I think Kant created a moral abomination with his categorical imperative. Schopenhauer was right - Kant was thoroughly deluded in terms of morality. Morality isn't based on imperatives, but on compassion. There can be no rationalising morality.I think Kant has done a pretty good job rationalising morality. — TimeLine
It's good you like feeling it man. Is it soft, warm, hot, tender, loving and mysterious this feelin'?The compassion in this exchange is so palpable. — Noble Dust
You have quite a dirty imagination. I wasn't making any sexual allusion there - just playing with words about the feeling of compassion itself. In fact, I had edited it and added stuff to it immediately, you should refresh the page.Bet you can't wait to get married to your virginal, submissive, obedient, quiet, catholic girl born with no sense of taste or a personality? — TimeLine
It's so peachy the sound of it melts inside my ears sugar-coated babydoll!Well isn't that just peachy, sweet cheeks. — TimeLine
I don't live in a metaphysical realm, but one does not cultivate compassion by saying "uhhh it's my duty to be nice - it's my duty to be nice - it's my duty to be nice". One cultivates compassion by fellow-feeling and meditation.An illusion is the belief that your feelings within this metaphysical realm is somehow free from the articulation of consciousness, and even if this is so, one can learn to cultivate compassion, hence the CI. — TimeLine
Well, to answer your question sweet pickle, I think you'd lose that bet ;)Bet you can't wait to get married to your virginal, submissive, obedient, quiet, catholic girl born with no sense of taste or a personality? — TimeLine
Yes.Is that how you define compassion? — TimeLine
You do have a tendency to bring your butt in from time to time :PI was just butting in for fun, but... — Noble Dust
You do have a tendency to bring your butt in from time to time :P — Agustino
Soft - It's not hard, it doesn't press on you.
Warm - It's like a warm feeling.
Hot - It's intense.
Tender - It's not harsh, it's gentle with you. — Agustino
Ok sour bunny ;) >:OYeah, sarcasm over, creepy crust. :s — TimeLine
Fellow feeling means being able to identify with others - their pains, suffering, etc. Fellow feeling emerges out of a - like you like to say - a metaphysical realisation that we're all one - or better said, we emerge from the same ground of being, we have a common source.Define fellow-feeling? — TimeLine
Fellow feeling means being able to identify with others - their pains, suffering, etc. Fellow feeling emerges out of a - like you like to say - a metaphysical realisation that we're all one - or better said, we emerge from the same ground of being, we have a common source. — Agustino
Ok sour bunny ;) >:O — Agustino
Okay so let's see.So where exactly have you exemplified these characteristics of compassion here? — Noble Dust
Did I press against anyone?Soft - It's not hard, it doesn't press on you. — Agustino
I kept a nice and playful atmosphere.Warm - It's like a warm feeling. — Agustino
Definitely intense!Hot - It's intense. — Agustino
I think I was quite gentle, would you disagree? Look at this:Tender - It's not harsh, it's gentle with you — Agustino
At least she can feel she's in pink flying unicorn lala land surrounded by hearts now no? :p >:OClear bunny bunny? (L) — Agustino
Well yes, because I take the question to be a joke too. I don't think I've been lacking compassion towards TL in our interaction here. Why would you think I have?That entire post is a joke, right, and not a response to the problem of compassion? — Noble Dust
Well yes, because I take the question to be a joke too. I don't think I've been lacking compassion towards TL in our interaction here. Why would you think I have? — Agustino
Sarcasm is underlying hostility disguised as humour, a way to ward off someone who has historically failed to 'get it'.TimeLine wouldn't get bored, you know. — Agustino
This 'realisation' that emerges as a revolution of character is still a conduct of thought and thus not beyond but rather a result of the faculties of cognition. This identification with our conscience indicates a beginning of our autonomy and self-inhered responsibility to those in the external world where ethics becomes a practice. This practice becomes the categorical imperative; it is compassion with reason, not just some mystical gobbledegook where one can flout being compassionate without knowing why.Fellow feeling means being able to identify with others - their pains, suffering, etc. Fellow feeling emerges out of a - like you like to say - a metaphysical realisation that we're all one - or better said, we emerge from the same ground of being, we have a common source. — Agustino
It's the result of the affective part of the soul, not of the thinking/rational part.This 'realisation' that emerges as a revolution of character is still a conduct of thought and thus not beyond but rather a result of the faculties of cognition. — TimeLine
Again the bombastic words. Dear God in Heaven. You just love talking about autonomy, rational agents, etc. don't you?This identification with our conscience indicates a beginning of our autonomy and self-inhered responsibility to those in the external world where ethics becomes a practice. — TimeLine
Sorry but this is so false. Compassion is ultimately without reason - without a why. If you have a why for being compassionate, then you're not really compassionate, you're just utilitarian. You're just being compassionate for a reason. That's like loving your child because he brings you money :sit is compassion with reason, not just some mystical gobbledegook where one can flout being compassionate without knowing why. — TimeLine
But there's no argument against that in this thread. — Noblosh
Then why don't you be clear on what statements you have made that you consider illogical, but not nonsensical.If you accept these particular definitions, you come to understand that one must conform to logic and reason in order to commit a logical fallacy which is called like that for this very reason. Then what's irrational is that which completely ignores logic and reason but that doesn't make it nonsensical because sense may still be derived from it. — Noblosh
More nonsense. In your first sentence you say that I'm interpreting his idea philosophically (well, we are in a philosophical internet forum). Then in your second sentence you imply that he is using the phrase as a philosophical attack on rationality. Duh! Which is it?Dostoevsky was a literary fiction writer. You're interpreting his idea here philosophically, rather than in a literary way. What I meant when I brought up the quote is that I'm in agreement with Dostoevsky when he chooses to willfully rail against rationality as being the only source of truth, or the only understanding of reality. — Noble Dust
It sounds to me that the person who says and believes such a quote is simply upset that Christ doesn't exist and will believe in Christ anyway in order to rebel against the line of thinking that exposed the truth. This is a great example of being delusional - of believing in something in the face of all the logic and reason that informs you otherwise. Being delusional is equivalent to being illogical and nonsensical. Not only that but it does nothing to bring people together on something that they can agree on. What you seem to imply is that truth can be subjective. It isn't.Another well known Dostoevsky quotes goes something along the lines of, 'If it was proved that Christ never existed, I'd rather go with Christ". The idea is that the sheer profundity of something like a backlash against rationality, or the profundity of divine Grace, are things that are sufficient for some men (men and women of great intellectual poise) to willfully throw away this modern reliance on rationality; to willfully rail against it; to rage against it. Indeed, to function, mentally, philosophically, within a rational realm doesn't avail itself to anything outside of rationality. So it's a self-defeating system that scrutinizes everything within it's own set of rules, without allowing for the possibility of new, or forgotten, or overlooked rules. In other words, rationality, strictly in the way you're using it, doesn't make room for creativity. — Noble Dust
They are simply rules for human beings to follow in order to stay in line with the cultures they are born in. — Harry Hindu
Some would disagree. Thus the ''failure'' of reason in the field of morality. — TheMadFool
Sorry but this is so false. Compassion is ultimately without reason - without a why. If you have a why for being compassionate, then you're not really compassionate, you're just utilitarian. You're just being compassionate for a reason. That's like loving your child because he brings you money :s — Agustino
Thanks for admitting you are hostile :D (Y) >:O — Agustino
What a pitiful argument.
I believe in unicorns. Some would disagree. Thus the "failure" of reason in the the field of the existence of unicorns. :-} — Harry Hindu
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.