Comments

  • The value of the given / the already-given
    It often seems we only realize the true value of something after it's lost. But is there a way to consciously experience gratitude, recognition, and sober appreciation without having to go through loss?Astorre
    There are situations where loss does not have to be experienced to appreciate the value of life itself. Blissful ignorance is one. There were isolated people who lived their lives contently without experiencing significant losses. Or the "losses" they experienced is part of living a life -- old age, passing away, illness.

    I think losses don't always teach us to appreciate life more. Humility is much more the way to feel gratitude. We look at the awesome world and realize we're just a small part of it, and we're okay with it.

    Even successful rat race, which is not a loss, rather a very busy life in pursuit of material wealth can be an instrument to retreat back to simplicity and appreciate the simple things in life.
  • Laidback but not stupid philosophy threads
    Is that to be found here or elsewhere?Ansiktsburk

    Yes, here you can find them. If you don't find it here, I think that either you haven't spent enough time here to find those conversations that engage with the idea of leisurely discussions; or that you have found and read them but not understood the sentiments or tone behind them.
  • Is there a purpose to philosophy?
    Most of us are in the wheel reinvention business.Tom Storm

    :grin:

    I don't remember who that thinker was who commented on this behavior against other philosophers who seemed to have been doing it in their writings. But yes, there was a mention of this behavior within the philosophical community.
  • Is there a purpose to philosophy?
    I don't think everyone is a philosopher like he says, most people don't really seem to question the way things are in life and just go along with it with what they were taught. From my understanding our brains are sorta resistant to what philosophy requires of us.Darkneos

    I wonder what the minimum standard would be for someone to be called a philosopher?Tom Storm

    Being a "Philosopher" is usually someone who does it for a living such as educators, scholars, and thinkers who publish books critiqued by peers. Time and effort spent, not money, defines them.

    You will find that there are methods common among them:

    1. Studied extensively the writings of those who came before them.
    2. Formed analyses and critiques towards other philosophical works.
    3. Formed their own theses to debunk or agree with other philosophical works.
    4. Tried not to re-invent the wheels, but built up on previous works by others.
    5. Got their works analyzed and critiqued by their peers before and/or after publication.
  • Was I wrong to suggest there is no "objective" meaning in life on this thread?
    Any data on the cannibalism rates back then or not so much? Hey, never let good meat go to waste am I right.Outlander
    Lol. Though cannibalism happened, there were some evidence that some tribes did it against enemies. As a victorious behavior.
    At the same time, there were evidence that within tribes, there were medical procedures done to save their limbs or life. Instruments or tools were found in their possession.
    Some populations or tribes actually survives for many decades or hundreds of years due to the concept of hygiene and cleanliness.

    So, while cannibalism is an horrific act, it wasn't practiced commonly.
  • Was I wrong to suggest there is no "objective" meaning in life on this thread?
    Well part of me thinks he comes of as a crazy sage who's seen some truth because he uses words like semantics and syntax and cites Wittgenstein a lot, but when I look at other stuff of his it doesn't seem like that. like his stuff seems deep only if you don't know betterDarkneos
    I would think not crazy but prone to generalization and using arguments by jumping to conclusions, unsupported claims like like everyone is a philosopher and historical accounts that have been proven inconclusive or just outright inaccurate.
  • Was I wrong to suggest there is no "objective" meaning in life on this thread?
    I'm also not really sold on how he thinks we make meaning:

    It merely refers to the fact that I, you, and all of us, are continually maturing. We evolve, and in that adaptive development over time we apportion significance to our experience in a manner that manifests as mood, motivation and morality.
    Darkneos
    The use of the word "maturing" here is suspect. It is because according to historical accounts, maturity of the mind, similar to the conception of "modernity", does not differ among people thousands of years ago.

    In fact, dating as far back as 200,000 years ago, one discovery that researchers have found is that, compassion and helpfulness have been around since the cave man era. There were evidence that members of a tribe had carried their wounded members to safety, not left them to die out in the field.
  • Self-Help and the Deflation of Philosophy
    means of coping, maximizing productivity, reducing stress, or achieving “authenticity.” I have seen this particularly in some pieces on Stoicism I've read that seem to be largely aimed at the "tech-bro" crowd. A commitment to truth gets shoved aside for a view of philosophy as a sort of "life hack."

    There is a sort of "managerial" outlook here, where praxis reduced to a sort of tool. In a similar vein, I have seen the critique that modern therapy/self-help largely focuses on helping us "get what we want," but not so much on "what we ought to do" or the question of if "what we want" is what will ultimately lead to flourishing and happiness. That is not seen as the purpose of therapy or self-help. That might be fair enough, but then it also not seen as the purpose of education either. So, what does fulfill that function? It seems to me that nothing does, except for perhaps wholly voluntary associations that one must "choose" (where such a choice is necessarily without much guidance). Aside from "self-development," this seems problematic for collective self-rule and social cohesion.
    Count Timothy von Icarus

    This is a very astute observation, which reminds me it is at the back of my mind, though I was not coherently aware of what's happening with the use of philosophy as a personal self-help advise. So, putting it together like your post is helpful.

    Repurposing is a very common human activity, including repurposing the philosophical writings for personal gain. Thankfully, forums like this know the difference and I haven't seen an argument advocating for life-hacks as the purpose of philosophy.

    The School of Philosophy, as the classics had viewed philosophy, is not harmed insofar as the teachings remain the scholars domain and philosophical procedures such as hermeneutics, are in place -- scholars who assiduously read and translated some of the most difficult writings were a gift.
  • Was I wrong to suggest there is no "objective" meaning in life on this thread?
    but I felt like the post was mistaking what humans do with that being purpose. Like us making meaning is what we do but that doesn't necessarily imply a purpose right?Darkneos
    There's a gap in his argument regarding 'man's search for meaning is the man's purpose'. I am also not satisfied with that.

    What I find is that, "purpose" is often confused with "essence", as in the essence of man is wisdom, for example. Philosophically, I haven't found a strong argument for purpose (I'm not widely versed, so I could have missed it). But I always find the explanation for the 'meaning' of existence, which is not the same as purpose.

    Search for Aristotle passages and see if he wrote about "purpose" or "essence". What does humans embody? What is it to be human?
  • The passing of Vera Mont, dear friend.
    This news was 3 months ago, during which I was also gone from the forum. So I'm just now posting this.
    So sad to find out she had passed away. She was a very solid contributor to this forum.
    RIP Vera.
  • The Ballot or...
    So you are arguing or asking if the assassination of Charlie Kirk was justified?
    Youre a mod?
    Thats pretty fucked up.
    DingoJones
    :up:
  • In a free nation, should opinions against freedom be allowed?
    And I believe that a society that strives for constant liberation from anything restrictive and oppressive is liberated to the point of freedom from beingAstorre
    Acknowledging that we have a moral obligation -- which in itself is restriction, but not oppressive -- is what a moral agent is.
  • Philosophy in everyday life
    you emphasize the importance of a solid foundation. Is it possible to build a foundation that includes subjectivity as an integral part of truth?Astorre
    Subjectivity will always occupy an important place in philosophy. Note that I emphasized errors in thinking, not the depravity of subjectivity. In fact, intersubjectivity, which is the idea that when we all share a common perspective, then it becomes a valid principle in philosophical arguments.

    For example, colors are, in fact, intersubjectivity reports of what humans see when they look at objects in the presence of lighting. While in physics, colors are wavelengths with different lengths, in the macro world, we see colors or red, yellow, orange, white, pink, etc. So, depending on what you're arguing for, philosophically, the admission of colors is valid one.

    does philosophy make you happier? What role does it play in your daily life - does it criticize your beliefs, or does it inspire you by connecting you to your humanity. What kind of people does philosophy make us in a world where objectivity is increasingly dominant?Astorre
    I didn't come to participate in philosophical discussions to be 'happier', rather to be more at peace in what the world is, what was it in the past, what was it now, and what it will be in the future.
    Yes, in fact, I learned to be self-critical in my beliefs in the practical sense and to connect more with my humanity.
    I would say that it is important for objectivity to occupy an dominant place when it comes to science and technology. Imagine medicine -- we have had major improvements in saving the patients' lives in chronic and acute diseases in just a matter of less than a decade. But we haven't really lost major subjectivity when it comes to politics, historical accounts, interpersonal relations, family relations, and preferences in tastes. We are very much influenced by heavy marketing, by heavy social media, and internal impulses beyond our control.
  • Philosophy in everyday life
    In other words, I think that philosophy should face the challenge of appreciating subjectivity as something much more important than we usually think. Normally we think that subjectivity means limits, narrow horizons, being conditioned, being relative.Angelo Cannata

    As I said, I favour criticism, because it protects and vaccinates us from deception, contradictions, it reveals a lot of hidden bad mechanisms. But what shall we do once all mechanisms, bad and good ones, have been deconstructed, revealed and pulverized?Angelo Cannata

    Angelo, I like your posts. You should have started a new thread with that kind of thinking. They are well written.

    My criticism to what you said about "Normally we think that subjectivity means limits, narrow horizons, being conditioned, being relative" is that, what philosophy tries to expose about subjectivity, which we all start with during the naive period, is the error in thinking when we mistake opinions as arguments. Subjectivity has a way of drawing an invalid conclusion from the available anecdotal accounts.
    What philosophers, and the excellent posters in this forum, are trying to build is a solid foundation for the things that we claim to be true.
  • A Great Evil is a deliberate moral failure
    What you're saying is maybe good on paper. But, let me go back to the concept of individualism. Your vision of a society is one that's organized and shares a common goal, that is, the goal is the greater good.

    But the principle of individualism is one that fosters or rather tolerate the individual decisions in matters of private life -- going to school or not, getting a job or not, contribute to society or not. Do you see the problem with these individual decisions? When you have thousands and millions of individuals who want to do nothing (!), what is a liberal society going to do about it without violating the individual decisions?
  • What is right and what is wrong and how do we know?
    If other people were aware of him they would probably revolt. Which is where a moral power play ensues.Barkon

    Someone can knowingly sell cigarettes or cancer causing products and be very successful and live a very happy life. Period.Tom Storm

    Tom's post is eerily true. No mass revolts on the street against tobacco and cigarette when the surgeon general put the warning on the cigarette.
  • In a free nation, should opinions against freedom be allowed?
    @Wolfy48
    Free speech, as conceived by the writers of the law, is never absolute. Nothing is absolute in any given society. Your conception of free speech is naive and disruptive.
    A good discussion of an ethics topic is one that wants the greater good to surface. Among the competing opinions, the goal is to come up with what is the moral obligation given the freedom to speak our minds.

    I am glad that there is a law prohibiting sexism, racism, and bullying at work. I'm glad because I don't have the desire -- through my own conscience, through education at home and at school, and through my interaction with other people -- to make people feel inferior, feel threatened by my presence, or to make a place a toxic one. And I certainly do not wish others to spout toxic nonsense in the workplace.
  • A Great Evil is a deliberate moral failure
    If we're willing to do it we can produce a societal system that's far more harmonious than the current system.Barkon
    Not quite. A society that values 'individualism' will have its share of unintended consequences. Think of people who do not make an effort to contribute to their own welfare. There's no law that would incarcerate people for being unemployed.
    Think of homelessness.
  • Coronavirus
    Hopefully, we live in a very modern era, and scientists can overcome this virus quickly.javi2541997
    Medical researchers work nonstop. Even while the world sleeps.

    My granny is 91 years old, and it seemed that the covid didn't even approximate to her.javi2541997
    She is a super granny!
  • How should children be reared to be good citizens, good parents, and good thinkers?
    That is your pov.BC
    The philosophical justification for punishment desert. I did not invent this.
  • Coronavirus

    Good to know you're out of it and doing well.
    It hit people differently. Many did not show obvious symptoms that they have covid.
  • How should children be reared to be good citizens, good parents, and good thinkers?
    Even if the Justice system were to be perfect, I am still against capital punishment. I do not believe it has the power to dissuade someone from committing a capital crime,BC
    The main purpose of any punishment is desert.
  • How should children be reared to be good citizens, good parents, and good thinkers?
    Sadly, "the extent of the law" may include capital punishment. I am against capital punishment for two reasons: #1, in the United States, at least, justice has been perverted in a significant number of convictions, including those of capital cases. The wrongfully convicted are sometimes exonerated by the hard work of a few justice groups. It's bad enough if someone spends 20 years in prison for a wrongful conviction. A wrongful execution is beyond appeal.BC
    There is room for improvement in the justice system and it is constantly being evaluated, reviewed, analyzed. But to say that capital punishment shouldn't be part of the system because the justice system is not perfect is similar to saying we will not give every and each individual what they deserved because we don't have a perfect system. Desert is the main focus of punishment. In a philosophical argument, desert is a way of acknowledging a person as a moral agent.
    Let me ask you, if capital punishment shouldn't be one of the choices of punishment because of an 'imperfect system', then why incarcerate criminals at all, as in life sentence, or twenty years in prison? Life sentence and capital punishments are both punishments based on desert. If you say we don't have a perfect system, then you should apply your objection to all types of punishment, not just capital punishment.
    I wouldn't want to see someone incarcerated for twenty years if they don't deserved it.
    Heck, I don't want to see anyone spend one year in jail at all.

    #2, execution is an unseemly activity for the state to engage in.BC
    Oh really? Execution is an unseemly activity for the state to engage in? Who should deliver the execution then? The federal government? The City government?
    What's missing in your point is that the State is made up of everybody -- including the voters. The state is made up of moral agents who decided that a capital punishment is an appropriate punishment for a given crime.
  • What is right and what is wrong and how do we know?
    "There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so." - William Shakespeare, Act 2, Scene 2, "Hamlet".

    Is right and wrong just a matter of thinking something is right
    Truth Seeker
    This quote is being taken out of context. Hamlet is in conflict with himself/ his thoughts.
    It is a wishful thinking because deep down he is morally perturbed.
  • How should children be reared to be good citizens, good parents, and good thinkers?
    Wisdom tells me that the second hanging is a formality, since the hangees will no longer be 'present'.

    On the other hand, I'll own up to a certain amount of vindictiveness toward responsible agents who wrecked the climate and caused billions of deaths.
    BC

    As you were.
  • How should children be reared to be good citizens, good parents, and good thinkers?
    Let them be hanged twice.BC
    No!
    Punish only up to the extent of the law. Anything beyond that is vindictiveness. Vindictiveness and wisdom cannot co-exist in you simultaneously.
  • Wisdom: Cultivation, Context, and Challenges
    I forget exactly where, I think it's in a few places, Plato describes being educated as primarily "desiring what is truly worthy/good and despising what is truly unworthy/bad." He says that a formally educated, wealthy person might be able to give more sophisticated answers as to why something is desirable or undesirable, but that this is ancillary to being truly "educated." If the more sophisticated person is nonetheless not properly oriented/cultivated such as to desire the good and abhor evil, then they are in an important sense uneducated (unformed); whereas the unsophisticated person is educated, although lacking in sophistication.

    Now, Plato's point here sort of goes with what you each have said in different ways. In general, we do not love the good by default. While people might have more or less of a talent/inclination towards specific virtues and vices (e.g., tempers can "run in families"), in general they won't attain to a state of virtue without some cultivation. Indeed, without care and cultivation, at the limit, infants and children will die, so there always needs to be some cultivation (some "education").
    Count Timothy von Icarus
    Good exegesis!
    Cultivation is part of education. Cursory learning, as we often see in schools, could only scratch the surface. The depth of learning brings us closer to wisdom, I believe.

    A bit out of scope for this conversation.T Clark
    Okay.
  • Wisdom: Cultivation, Context, and Challenges
    I've been careless in language.Tom Storm
    Count me in. That's why I'm here in this thread.
  • Wisdom: Cultivation, Context, and Challenges
    Because, in most situations, even a fool can see when something is a failure. You don’t even need to know what success is. But as I already said, very few people are 100% foolish.Tom Storm
    This answer is neither here nor there. Fools by definition are people who act unwisely and get unwise results.

    Here's a copy-pasted thought on wisdom:
    “It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.” — Aristotle

    Here's another one from Albert Einstein:
    “Any fool can know. The point is to understand.”


    Your understanding of Taoism is different from mine.T Clark
    Okay, then educate me. How do you understand Taoist wisdom.
  • Wisdom: Cultivation, Context, and Challenges
    Wisdom comes from letting go of what you’ve learned, not adding more to it. Wisdom is a surrendering, not the result of an act of will.T Clark

    I disagree with the above passage. Sainthood comes to mind when I read that passage. If you surrender yourself to the way of the universe, you become Tao, a passive observer of the universe. But we are here on Earth -- living and interacting. If you want wisdom to mean a passive observer, then you should make that clear.

    In fact, I have learned more from watching mistakes and making them than I ever have from success.Tom Storm
    Okay so you're just supporting what I said earlier. How do you know what mistakes are if not by knowing what success is. By knowing the difference.
  • Wisdom: Cultivation, Context, and Challenges

    I don't care how many upvotes that post gets.
    I still don't understand what's the objection.
  • Wisdom: Cultivation, Context, and Challenges
    I wonder if it is possible to become wise by learning from the foolish? After all, with discernment, watching a fool and what happens to them can be very instructive in learning what not to do.Tom Storm
    Ah, you are forgetting one principle -- this is parallel to what you're saying "how do you know there's an error in a process?" You know there's an error when you've seen the correct result from that process and now another person using the same process did not arrive at the same result.
    You could only learn from the foolish if you know the difference.
  • Wisdom: Cultivation, Context, and Challenges
    I still think you’re clearly wrong.T Clark

    I don't share your sentiment. One who does not work hard on learning at all is uneducated and could not be wise.
  • Wisdom: Cultivation, Context, and Challenges
    Of all the personal qualities that a person can have - intelligence, character, integrity, experience, wisdom, temperament, maturity, personality, virtue - what wisdom and maturity have that set them apart from the others is distance, dispassion. They’ve seen everything before. I was thinking for a minute that maybe wisdom and maturity are the same thing, but that’s not right. I guess it’s more that maturity is a prerequisite for wisdom. Wisdom stands back and sees everything at once, how everything fits together, what’s going to come next.T Clark

    Well said. This is what I have in mind.
  • Wisdom: Cultivation, Context, and Challenges
    You’re seeing education as something quite different from traditional book-smart or university-style learning. I imagine it is possible to be wise in some areas and foolish in others.Tom Storm
    No, I'm seeing education as not just schooling and formal instruction.

    That’s ridiculous. I think it shows, perhaps, a lack of wisdom.T Clark

    "Uneducated" to me means no formal schooling and/or no instruction from the wise people.
  • What can go wrong in the mirror?
    I think that's right in the sense that a fish doesn't actively experience water. It's too fundamental. On the other hand, water is an essential part of its lived experience, and if you take it out of the water, it definitely knows the difference.Baden

    Ah, but the analogy doesn't work. We can't take ourselves out of consciousness or perception and know the difference. Our vantage point is a given. We will not be able to position ourselves other than where we are in terms of awareness.
  • How should children be reared to be good citizens, good parents, and good thinkers?
    When my teenage daughter got in trouble with the law, she had to go into counseling and the counselor told her she learned better. She most certainly did. But the teen years are a form insanity.Athena
    Good for her. Yes, in a way teen years are a form of 'insanity'. The overriding principles are recalcitrance and insubordination.
  • What can go wrong in the mirror?
    What follows then is an attempt to explore a form of brokenness in or in our relation to this non-positional awareness, and, by extension, the other.Baden
    I don't agree that we even experience this brokenness just because we cannot go beyond our perception and explore the consciousness not as an object.
    I don't think we feel "incomplete" or there is the lacking. Of course, I am not a Sartrean follower. So, maybe something to explore.
  • Wisdom: Cultivation, Context, and Challenges
    Can an uneducated person be wise?Tom Storm
    No. That said, there are many ways to educate ourselves. I don't mean academically. Reading, listening to other reputable people, and watching the actions of those you respect.

    Does wisdom usually belong to one or two specific domains, or is it a broader category of integrated practice? To what extent does it involve practical skill, moral awareness, or both?Tom Storm
    Wisdom is whole. So, a wise person should have wisdom in all aspect of their life -- practical skills and moral awareness.

    How important do we think wisdom is in our lives, and do we agree with contemporary thinkers like John Vervaeke that we “suffer a wisdom famine in the West”?Tom Storm
    Very important. I don't mean being a sage. Vervaeke could be right. Anytime someone points to the west, they mean the insatiable appetite to amass great wealth and conquer whatever it is to be conquered. At the expense of wisdom, there is suffering as a result of this behavior.
  • Idealism in Context
    So I cannot depend on my understanding to know the true state of being in the world.

    Therefore, "perceive" in "to be is to be perceived" cannot refer to the understanding but only to the sensibilities.
    RussellA
    I should say that this is not a good understanding of perception. Also, your conclusion doesn't follow.
    Just because you might have perceived erroneously that Mary is bored, it doesn't follow that you cannot depend on your understanding. This moment, you thought she was bored, and it turned out she was not. But there are other things you perceived of Mary that you could be right.