• Janus
    16.2k


    Sorry about that, it was meant to be a response to Thinker's Post 41. I must clicked the wrong 'reply'.
  • Thinker
    200
    If the third world is on fire, and ours soon will be, it has nothing to do with religion and could not be cured by philosophy. It is due to economic greed, exploitation and resource depletion and degradation, and of course, burning fossil fuels. Islam itself is mostly against globalization and the erosion of their traditional cultures and exploitation of the resources that goes with it.John

    It is not only the third world that is on fire. Europe is in crisis mode, with regard to Islam, as well as the US; although not as much as Europe. Islam is a behemoth, 25% of all people of the Earth. Islam is everywhere and a chameleon, a shape shifter – it changes its tactics as need be – but – it moves forward relentlessly. It uses guile and deceit and most importantly the apathy of thinkers to move its ugly agenda on the way to dominion. Once it takes hold it never let’s go. As a soldier of Christ, John, I wonder when you come before the “Pearly Gates”; if you be able to say you had the courage Jesus demands. Please don’t answer to me – look to yourself. Our only possible defense, at this time in history, is to expose Muhammad as the fraud he is. Islam cannot be beaten militarily, economically or politically. Those battles are long past – although still pursued in vain. We of the Christian, Jewish, Buddhist - decent world - have one card left to play – philosophy – reason – common sense. If we just employ the Golden Rule – ask any Muslim man if he wants to wear a head scarf? Then we go on and ask – is it ok to have sex with a nine year old girl? Is it ok to behead a man with a sword? Is it ok to create and deal in slaves? Is it ok to sentence a man to death for defaming Muhammad? Muhammad did these things and more. Would Jesus approve these things? Would Buddha - Lao Tzu – Plato - Bertrand Russell? We are their heirs. I read the Daily Word:

    Healing
    EVERY CELL OF MY BODY IS AGLOW WITH THE LIGHT AND LIFE OF GOD.
    I believe in the healing power of God. I affirm this truth daily through my thoughts, words, and actions. My faith in God’s healing energy allows this energy to move in and through me. I open myself up to receive and I am restored to wholeness.
    If I am experiencing illness, I continue to affirm that I am one with God. In truth, my spirit is always whole, but as a human being I may experience dis-ease. I use affirmative prayer and meditation to help bring me back into balance with God. I focus my mind on the healing power of God and envision each cell of my body vibrant with light and life.
    I trust in the healing power of God. I speak and act in ways that demonstrate my faith, and I open myself up to experience wholeness.

    Oh Lord my God, I cried to you for help, and you have healed me.—Psalm 30:2
  • Thinker
    200
    At the risk of sounding too philosophical, courage is contextual. If you're not raised in a context where courage is required or exemplified, you won't have much courage. If you are, you will. So, "the greatest generation" lived in the reality of WWII. They had courage. But because of the context. If we live in a cowardly society, it's due largely to our context, and our context is due largely to the previous generations that have handed us the culture we've inherited. We shape it and morph it ourselves, but we do so within our context. I hate how liberal that sounds (I'm fairly apolitical), but I don't know how else to phrase it.Noble Dust

    Courage is a daily affair – we live with or without it every moment in our consciousness. The context is now - forever!


    They're not responsible for their situation. As "enlightened" intellectuals, we like to say that all men have autonomy and can change their situation. But how true is that, on an every day scale?Noble Dust

    We are all responsible for our choices – there is no abstention or abdication.


    Autonomy requires education, it requires enlightenment (interpret that word however you want). And if we're talking metaphors (I have a tendency to be anal about metaphors), America isn't spiritually fat; we're spiritually malnourished.Noble Dust


    We are all Frodo Baggins, if, we choose to be.


    Again, this goes back to my comments about sheep. "Unfortunately"? Again you're implying that the world needs to be more intellectual. I disagree. The rare jewel of the intellectual mind bears itself out; the value of that mind is self-evident. It's value is to give, not to control. Like the Tao, it relinquishes control. Therein lies it's "power". True intellectual power is always self-abrogating. Anything else is a masquerade of power and charisma over others.Noble Dust



    Common sense is not intellectual – it is common. Common sense is what we need and we need our champions to voice it.



    The decline of philosophy, though, has more to do with philosophy itself. Disciplines run their course. Philology is no longer a discipline. Philosophy is a fading discipline. This has less to do with the world going to shit, and more to do with the changing landscape of human consciousness, regardless of whether or not you and I particularly like it.Noble Dust



    Philosophy and linguistics will never leave us. They will be with us until the last breathe of humanity. We are here to sustain our wonderful traditions – to listen and admire our forebears – inspire ourselves and our decedents to achieve a new world full of hope and worthiness.
  • Noble Dust
    7.9k


    Are you making an argument? I honestly can't tell.
  • Janus
    16.2k


    Disapproving of the ways of others will not help in the context of international relations where there are great differences between existing cultures. It might work within societies more or less unified by sets of laws, common practices and beliefs, but if applied outside that context can only widen the rift, and further the division.

    As I see it, what you are spouting is egregiously prejudiced, hysterical fundamentalist nonsense.
  • Thinker
    200
    Are you making an argument? I honestly can't tell.Noble Dust

    You certainly are not making an argument with this statement. This thread is about Ignosticism; I laid out a clear definition of how God exists – for me. I heard you talk about Berdyaev’s ideas and your own and I respect them. Then we talked about the beginning of art and metaphysics in the human experience. Then we talked about the fact that we are not very significant in God’s eyes. Then we talked about the fact that most people are sheep because they are either too lazy, apathetic or both to participate in intellectual discourse. Then we talked about the decline of courage in intellectual circles in relation to Islam. I then laid out clearly why Muhammad is an evil man and that doing so is the only way left to combat Islam. Did I miss something – or did you? Or are you questioning my statement about philosophy & linguistics – I don’t know if you don’t say? What is your complaint – argument? Any and all of these ideas are fair game for me – how about you?
  • Thinker
    200
    Disapproving of the ways of others will not help in the context of international relations where there are great differences between existing cultures. It might work within societies more or less unified by sets of laws, common practices and beliefs, but if applied outside that context can only widen the rift, and further the division.

    As I see it, what you are spouting is egregiously prejudiced, hysterical fundamentalist nonsense.
    John

    What did Jesus mean when he said “turn the other cheek”? What I get from the Sermon on the Mount is that we should not engage in personal disputes with others. Was Jesus an anarchist? No. Did he believe in laws and punishment? Yes. Was Jesus a pacifist? I don’t think so; he was being pragmatic in relation to personal disputes. Which means don’t personally get into someone’s face. If someone tries to kill or rape your daughter should you just let them? No, and I believe Jesus would agree. Did Jesus say or think that we should not dispute what others say and think? Absolutely not; he has a very definitive argument for a peaceful point of view. Did Jesus say we should tolerate debauchery and violence? No, he did not. Jesus was a Rabbi and he was into law and order. If something was wrong – he would say so. There is a difference being peaceful and a doormat. Jesus was not a doormat - quite the contrary.
  • 0 thru 9
    1.5k
    (Edit- if this post had a function, it has served it)
    Thank you. Peace and blessings to you and all, without exception.
  • Thinker
    200


    I agree - I am way off topic with the Islam thing - it should be in a isolated thread. Maybe I will start one. No more comments here on Islam.
  • Noble Dust
    7.9k


    Sorry if my comment sounded dismissive, but I was commenting on the specific post of yours before mine; saying things like "we're all Frodo Baggins if we choose to be" sounds more dismissive than argumentative, which is what I was referring to.
12345Next
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

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.