do you think you can make that judgement without applying theory? — Metaphysician Undercover
If you think it is a theory then explain just what the theory is and what its predictions could be. — Janus
One way to express my uncertainty about interests can be observed at the beginning of the Timaeus. — Valentinus
... where storytelling is closely regulated, is inserted into a story about the distant past. That seems to complicate one's relationship to the cosmogony rather than provide orientation to our present endeavors. — Valentinus
Does that difference in approach mean Plato and Aristotle are using different models of the divine? — Valentinus
"The city and citizens, which you yesterday described to us in fiction, we will now transfer to the world of reality. It shall be the ancient city of Athens, and we will suppose that the citizens whom you imagined were our veritable ancestors of whom the priest spoke; they will perfectly harmonize and there will be no inconsistency in saying that the citizens of your republic are these ancient Athenians" — Plato, 26d, translated by Benjamin Jowett
I was referring to when Critias related the story of what an Egyptian priest told Solon about ancient Athenians — Valentinus
What is one to make of the "fiction that becomes a fact" immediately before a creation story is told?
I meant to ask if Plato and Aristotle are using the same model despite taking such different approaches. Aristotle takes the cosmogony and edits it so that it can become an argument. — Valentinus
what would using the same or different model of the divine look like in their case? — Valentinus
The person sees that if there is a hint of yellow in the red, it ought to be judged as orange. So the person applies this theory (you agree that this is theory?) — Metaphysician Undercover
No I don't agree it is a theory; it is a name for a perceptible difference, a distinction. — Janus
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.