This progress is not the result of some cosmic force. It is a gift of the Enlightenment: the conviction that reason and science can enhance human flourishing. — universeness

Pinker shows that life, health, prosperity, safety, peace, knowledge, and happiness are on the rise, not just in the West, but worldwide. T — universeness

What is the name of that book or where do I find that information? I have heard the New Age is a time of high tech, peace, and the end of tyranny. The people of the New Age will not be able to relate to our past because their experience of life will not give them the information they need to relate to a more primitive time. That is like us trying to relate to the first humans venturing out of Africa. I believe we are headed in that the New Age direction and have been on that path since the Enlightenment.

I am listing to a professor's explanation of the Enlightenment. :rofl: I pay attention to all explanations of the Enlightenment because it was such a pivotal time in history. Do you realize the philosophy of that time, the conviction of reason making life better, triggered the Awakening. The Awakening is the birth of Evangelical Christianity. It is theologians defense of religious doctrine and I mention this because I think that is one of the barriers to fully manifesting the New Age that needs to be corrected BUT!

We can not get rid of religious notions that prevent progress without raising awareness of what reason has to do with a high morality and democracy.

Amazon

You might also watch:

Do you realize the philosophy of that time, the conviction of reason making life better, triggered the Awakening. The Awakening is the birth of Evangelical Christianity. It is theologians defense of religious doctrine and I mention this because I think that is one of the barriers to fully manifesting the New Age that needs to be corrected — Athena

Every silver lining has its cloud!

BUT!

We can not get rid of religious notions that prevent progress without raising awareness of what reason has to do with a high morality and democracy. — Athena

If reason, rationality, exemplification and even demonstration, fails, after many attempts, and we are (I hope) barred, from forcing an individual to support all efforts to create a progressive, humanist, secular, global, society which is benevolent to all species and all universal objects that come into the sphere of influence of the human race. Then I think the best we can offer the dissenters(and the criminal or nefarious), is regular or perhaps even permanent (matrix style) existence in a VR/AR world where they can experience the 'rapture,' of their choice, until they die.

If reason, rationality, exemplification and even demonstration, fails, after many attempts, and we are (I hope) barred, from forcing an individual to support all efforts to create a progressive, humanist, secular, global, society which is benevolent to all species and all universal objects that come into the sphere of influence of the human race. Then I think the best we can offer the dissenters(and the criminal or nefarious), is regular or perhaps even permanent (matrix style) existence in a VR/AR world where they can experience the 'rapture,' of their choice, until they die. — universeness

I am sorry but I do not have the information necessary to understand what you said. I do not know what matrix style is or VR/AR worlds. Do those letters stand for virtual reality and artificial reality? If those letters mean either, I do not have any thoughts of such needed for meaningful meaning. Those words are only words to me without meaning as some possible world realities.

That's ok, it's easily explained. The matrix is a series of sci-fi movies, starring Keanu Reeves. You could easily get a synopsis of the plot from a wee google search, if you have never watched them.
Yes! VR/AR is virtual reality/augmented reality. VR is a total simulation. AR uses the real world as the background and augments your experience by adding virtual characters and events.
If you have never experienced a good quality VR headset experience, I would highly recommend it.
It really can completely fool your senses, your brain can have real difficulty not reacting to what you are experiencing, as if it was really happening. VR/AR is still in it's infancy but it's possibilities are very powerful indeed. Perhaps in the future, we may achieve holodeck tech such as:

That's ok, it's easily explained. The matrix is a series of sci-fi movies, starring Keanu Reeves. You could easily get a synopsis of the plot from a wee google search, if you have never watched them.
Yes! VR/AR is virtual reality/augmented reality. VR is a total simulation. AR uses the real world as the background and augments your experience by adding virtual characters and events.
If you have never experienced a good quality VR headset experience, I would highly recommend it.
It really can completely fool your senses, your brain can have real difficulty not reacting to what you are experiencing, as if it was really happening. VR/AR is still in it's infancy but it's possibilities are very powerful indeed. Perhaps in the future, we may achieve holodeck tech such as: — universeness

It would be wonderful if we could use this technology instead of drugs. How about replaying history and changing it and watching what happens when history is changed. I love the original Nintendo games and being able to redo the past section of the game and get better results.

Also I remember a movie where a grieving person was able to sit and talk with someone who past. That would be so wonderful. Maybe we could resolve many personal problems with such technology? Psychotherapy linguistics makes a person aware of how s/he remembers the past and then rethinking it because linguistics is about how we talk to ourselves and tell our life stories in a new way. We can change our story and change our lives. With better technology the process could be even more effective.

I bookmarked the other video and love that it spoke of Daniel Kahneman. His perspective can also be life-changing. His perspective gives new meaning to Socrates' "know thy self". This is an important part of understanding secular morality and the sense of responsibility that self-governing people must have.

Democracy is not the rule of the people, it's the rule of the majority. No government can ever achieve true democracy and maintain it for two generations.

VR/AR/Future Holotech might mean we can each experience the world as we would personally make it, quite soon. Maybe that will be better than the good feelings and fantasies experienced under substance abuse. Perhaps it will even be cathartic for many, perhaps it will also confirm, that the REAL world is the only one that can offer each person REAL experiences that the best and most convincing holotech never will.
Humans WILL travel every possible path. Such is our nature.
We live in very exciting times, perhaps it has been ever thus for every human generation. Such is the nature of relativity.

We live in very exciting times, perhaps it has been ever thus for every human generation. Such is the nature of relativity. — universeness

I know historically when we harnessed electricity and could lite our streets, people thought we were in the Age of Enlightenment.

Humanity has not always progressed as it has since the Age of Reason, that moment in time when our loyalty shifted from the authority to explain everything and dictate what and how things would be done, to relying on our own reasoning and giving the power to the people to decide what will be and how it will be. Before this moment in time, we were in the Dark Ages and yes they were really dark because the Church had destroyed liberty in a fight for its power. Scholasticism began making things right by reviving the thousands of years of progress that ancient civilizations had made before the Church took control.

However, from the time of the change in authority from a few with power and authority to everyone having a say in governing decisions, we did not have the vast knowledge we have now, nor the material means to make life totally different. We are in a moment in time that will change the human experience as much as our experience of life was changed when we climbed down from the trees.

We are in the Resurrection. Geologists, anthropologists, and related sciences are resurrecting our past and it is our duty to learn everything we can from them and to rethink everything we believe to be true. We have gone from Socrates' mandate to know ourselves as individuals, to knowing ourselves as a species. And so, as it is in heaven it will be one earth. But God didn't build Noah's ark and He is not going to clean up the earth and make it new. We are 100% responsible for what will be. Only by getting our act together can we have free will and heaven on earth.

Democracy is not the rule of the people, it's the rule of the majority. No government can ever achieve true democracy and maintain it for two generations. — New2K2

Democracy is rule by reason. It begins with asking, how do the gods resolve their differences and concluding they argue until there is a consensus on the best reasoning. Only when we get our understanding of what is, and what we want right, can we get good results.

Democracy is not efficient. Autocracy is efficient. We are still working on getting our act together and we are still dealing with the mentality that supported kings as authority over the people. We are as autocratic as we are democratic and we seem to understand autocracy and the good reasoning for it, a whole lot better than we understand democracy.

What we achieve, depends on how we educated our children and why we educate them. Public education is like a genii in a bottle. The stated purpose is the wish and the students are the genii.

which gods and why are we modelling our lives on these gods? I know if other gods that work differently. Why do we even have to reason it, isn't there some hand-me-down history from these gods?

We are 100% responsible for what will be. — Athena

:clap: We can no longer afford to scapegoat nonexistent gods.

We have gone from Socrates' mandate to know ourselves as individuals, to knowing ourselves as a species. — Athena

:clap: I don't need the fake hope of fictitious god's to help me in my life, I just need good people like yourself to exist.

↪Athena which gods and why are we modelling our lives on these gods? I know if other gods that work differently. Why do we even have to reason it, isn't there some hand-me-down history from these gods? — New2K2

Well yes, it is the history of democracy as it originated in Athens. The folks of Athens asked, how do the gods resolve their differences? As you know, their gods had plenty of differences, and yet they are immortal so they can not resolve their differences by killing each other. Their conflicts went on until reason ended the conflict.

One of the most important gods isApollo, the god of reason. I don't know if any other mythology has a god of reason. Apollo was born when Athens was in turmoil which pressured people to rethink everything and come up with some solutions. You probably know Socrates was opposed to some of the stories of the gods and he asked...

Is Zeus a good god? Everyone was sure he was. Then Socrates asks, is it good to commit adultry, and everyone knew of the trouble in Zeus's and Hera's marriage, and they had to answer, no, it is not good to commit adultery. See the dilemma? Can evil gods do good? Athenians did not believe evil people could do good. If good happened because of the actions of an evil person, that was just a fluke.
Socrates is known for speaking against democracy and yet he also died for it.

I think those who say Socrates spoke against democracy are missing the most important point of what he said. He said ignorance is a terrible thing and that makes a democracy of ignorant people a terrible thing. The gods did not have good morals and Socrates pleaded that Athenians to take up the problem of ignorance and stop feeding citizens stories of the gods that leads to bad behavior. Here is where Apollo is extremely important and there can not be a democracy without Apollo, the god of reason.

Socrates was opposed to spending time on such things as questioning what is the substance of life and is the universal element an atom. Socrates was concerned with our consciousness and moral judgment. Yet today we can easily see how the understanding of logos, reason, the controlling force of the universe, also shapes our understanding of gods.

Athenians stand out as unique because they broke away from supernatural explanations of everything, and began looking for the physical cause of all things. This put humans on a totally different path from the rest of Asia. It is a secular path and it led to democracy. The Bible is no better for democracy than Homer's stories of the gods.

I don't need the fake hope of fictitious god's to help me in my life, I just need good people like yourself to exist. — universeness

You do know my effort in the forum would be completely useless without someone who understands what I am saying as you are understanding the thoughts. I could not think the thoughts your agreements bring to mind, if you were attacking me instead of understanding what I am saying.

Here is the miracle of democracy- it is what happens when our minds meet in agreement. The way of Apollo must begin with a willingness and ability to understand each other. When this happens there is enlightenment and those involved can see even more than they did in the beginning of the communication.

Christianity can be deadly to the necessary process as a belief that we know God's truths, blinds us from knowing truth. As soon as we think we know God, we know not God, but only our mental representation of God.

Bottom line, my thinking is only as good as yours.

Bottom line, my thinking is only as good as yours. — Athena

Bottom line for me when it comes to you Athena is that YOU DO GOOD!
You are reasoning and tracing a path from historical theism, to a democratic humanist imperative.
I am fine with the path you are tracing and the characters you invoke, because, you regularly confirm, that you are not suggesting the gods of the ancients were real. You describe them, as exactly what they were used for, imitation/virtual manifestation/simulation/emulation of observed aspects of humanity and human behaviour and human intrigue.
The only difference between us, in the path you trace, is that I think, that the 'benevolent' consequences of the use of god characterisations, is, in the final analysis, outweighed by the 'pernicious' consequences.
But any small divergence we have in the details of our interpretations of the effects and consequences of historical and current theism, pales into insignificance, when I know that what you DO to help other people, makes me so, so grateful that folks like you exist and have always existed in every generation. May it always be so!

Bottom line for me when it comes to you Athena is that YOU DO GOOD!
You are reasoning and tracing a path from historical theism, to a democratic humanist imperative.
I am fine with the path you are tracing and the characters you invoke, because, you regularly confirm, that you are not suggesting the gods of the ancients were real. You describe them, as exactly what they were used for, imitation/virtual manifestation/simulation/emulation of observed aspects of humanity and human behaviour and human intrigue.
The only difference between us, in the path you trace, is that I think, that the 'benevolent' consequences of the use of god characterisations, is, in the final analysis, outweighed by the 'pernicious' consequences.
But any small divergence we have in the details of our interpretations of the effects and consequences of historical and current theism, pales into insignificance, when I know that what you DO to help other people, makes me so, so grateful that folks like you exist and have always existed in every generation. May it always be so! — universeness

I am very sensitive to the importance of culture. Joseph Campbell said mythology is essential to humans and when they do not have a shared mythology they make their own myths and use the people they know as the monsters and antagonists. That is pretty heavy and I think destructive. It is much better if we have a shared mythology instead of blaming the people in our lives for our problems. He also said mythology is about teaching the young how to be adult members of the group.

The US intentionally had its own mythology transmitted through education. When we began education for technology we destroyed our national heroes and the culture that united us and made our liberty possible. I think that is a big mistake.

If you understand me correctly, I am not opposed mythology being constructed and then manifested as a culture. I am glad you see the Greek gods as human inventions and based on human traits. Athena was radically changed at the end of the Persian wars when her temple was rebuilt to tell the world about democracy. I think we should do all our power to restore her temple with all the statues returned and put in their places. This is far more important to me than rebuilding the Jewish temple.

Each god and goddess is a concept. We can also know them as archetypes and learn a lot about ourselves by learning of these archetypes. Jean Shinoda Bolen, M.D." books "Gods in Everyman" and
"Goddesses in Every Woman" are amazing because with her explanations of the gods and goddesses as archetypes we can learn more about ourselves and also the gods and goddess that led to our democracy.

I do not stand alone in valuing the gods and goddesses. Our forefathers had a mural created in the Capitol Building portraying Greek and Roman Gods and Athena is seen there as the Spirit of America and the goddess who defends liberty and justice. As the Spirit of America, she brandishes the sword of Justice and is the defender of those who stand for liberty and Justice. Athena is portrayed as our Statue of Liberty holding a torch and a book, symbolizing the Enlightenment. She also stood in courts as the Lady of Justice and she holds scales for the balance of justice.

Truths are so elusive and perspective has such an important part in our ability to see them. We can totally miss the obvious without the right perspective to see them. Understanding the gods and goddesses as concepts make them very useful. They are also behind our laws.

I ask you to consider reading the books and seeing if they change your perspective.

We all have to go to Hades from time to time to get a sense of meaning. People who do not go to Hades are totally frivolous and I think that is a waste of our lives. But, we should never go to Hades without the help of the gods and goddesses because it is so easy to get lost in Hades. That is to experience depression or even more serious forms of mental dis ease such as psychosis.

Thank you for being open-minded. There is so much to be done if we are going to save democracy. I really do not like what education for technology has done to our attitude and spirit. So much has been lost from our consciousness. This is the mechanical society we defended our democracy against. I hope you see how your values can be served with a different way of seeing the truth. Being totally opposed to the gods and goddesses is very Christian and very atheistic and lacking in a philosophical perspective.

He also said mythology is about teaching the young how to be adult members of the group. — Athena

I understand, but I think we can achieve the same goal through the use of truth, and I think the results will be better than the results of using mythology. We can continue to story tell but we don't need to rely so heavily on numinous or supernatural suggestions. We can simply extrapolate and stretch real science.
Star trek proposes a lot of future tech which is not impossible. The flip style mobile phone was so like the communicator posited in Star Trek. Fantasy characters like Ironman are not impossible. An omnigod is impossible. Getting two of every species onto an 'ark,' is impossible.

When we began education for technology we destroyed our national heroes and the culture that united us and made our liberty possible. I think that is a big mistake. — Athena

Give me an example of a 'destroyed national hero,' and 'a destroyed cultural aspect that united us and made our liberty possible,' that would exemplify your point here.

I think we should do all our power to restore her temple with all the statues returned and put in their places. This is far more important to me than rebuilding the Jewish temple. — Athena

That's a step way too far for me Athena. How would that be different to calling for a new temple containing statues to a modern manifestation of the fabled Hercules or biblical Samson in the guise of The Hulk? I also have no attraction towards rebuilding Solomon's temple. If I had the power and democratic permission of the majority of stakeholders, I would convert the dome of the rock mosque, Westminster abbey, St Paul's Cathedral, The Vatican, Buckingham palace and every other church, chapel, kingdom hall, Hindu/Buddhist temple, into 'people property.' Units that can be used by the hungry, the homeless etc. The theists, theosophists, royalists can still run them as they do now, but they would not own them, and the main function of such places, would have to demonstrably be, the physical support of those in desperate need. If a homeless person is on the streets, then the local theists/theosophists, would have to explain why they are not helping that person.

Athena is portrayed as our Statue of Liberty holding a torch and a book, symbolizing the Enlightenment. She also stood in courts as the Lady of Justice and she holds scales for the balance of justice. — Athena

So, such fabled characters are presently, still represented in American culture, fine. So, let's make the path you are tracing here, from the ancient gods and goddesses to theism, as it manifests today. A reason to insist that such historicity, gives all theist groups/organisations and all of the associated current wealth and access/ownership of property, a legislated responsibility, to directly aid the worlds needy and suffering humans, much much more, than they do at the moment. Their main purpose must be to help alleviate all human suffering and need.
They must use the majority of their wealth and assets to achieve this, or else, the wealth and assets of a particular organisation, such as the Roman Catholic Vatican City can be seized and turned into funds to help the worlds poor and needy humans.

I ask you to consider reading the books and seeing if they change your perspective. — Athena

I am sorry I cant offer to do that, as I have such a long list of books I want to not just read, but fully understand, and I don't have the lifespan, to add your recommendations to my currently way overburdened list.

We all have to go to Hades from time to time to get a sense of meaning. People who do not go to Hades are totally frivolous and I think that is a waste of our lives. But, we should never go to Hades without the help of the gods and goddesses because it is so easy to get lost in Hades. That is to experience depression or even more serious forms of mental dis ease such as psychosis — Athena

I agree with you here, but I don't think we ever have to 'go to hades,' as I think it regularly comes to visit us, whether we are ready to face it or not.

Being totally opposed to the gods and goddesses is very Christian and very atheistic and lacking in a philosophical perspective. — Athena

I think our detailed approach will continue to differ and I suspect you would fight against many of the details of my suggestions about what legislated responsibility, I would lay at the door of all current theistic/theosophist/royalist organisations, along with the serious actions, I would take against them, if they did not comply with the responsibilities I would impose on them.

I suspect neither of us will be allowed to fully reboot the world and have human society function in the way you or I would make it function. BUT, I also think that we would be able to find a great deal of common cause between us and we both scream from the same humanist platform. I am probably more firmly in the 'totally secular/irreligious camp,' compared to yourself.
I would only favour mythology which was not 'scientifically impossible.'

I don't really have a formal education. I finished high school but it was basically a useless education in a 2nd world small town.

I have to make clear that I never had any interest in politics and my approach on this matter is not political but still people mostly responded to this post in a political perspective because the word 'democracy' is used and that triggers politics in our conditioning.

As far as book suggestions for you, I don't think I have ever read books on this specific matter but the approach of personal responsibility (change starts from within) comes from many sources, like Nietzsche (poor man still misunderstood), Socrates, Gurdjieff, Krishnamurti, Dostoevski, Zen masters, and many others.

A recent discovery for me is Iain McGilchrist. His work is abundant but very much worthy.

Athena I don't really have a formal education. I finished high school but it was basically a useless education in a 2nd world small town.

I have to make clear that I never had any interest in politics and my approach on this matter is not political but still people mostly responded to this post in a political perspective because the word 'democracy' is used and that triggers politics in our conditioning.

As far as book suggestions for you, I don't think I have ever read books on this specific matter but the approach of personal responsibility (change starts from within) comes from many sources, like Nietzsche (poor man still misunderstood), Socrates, Gurdjieff, Krishnamurti, Dostoevski, Zen masters, and many others.

A recent discovery for me is Iain McGilchrist. His work is abundant but very much worthy. — TheMadMan

What are the years of your high school education and what is a 2nd world small town? The date of your education is important because of the changed purpose of education. Before or after 1960?

Do you know what put you on the path of your book choices? I am looking for understanding what put you on your chosen path that can it be used to interest others in that path? I am asking the same question of myself because we have agreements and what in our characters led to us having a similar point of view when we are kind of going against the flow? I certainly despair at our focus on politics rather than having a more Greek concept of the polis and human nature.

I love books about the brain and made a note to myself that I must have a book written by Lain McGilchis. I googled him and found this exciting explanation....

Attention is not just receptive, but actively creative of the world we inhabit. How we attend makes all the difference to the world we experience. And nowadays in the West we generally attend in a rather unusual way: governed by the narrowly focused, target-driven left hemisphere of the brain. — McGilchrist

Yes, that seems an important observation and I believe it is directly related to the change in the purpose of education. I think the change was a big mistake. It clearly is rapidly advancing technology but what of our humanness and our polis?

I finished high school in 2015 in Albania. I grew up in a post-communist society that suffered for many centuries under oppression. The atmosphere growing up was and still is that of the zero-sum game where success is god, all I remember from my teachers is that you must make money no matter what and that wisdom has no value in this era.

So that created a rebellion in me towards the direction of the current culture, so naturally I found affinity with controversial writers down the ages. Always felt like people lived 180° so I looked for those who were outsiders. One of the first things I read and inspired me was Nietzsche's Camel-Lion-Child story.
A strong influence was also Krishnamurti although it took me some time to really understand him for I was very young.

I strongly suggest McGilchrist because he is really trying to direct our attention to a more holistic approach to reality and he does this through hard science data to begin with and how to understand its implication epistemologically and ontologically.

I understand, but I think we can achieve the same goal through the use of truth, and I think the results will be better than the results of using mythology. We can continue to story tell but we don't need to rely so heavily on numinous or supernatural suggestions. We can simply extrapolate and stretch real science.
Star trek proposes a lot of future tech which is not impossible. The flip style mobile phone was so like the communicator posited in Star Trek. Fantasy characters like Ironman are not impossible. An omnigod is impossible. Getting two of every species onto an 'ark,' is impossible. — universeness

I sense a strong need to be a little too literal. Did we really believe George Washington cut down a cherry tree and when his father asked about the tree did he literally say "I can not tell a lie. I cut down the cherry tree." or is that a story told to make a point about the importance of being honest? George Washington being one of our national heroes; part of our American mythology, the same as some characters in ancient stories were used to make a point. I speak of a time when history was not technologically correct accounts of history, but a blending of history and good storytelling. I want to appeal to your right brain, not just your left brain.

Give me an example of a 'destroyed national hero,' and 'a destroyed cultural aspect that united us and made our liberty possible,' that would exemplify your point here. — universeness

Oh wow, you are fun to converse with and so thought-stimulating! George Washington cutting down the cherry tree and Abe Lincoln walking a mile to give someone a penny, are examples of the American mythology that was transmitted through public education. Stories of Ben Franklin and Danial Boon and others were part of that mythology. Because this mythology was transmitted by grade schools it united us. We stopped transmitting that mythology and we are now very divided.

That's a step way too far for me Athena. How would that be different to calling for a new temple containing statues to a modern manifestation of the fabled Hercules or biblical Samson in the guise of The Hulk? I also have no attraction towards rebuilding Solomon's temple. If I had the power and democratic permission of the majority of stakeholders, I would convert the dome of the rock mosque, Westminster abbey, St Paul's Cathedral, The Vatican, Buckingham palace and every other church, chapel, kingdom hall, Hindu/Buddhist temple, into 'people property.' Units that can be used by the hungry, the homeless etc. The theists, theosophists, royalists can still run them as they do now, but they would not own them, and the main function of such places, would have to demonstrably be, the physical support of those in desperate need. If a homeless person is on the streets, then the local theists/theosophists, would have to explain why they are not helping that person. — universeness

h boy, that is a challenging question! :cheer: :grin: One difference is Athena's temple still stands and was restored but the statues that should be in it are in Briton.

The Parthenon Sculptures | British Museumhttps://www.britishmuseum.org › british-museum-story
The Parthenon Sculptures are a collection of different types of marble architectural decoration from the temple of Athena (the Parthenon) on the Acropolis ...

It really matters that the restoration of Athena's temple can not be complete without the statues because that makes the history written with stones, like a book with pages torn out. That building was constructed to teach the world of democracy and every piece of it had meaning. To understand the meaning that is contained in this temple built to teach the world of democracy, it needs to be as it was.
I don't think that is equal to the stories of Hercules.

I want all the places to be protected for the whole of humanity. I think what the Taliban did when they destroyed statues of Buddhas was terrible. But I love everything old and I would love to restore old houses and preserve a memory of their time in history. These relics unite us with the whole of humanity and I don't mind if they are owned by responsible people as long as our shared ownership is respected. When no one has ownership and responsibility, things get destroyed as the Brits and others looted the ancient world.

I think as a matter of principle we need to respect property rights. This is another subject and if you want to debate it let us start a thread for that. That could be a fascinating discussion of virtues. I would not welcome anyone in my home who does not respect private property. I can say that without a doubt, because people have taken advantage of me and stole from me. We must absolutely, return to teaching virtues.

Yipes I am late to a very important date- sorry I got to run.

Yipes I am late to a very important date- sorry I got to run. — Athena

Said the white rabbit, staring at its big watch! :rofl:

Did we really believe George Washington cut down a cherry tree and when his father asked about the tree did he literally say "I can not tell a lie. I cut down the cherry tree." or is that a story told to make a point about the importance of being honest? — Athena

Do we really believe that an apple fell and hit the head of Newton and then he repurposed the word gravitas into a crucial shift of meaning of the word gravity. George might have cut down that cherry tree and the story might be true, it's at least credible but Noah's ark remains impossible. This is an important difference imo.

I want to appeal to your right brain, not just your left brain. — Athena

Your appeal permeates me(Rcomplex), myself(limbic system) and I (Cerebral cortex). Left and right can work in harmony and unison when they find common cause.

George Washington cutting down the cherry tree and Abe Lincoln walking a mile to give someone a penny, are examples of the American mythology that was transmitted through public education. Stories of Ben Franklin and Danial Boon and others were part of that mythology. Because this mythology was transmitted by grade schools it united us. We stopped transmitting that mythology and we are now very divided. — Athena

I think all those plausible stories of folklore are alive and kicking in the American Psyche but some do have to diminish to make room for depictions such as 'to kill a mocking bird,' 'The grapes of wrath,' 'Inherit the wind (the scopes trial), 'Watergate,' 'The Kennedy assassination,' and my own musings which sees Donald Trump looking in a mirror and the reflection is Vladimir Putin which morphs into Xi Jinping which morphs into Kim Jong-un which morphs into Elon Musk etc, etc. Yeah, I know I need a chill pill! :flower:

h boy, that is a challenging question! :cheer: :grin: One difference is Athena's temple still stands and was restored but the statues that should be in it are in Briton. — Athena

I hear that more effort is being made to return the Elgin marbles from the UK so, you never know what else may be returned from whence it came, soon enough.

From Wiki:
Athena or Athene, often given the epithet Pallas, is an ancient Greek goddess associated with wisdom, warfare, and handicraft, who was later syncretized with the Roman goddess Minerva. Athena was regarded as the patron and protectress of various cities across Greece, particularly the city of Athens, from which she most likely received her name. The Parthenon on the Acropolis of Athens is dedicated to her. Her major symbols include owls, olive trees, snakes, and the Gorgoneion. In art, she is generally depicted wearing a helmet and holding a spear.

Perhaps we could put a statue of Athena beside one of Jane Goodall, Carl Sagan et al and perhaps have a statue of some homeless folks and some other needy folks sitting under such statues in all sorts of well thought out relevant poses. We need new messages! But I agree we should not abandon some useful ancient ones.

I think as a matter of principle we need to respect property rights. This is another subject and if you want to debate it let us start a thread for that. — Athena

How about 'What property do you need? and how private do you need your property to be?' as a thread title? I leave it to you to relate such effectively to one of the philosophy categories listed on TPF.
I would like to hear about them BAMS! who stole from you and how that affected you.

Democracy starts from a system of total tyranny. The change to the former is called revolution.

Tyranny starts in a system of total democracy. The change to the former is called fascism.

It's a spectrum with the two concepts serving as opposite poles. Opposing forces. Self interest vs. Collective interest.

The variables inbetween are the quality of information spread amongst a society - the ratio of propaganda, fear, and intimidation to honest education, discourse and formal/systematic voting.

Truth verses deceit. Democracy says everyone is equal and that normative distributions know best. Autocracy says I'm the most powerful and everyone most bow to my whims as I know best.

They're also mutual existents, as they both require the other in which to oppose, be contrasted to and manifest in a dynamic.

So, sounds like you have to pick your side, plant your flag and fight for your cause. Agree? or do you see a less binary more nuanced range of choices?

It is very clear that a true form of democracy hasn't existed in any government. — TheMadMan

What is a "true form of democracy"?

The word "democracy" comes from ancient Greek "δημοκρατία" (pronounced "democratia"), which comes from the noun "demos" (= people) and the verb "cratein" (= govern).
Literally speaking, such a thing is totally impossible, of course. So as a first remark, we can say that democracy is relative. And this in fact is what we see if we examine the governmental systems or schemes of various countries, but also the ruling system of any organized group. The main question to ask is "how much power people have in such a system and in what form?" Based on this, we can state that the more power people have and the more strong this is, the more democratic this system is. And the other way around.

In ancient Greece, the citizens who were eligible to vote were gathering very often in the central market, to decide through their votes about important matters of the state.



In our Western civilization, the closest we can get to that are local or national referendums. (I'm not considering elections, which occur every 4 or 5 years! These consist the most rudimentary form of democracy and have very little to do with actual people's power. Hence the large percentages of abstention in a lot of countries.) We also have local (autonomous) government administrations, but these are more representations of the state government than people's voice.

Now, the Athenian democracy is one about which I think we have more information and details than any other part of the Western worlds and even the whole world. And in fact, it is considered as the origin of democracy itself. However, in its essence, democracy must exist since the early organized communities formed by Man. But I don't see any value in studying such primitive forms of democracy ...

So, sounds like you have to pick your side, plant your flag and fight for your cause. Agree? or do you see a less binary more nuanced range of choices? — universeness

My flag is planted firmly in the middle of the democracy-tyranny spectrum. As I believe not everyone is equal in intention (moral) nor knowledge (education).ideally they ought to be but practically they are led astray by personal preference.

On paper it's pretty clear cut. Binary. That generally democracy trumps tyranny. It is almost always the healthier choice.

However, in a more nuanced sense, I don't think tyrannical leaders/dictators are automatically malign/evil.

I do think it takes a certain set of attributes to be a "Good Dictator" that are generally not common and not usually associated with dictatorship.

For example, exceptional wisdom, insight, reasoning, tolerance and patient contemplation plus an innate core desire to provide for and care for all subjects. To uphold the highest degree of of ethical imperative possible.

If a dictator is open to criticism, listening and taking on board their subjects qualms/ concerns, can accurately identify their own shortcomings and implement corrective action, they're much less likely to be malicious and cause systemic harm.

Easier said than done. As a singular person with inherent bias, prejudice etc. Any of which is their downfall.

However a "Good Dictator" differs little from those who are voted/appointed into power through likeability and promise - mirroring the democratic process with an established and uncensored journalistic review, open public critique and acceptance of resignation if they f*ck up big time.

This is why benign dictators and democratically elected presidents/leaders are virtually the same for all intents and purposes. And this the lines between tyranny and democracy become blurred.

No one is perfect, so a perfect dictator is impossible and never immune to criticism, except for the universe itself - which is an entity that dictates the laws and contraints of physics, chemistry and biology, as well as evolution that determine outright what we are capable/permitted to achieve.

Hence the reasoning behind many that God is the ultimate benign dictator. Enforcing determined law in our becoming, but our becoming being ever more open to free will (as conscious agents). Non interference but fundamentally restrictive in setup. A duality.

I hope that clarifies my position on the subject. I think balance is always in-between opposites. Progress comes from being equal part tolerable/conformative and revolutionary/innovative. Look this is how things are (pragmaticism) but here is what could be (idealism).

My flag is planted firmly in the middle of the democracy-tyranny spectrum — Benj96

Good place to get both arms ripped off. One arm to each side! :gasp:
I will try my best to stop the other side from forcing you over to them but holding on to your arm from my side too strongly might mean I am left with your disembodied arm only. Should I just let go and watch you be grabbed by the other side?

Haha I like the imagery conjured by your writings. But I don't think you have much to fear. The middle is usually the most ignored by both sides.

They're too preoccupied with disarming the opposite pole out of pure abject contempt/denial. Those that directly and forcefully oppose them.

In essence, bigger fish to fry than the middle ground.

Neutrality is not as threatening as the contrasting side as it embodies a partiality of agreement whilst the opposite is the greatest threat. My arms shall remain un-pulled.

Afterall, balance is stable. It doesn't get swayed or pulled upon or it would not be balance.

The middle is usually the most ignored by both sides. — Benj96

Neutrality is not as threatening as the contrasting side as it embodies a partiality of agreement whilst the opposite is the greatest threat. My arms shall remain un-pulled. — Benj96

Only complete fools ignore the middle ground. They can often tip the balance. If you don't feel the pull from either side, then I predict you soon will, if you remain positioned as you are. No mans land is a dangerous place to wander or try to exist in.

But alas it is neccesary. There's always a middle between two ends. Someones gotta do it. You can't have - 1 and +1 without 0. It's referential.