So I am not sure what you are getting at. — schopenhauer1
Foremost Breatharian, Jasmuheen, formerly Ellen Greve, is credited with starting today's Breatharian movement. Her Prana Program advises followers to convert to Breatharianism gradually: Become a vegetarian; become a vegan; move to raw foods, then fruits, then liquids and finally prana. You replace physical food with air and light as well as metaphysical nourishment.
Apokrisis thinks that we should X, so we should X. — schopenhauer1
Not really what I am getting at. Rather, why we do anything. Our motivation. Our goals. Our decisions. It isn't simply dictated by instinctual drives. It isn't even that we have some learning mechanisms. We have symbolic brains that make meaning of the world by parsing them out into conceptual frameworks, by iterative interactions of individual and the group. — schopenhauer1
We aren't doing things because apokrisis thinks there needs to be balance. — schopenhauer1
It's just apokrisis' ideas on X, nothing more. — schopenhauer1
I wish life were an endlessly fascinating riddle to be solved.
Oh wait. It is! — apokrisis
Life in general is like that. A mix of general constraints and particularised choices. We can turn food into a moral dilemma. But we still must eat food. Go figure. And I didn’t invent this world. I just comment on how it is. — apokrisis
That being said, the human mind dreams about how the world could be better, even if it contradicts fundamental constraints of reality. — _db
Metaphors aside, humans want more than reality can provide. We always have and we always will. — _db
development of something like the language faculty (which animals lack, though they don't lack communication) and the emergence of self-consciousness. — Manuel
Do you believe that being an airatarian is conceivable dietary choice? — apokrisis
A rational society doesn't require that kind of deliberation beyond the point that it has some collective utility. — apokrisis
The point is there is no fixed instincts anymore. — schopenhauer1
But that would be a gross straw man to equivocate that with the types of human reasons I am discussing here. — schopenhauer1
My point is that existence is a hierarchy of constraints. And that constraints indeed define the freedoms at each stage.
You are thus not free to choose your freedoms. They emerge from the system of constraints. — apokrisis
Of course we are limited.. by gravitation, by the laws of the physical universe.. But that would be a gross straw man to equivocate that with the types of human reasons I am discussing here. — schopenhauer1
Anyways, now we are just talking past each other. — schopenhauer1
But the topic of having reasons that I am discussing is what it means to be a species that has reasons.. The fact that we can do things a different way.. That there is no right way for anything. — schopenhauer1
Any time you put a goal in mind, you are simply putting your "spin" on it. I called that a hypothetical imperative. Yes, if you WANT that, one way to get that is THIS. But no one has to want that by necessity nor do it in that way that is prescribed. — schopenhauer1
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.