Philosophy is difficult, and hence sometimes uncomfortable. While good grace is a virtue, so is being forthright. — Banno

Life is difficult and hence sometimes uncomfortable, but your philosophy of life does not have to be commanded totally by whatever your natural tendencies may be.
It is down to individual choice when you choose to be forthright/frank/curmudgeonly/acrimonious etc.
Natural tendency can be controlled, and a good teacher/guide/proponent of philosophy should try to be patient and supportive to those who do not have, currently, an ability to demonstrate a deep study and grasp of the topic and should also not resort to nodding indulgence.
I am merely stating my personal preference for a particular skillset in people that I would declare to be 'good at imparting philosophy.'
Was your quote from 'yes minister' simply your statement of 'hey, it takes all kinds to make a world?'

But what say you of a person who believes they are the only thing that exists (solipsists) - one who believes their "self" is unanimous with the "whole" but perhaps have a perogative to act in servitude of the self. In that case a crime against another is a crime against the self. They hold accountable their actions against another as if it was against their self and therefore are benevolent towards all people.

It is sort of positive narcissism. I wouldnt hurt myself therefore I cannot hurt another as it is equivalent. — Benj96

I think if you are a solipsist who declares solipsism as an objective truth, then you have declared yourself as the most important object in the universe, based on your delusion, that only you truly exist, which would fit with my definition of an extremity of evil.
I personally think solipsism is nonsense but your connection between solipsism and the golden rule is a nice but unlikely connection.
A solipsist who is benevolent towards everything because they believe everything is of them and they therefore treat everything as they themselves would want to be treated, is an angle on solipsism I have not heard of before and I find it too much of a stretch for me. I would consider a solipsist to be narcissistic by default, unless they only put solipsism forward, merely as a small possibility.
Based on your agreement with @180 Proof, do you consider masochistic humans as behaving in an evil way?

'To deliberately inflict and prolong, willfully ignore or derive pleasure from suffering' is my quick & dirty idea of evil. — 180 Proof

Why do you use 'dirty' here? Are you referencing masochism? and if so, do you see masochism as an evil behaviour in all cases?

"Evildoers" are human. If you want to stop them, you have to understand that. — T Clark

This is a crucial point for me, there are no supernatural scapegoats available, there never has been and there never will be. Humans must own evil and only by fully understanding why humans do what they do, can we successfully combat evil, in all the ways humans demonstrate it.

I personally do define evil as a purely human measure/judgement of behaviour.
I think the most heinous evil is to truly believe that YOU are the most important object in the universe and to act 100% in accordance with that belief. Adolf Hitler was one of the most evil humans who has ever lived and I think his narcissism was at a 100% level or as close to it as a single human can get.

t is probably very logical that a teacher who is pleasant to deal with ultimately also has the most clout when it comes to the transfer of learning material. — Seeker

Reads like a very fair and accurate viewpoint to me.

I respect all those who have the academic qualifications in philosophy, which means they can demonstrate that they have studied the topic deeply. I also respect those who do not have the academic qualifications but who can also demonstrate they have personally studied the topic deeply, so it would be folly on my part to not heed such people. BUT some folks use their talents and expertise to mentally beat up others and some other folks, use their skills to be benevolent towards others.

But would you be happy if all your posts elicited was nodding indulgence? I hope this is the wrong forum for just that. — Banno

Not nodding indulgence no, perhaps we can agree that impatient/exasperated and nodding indulgence responses are all equally unhelpful. Constructive criticism is a better approach.
I do appreciate the impatience that does come, when you have had to explain the same point to different people many, many, many times. The novelty of doing so wears very thin. The need to do so is nonetheless, an important part of being a good ambassador for the areas in which a person claims expertise or a significant depth of knowledge.

I remember having different teachers for every new schoolyear and consequently there were schoolyears when learning equalled overal positive experiences, with a general eagerness heading off to school every morning, in during which absorbing data was a natural given, while during others I absolutely dreaded the place, absorbed far less and in which I hated the ones doing the teaching. — Seeker

Yeah, too many teachers can be like too many cooks, it spoils the broth/confuses the student.
My main approach to teaching pupils was entertainment and as many flash/bang/whoosh moments as possible, especially from age 11 to 14 (S1 to S3).
In certificate courses, I was a little more refined, subtle in my use of humour and entertainment but the fact it was computer science and I had access to good quality software was always a big help. It was a little different with the advanced higher classes (S6), 16/17-year-olds. Your use of humour had to be 'clever' and 'relevant,' if you were trying to convince the pupils you were willing to work hard for them based on them wanting/needing to be successful in your subject.

:clap: Well said, beratement is a weak response, that tells you more about those who employ it than they appreciate. I was almost 30 years in teaching. Beratement is one of the worse responses you can give to a student who has not (or chooses not to try to understand) understood your lesson. Beratement just displays your own frustration and your lack of ability to 'cause learning.' Trying to teach or lecture is easy, especially if you have expertise in the area. Causing learning, is a totally different skillset.
I will berate those who berate but mainly in defensive mode.

Wear your philosophy neophyte badge with pride, as I do. It actually has a high 'excuse,' currency value when I/you get philosophy projections wrong, and you get a disgruntled/impatient/exasperated response from characters like @180 Proof or @Banno or just general beratement fetishists. (Suggested member names for 'beratement fetishists,' withheld, just cause it's fun to do it that way!)
The 'but I am still a beginner here,' can be a very good defensive card to play. :smile:

All true seekers seek truth. Even the people who invented the words in the bible chose to include 'seek and ye shall find.' Only an arrogant deluded fool thinks he/she/hesh knows all that they need to know.
In past face to face encounters with others, I have often came away feeling defeated and depressed.
But I began to realise that those who I thought were mentally stronger than I and knew so much more than me in a particular area, were quite weak in other areas and in many cases were weaker and knew much less than I in some areas. We all have our strengths and weaknesses. Don't be too impressed when someone seems very powerful in any particular area of debate. No one is infallible. No living creature displays any omni capability.
Btw, I use 'hesh,' just as my own invented pronoun for anyone who does not consider themselves male or female.
I just joined a wee bit of he and she. Just laziness on my part, but I find it easier than lgbtqi etc, etc.
I just use hesh, unless an individual finds it offensive.

How do you 'fit' a human concept or aspect of sentience/consciousness, such as irrationality into something like a Turing test? One aspect of a Turing test is that you can use irrationality as a method of testing the sentience of a system. For example, if I can communicate with the system then I might suggest to the black box systems that they are inferior to the white box systems in the next room.
What reaction would be required to such an input, under the turing rules as you define them, that would support a declaration that your black box systems are sentient?

I blame patriarchy for the division of those who have power and those who do not. It is my understanding matriarchies have a family order but not the hierarchy of power and authority that men seem to prefer. — Athena

I personally don't think that male lineage produces fewer nasty leaders than female lineage.
Do you think, Cleopatra, Elizabeth I, Catherine the Great, Maggie Thatcher etc are any better than horrors like Trump? It has always seemed mere anthropocentrism to me to assign gods a gender. Evil has no gender Imo. Evil is just base behaviour which has its origins in the 'rules of the jungle,' we evolved from. It looks quite evil to me, when a lion kills a small, weak, slow, unwell zebra and then rips it to shreds and eats it. If a human did that to a lamb in a field, in front of others, we would think of that human as a savage, a throwback, not welcome in our world. Evil has got nothing to do with woo woo gods and demons, it's just humans behaving in ways we NOW CONSIDER, is somewhere in the range of unacceptable/criminal to completely savage/horrific.

I assume you accept evolution. — Athena

I consider evolution to be scientific fact.

How about male and female differences? — Athena

Human males and females are different in many ways. As a heterosexual male, I am very happy about some of those physical differences. I don't think we differ greatly, mentally, in any significant ways, perhaps with the exception that the vast majority of women, do have, imo, an obviously higher imperative towards nurturing children, in all its forms, than men do. But I do think that this is merely an instinctive difference and is malleable as advances in science and technology and social role changes, continue to blur the gender borderlines.

I think we all agree other animals are ruled by their hormones. How about people? — Athena

Some influences can be very strong indeed in many people, others can control such natural instincts and hormonal imperatives quite successfully and are not controlled by them. The level at which an individual human is more under the control of their instincts or base chemistry, differs from person to person and perhaps even year to year, or it may depend on how hard your reasoning is able to battle with your, wants, needs, personal cravings/satisfactions etc.

Greeks did not conquer the world as the Romans did. We seem to think the Romans were superior, but really? Intellectually at least Athens was superior. I have read the Greeks and those living in Celtic territory got along just fine, but the Romans enslaved everyone. — Athena

Tribal groups have warred since the beginning. Many female warriors were as involved as the men were in many early civilisations. Why, for example in some Western cultures and in the USA, are the Mongols, and Genghis Khan considered to be less influential than the Greeks, Romans and Egyptians etc.
I don't place any of the early civilisations above each other. They were all just 'earlier humans.'
I hate to use the term 'superior,' when comparing one earlier people against another.
That was always one of the main problems, yes?
WE ARE BETTER THAN YOU! AND WE ALWAYS WILL BE. It's freaking BULLSHIT!
It seems to me that, we need to all really work from the position that humans are not superior to each other. I look to the future for a fair, balanced human civilisation. I use past failed systems such as all those which have gone before as 'lessons to be learned and not repeated.'

I think my point is, I was not always as self-confident as I am today. The girls in Iran are caught up in the history of their time, as I was when I thought I was a hippie, but during the recession when people were losing their homes and businesses, we were not united in an effort to improve things. We were alone as we slowly sank to the bottom. — Athena

We all have our story of raw thinking and impetuous actions when we were younger.
The bottom is merely a place you can improve from!

agreed :up:

I do not agree with hating the rich because that is like hating someone because of their color. — Athena

I always try to be careful when I damn, unlike the gods, described by theists. I stated the 'nefarious' rich as opposed to all rich people. I have some space for the 'least they could do,' altruistic, philanthropic rich.
Hating a person's colour is irrational and imo, inaccurate as racism is much more based on fear of difference and dislike of anything outside of your experienced, daily culture. You can change your economic policy, much easier than you can change your physical colour or your cultural influences/indoctrinations.

However, I think we all could be improved with knowledge of how to play the economic power game. How does it work? I wonder if we do not teach high school youths about economics because those in control really do not want the masses to know. Or maybe it is because most high school students are nowhere near ready to comprehend economics and struggle just to have some awareness of personal finances. Or maybe no knows enough to make economics a part of the high school curriculum? — Athena

The money trick is well understood and not difficult to explain but you are correct that those who hold power wish to maintain as large a population of ignorant people as is within their power.
The nefarious rich, need such a resource, to service them and to enhance/maintain their profits.

The rich have provided jobs and built the economy of cities and I am very glad we have these people. Maybe the whole game is not fair but we are darn lucky to have people who do start industries and run them. — Athena

I disagree, the jobs were always there, as were and are the industries and resources and ingenuity.
I prefer 'these people,' you describe to be decent people and if they are nefarious, then we have the state of affairs we have now. The problems started as a residue from our time in the wilds. The process and means by which the first nefarious few were allowed to become an established malignant infestation, is simply the story of how the first nefarious King/Queen/Messiah/chief/community leader came to be, and allowing such to become established and prosper, was the greatest mistake in human history.

I am struggling with these thoughts. Can you help me? How can we bring out the best in people and reduce social problems? — Athena

By adding to the solutions, by reducing the problems, sticking your finger in the hole in the sea wall, if you can help stop the flood or help clean up afterwards.
By each of us feeling/taking the responsibility and having the empathy to do what you can when you can, just like you exemplify every day.
Out of little acorns, big Oak tree's grow. The only help I think the folks on TPF can offer you is textual/human support unless they stay near you. Perhaps even some financial support, if you can get involved in some kind of crowdfunding/fund raising efforts which would directly support the local help initiatives you are trying to participate in.
I was watching a show about Chile recently and a woman was trying to feed 70 local kids every day using mostly her own limited pay she gets as a nurse and some local charity she was getting a little help and money from. Again, the likes of she, you and the schoolgirls in Iran are what helps convince me that there is great hope for the future of the human race.

The question becomes 'where do you yourself, as a single entity/conscience, mainly exist?
Past/present/future/outside of linear spacetime? By 'outside linear spacetime, I refer to spacetime I would label escapist/fantasy/dream/woo woo spacetime.
For me, I exist more in future linear spacetime. Most of my thinking, references my projections into future linear spacetime.

BTW, the first time I saw the film LUCY, your clip is from, I had quite a low opinion, now I think it's a brilliant movie of cult classic status.

Shhh! I design ships that float for only and exactly 5 seconds! :lol: — Agent Smith

Such a short but bright, flashing, spectacular life of colour and adventure before some freakin iceberg sinks yer ship (designed and built by the typical flawed god that is our one and only deus, Agent Smith)

Yeah, :lol: thanx for that suggestion, should cheer everyone up!

Whether it is due to cognitive or other difficulties, it may be that an underclass is developing, of people who just are a bit outside the parameters of the mainstream. It is probably not an entirely new development but as life gets more digitalised and 'faster' there may be greater exclusion of those who find it hard to compete in the fight for resources. In the case of the most downtrodden, they may be less able to argue for their rights and be cast outside of agendas for arguing for their rights, and be a silent minority on the periphery or edge of society. — Jack Cummins

I think that 'From each according to their ability, to each according to their need,' is still a fundamental imperative. But perhaps we need to add ', their freewill, and democratic consent,' after the word 'ability.'

At times, when I struggle with online communication and forms I begin to doubt my own cognitive abilities, — Jack Cummins

For what it's worth to you Jack, your 'cognitive abilities,' based on your typing's, here on TPF, seem pretty solid to me.

Unfortunately, in my opinion, you seem borderline psychotic concerning these issues. I'll tell you from experience, I thought very similar ideas in the past, until I realized it was merely a recipe for my personal misery. I didn't like it so I changed my tune. I have no advise other than to say be happy and make your life good, stop worrying about things outside of your direct control. I say this all as a friend. — Merkwurdichliebe

Thanks for your friendly advice. It's a pity that those who wish for a better world and remain confident that it can and will be achieved by humans and the human race are TO YOU, borderline psychotic, or you at least think I may be.
I think this speaks more to your own mental state than it does to mine.
If you have held similar ideas to me in the past, then it's a pity you were unable to maintain them. Perhaps a personal strength is something that will return to you one day and then you will become again, a more significant part of the solutions we need.
I know this may be difficult for you to fully accept but in general, and by far, I am happy and have no personal misery, such as that you describe so negatively affected you. My life is good, and it is part of my function and responsibility, to influence, as much as I can, those issues that you think are unassailable and which YOU have personally surrendered to, using your excuse 'out of my control,' and exasperated typing's such as

That is the history of the world and the future of humanity until its extinction — Merkwurdichliebe

and

"Economic parity for all" is the biggest pipe dream in human history. — Merkwurdichliebe

I am glad that you can still find some embers in yourself that still invokes your support for:

I think you and I would agree that the playing field could be leveled a bit. A guaranteed nice standard of living for the working girl would be a nice start. But as long as we continue to elect these treasonous cowards (left and right), we get what we deserve — Merkwurdichliebe

Perhaps you could rekindle some of your early strengths by listening a little more to certain songs like:

You need to finish what you start!

In the UK there are many, many more unoccupied properties than there are homeless. Some are run down properties that could be given to the homeless for free and as long as they have water, electric and they are made sound against the weather, people could group together and 'fix them up,' themselves. Other unoccupied properties are owned by the rich abroad, who buy them for investment purposes to have 'assets' abroad. Sometimes it's even foreign governments/politicians/oligarchs that own them as a way to 'launder' their money.

This is the rich man's world we live/exist/struggle in, these are the games of the rich. The money trick, supply and demand. Keep the poor masses down and needy and this will provide a cheap labour force, military and police malleable fodder and a very large uneducated, politically ignorant populous.
Keep all their services underfunded and understaffed. Play the blame culture. Blame it on pandemics, blame it on your rich enemies like Putin. Blame it on the immigrants, blame it on market forces, blame it on lazy ungrateful workers, blame it on militant unions, blame it on over population, blame it on a shortage of housing, blame it on whatever bullshit excuse you want.
Meantime the rich and powerful who are actually, fully to blame, can get on with enjoying their wealth, power and status whilst the majority suffer.
Socialist? Humanist? Capitalist sycophant? The questions that make the difference are.
1. Who are you?
2. What do you want?
I am a socialist, a humanist, and I damn the nefarious rich and powerful to destruction.
I want economic parity for all humans, from cradle to grave.

Unlike many on TPF. I don't admire much about ancient Greek culture or Rome or Egypt or even my own closest culture, the ancient Celts and the vile druids in Scotland/Ireland. Saint Mungo/Andrew/Patrick/George etc are all ridiculous embarrassments to me.
I think the best human civilisation and culture, firmly lies in the future, not the past.
The past, at its best offers many more examples of people, behaviours and systems we should avoid repeating as opposed to those we should emulate.
I look forwards to those philosophers not born yet, not characters like Plato and Aristotle.

Don't be so dismissive is what I'd say, — Agent Smith

Don't be impressed by bullshitters who hide behind curtains or magicians who impress with bells, whistles, smoke and mirrors. Ancient woo woo is no more impressive than the woo woo of modern con artists such as Uri Geller or David Blaine.
An oracle is just a grifter:
Oracle:a priest or priestess acting as a medium through whom advice or prophecy was sought from the gods in classical antiquity.
a place at which divine advice or prophecy was sought.
synonyms:
prophet · prophetess · sibyl · seer · augur · prognosticator · diviner · soothsayer · wise man · wise woman · sage · fortune teller ·

Wise man/women, how ridiculous to include those terms under 'Oracle.' :rage:

Edit: Change the dictionary definition for Oracle to 'Grifter, offers fake predictions regarding future events in the hope of gaining fraudulent funding.'

That said, oracularity was an art form; the sophistication was dazzling or so the story goes. — Agent Smith

Yeah, but only to those who were not aware of the con involved. Like moronic Kings or tough guy gangsters, who were scared of the woo woo in their heads, and wanted CONformation the non-existent gods were on his side and of course former American Presidents like Ronald Reagan, who did not sign a policy document without consulting his oracles. :lol:

The Delphic Oracle — Agent Smith

They were just junkie's, messed up on scooby gases as opposed to scooby snacks!

What a lark eh? A great kingdom will fall! and it turned out to be your own :lol: what a hoot! :rofl:

Those crazy daze, of the ancient junkies and their purple haze!

Perhaps you would prefer this detailed, more self-referenced, slightly yodely, Scots version with accompanying lyrics!

I think you could sing this song to yourself every day as the main anthem to your world view.
Sing it loud, be proud of who you are! Sing it proud!

For sure I hope the women win the fight for their rights. We burned our bras and I am so thankful the danger to us was not as it is for the women of backward countries — Athena

Have you saw some of the mobile phone footage coming out of Iran, such as the two I posted recently in the shout box, in my 6th post on this page here
ALL POWER TO THESE YOUNG BRAVE PEOPLE! Almost 200 people have lost their lives so far to this vile theistic regime.

We must do more for people who need help but I don't know how we can. Things are out of control. — Athena

Similar to words I typed previously, one set of hands, held out, opened and pushed forwards can do little to protect individuals from a cold blowing wind but if many other hands joined you then things can get better. It's very old but it's still very true..... UNITED, WE STAND! DIVIDED, WE FALL!

I am having trouble getting blood work done because talking to a robot over the phone is too frustrating! I throw up my hands and think so what if I drop dead? At least then I don't have to deal with the barriers to getting services. — Athena

No shame in seeking help, others accept your help, you can get help too. I now act as a barrier between my mother and the outside world. I deal with all authorities, medical, financial etc on her behalf but I do so based on her instructions, her directions, her wishes. I deal with the robots for her and those humans in call centres that can hardly speak English (no fault of theirs of course, just the usual profiteers using the cheapest labour force on offer), as I am fully able to do that. Don't be too pround Athena, get the help you are entitled to, the same help you are trying to get for others. Family/friends/neighbours/help groups/charities surely someone can help you here. In Scotland we have some fantastic organisations like 'Age concern,' 'Citizens Advice Bureau,' 'Alzheimer's society,' 'Local council, home help support,' etc, etc. You must have the equivalent of some of these.

But I think many of them are overwhelmed with heavy workloads. — Athena

So are the poor sods they are supposed to be helping! Perhaps they are not overwhelmed with heavy workloads but overwhelmed by their unfair circumstances. I absolutely agree, that there are many good people working in the social care system but there are many f***wits as well! There is no question that they are over worked, under paid and way under-resourced and the real culprits are the politicians in power. The pressure must come from the people who must move 'en masse' to pressure those in power and demand significant improvement to the social care system, on threat of removal from power.

What personal opinion are you offering me based on these 5 tropes?
You need to be a little less cryptic to gain more impact, imo, or your viewpoints simply become lost in the background noise of the words of others such as Agrippa/Pyrrho.

People tend to be led by emotion and self-interest, rather than philosophical or any other type of reasoned argument. — Down The Rabbit Hole

I think this is too true of too many to be denied or ignored (but I would take out the words 'philosophical or any other type of,' in the quote above, as I think some philosophy is not well reasoned,) and I think that all living philosophers have a human responsibility to try to change this. This is the viewpoint I was heading towards, from the OP I typed. I am simply interested in how much support for this view there is amongst current TPF members, but I don't want a poll, as suggested by @Agent Smith, as I would like to know a little detail about why they agree or dissent.

Whenever an individual's cognitive framework is challenged, "joy" or "calm" is most likely not going to be their reaction, but rather fear. — Ajemo

This is true of some but certainly not all. If an individual is TRULY 'open minded,' then said individual will welcome challenge to even your most dearly held viewpoints as challenge offer you the opportunity to HONESTLY defend. After I get over the initial shock, I will eventually thank someone who shows me convincing evidence that a viewpoint I hold is fatally flawed, especially if it means some of my past or current actions are, in accordance, incorrect/unjustified/damaging to the common good or to human progression etc.

But again, setting up large contrasts in ideologies helps us to a certain degree to either change our philosophy or stay the same. — Ajemo

I agree, but this is a situation that each individual must fully understand in my opinion, as it has proven to cause extremists like Trump, BoJo, Bolsonaro and Duterte to be given power and it also facilitates autocratic powers such as Putin, Xi Jinping and Kim Jong-un etc. If people have to be taken to some kind of brink of fear or threat, to get their compliance or to win their vote, then philosophers must explain to them that this is what they are doing and that they must stop doing so and consider the information they are sourcing, in a more balanced way and with more scrutiny, to ensure its accuracy before they take any actions.

Nietzsche urged people never to drink alcohol. I think that's a bit extreme. But perhaps a good shot of medicine for a society bent on excess. His argument was basically that it stripped us of our drive for self improvement. — Ajemo

I am conflicted on the advice 'dont touch the fire because it will burn you!' I agree it's silly to touch the fire because it WILL burn you, so I personally do heed such advice but some people who think 'Well, it might have burned you, but it won't burn me, I have a cunning plan,' etc, only seem to learn through suffering and such suffering often turns them bitter, twisted and misanthropic.

I don't abstain from something like alcohol, but I stay aware of the dangers involved.
I think Nietzsche was, in the main, a bad role model for the human race and I think his fear-based philosophy did more harm than good. But I am basing that on a limited knowledge of his life and all he wrote or said. I do agree with always trying to improve yourself but not exclusively in the areas of power, wealth and influence over the lives of others (unless that influence is benevolent.)

Confirmed! No sarcasm involved!

Well said Agent Flint!

By the way, maya is fun for some. — Agent Smith

I had to google 'maya.'
the supernatural power wielded by gods and demons.
They have no power, as they don't exist. Can you get the ones you have experience with, to affect me?
I think your demons and gods are wimps and cowards and non-existent. I challenge your manifestations to affect me. Not through human hands or accidental happenstance of course, that would not count.
But if you could arrange a personal face to face meeting with any demonic or god manifestation you are familiar with, I would buy you a beer afterwards in appreciation, if I survive the encounter, which I will, easily, as such entities have no power, as they are only of the human imagination.

Sorry, but it's not your fault. — Agent Smith

You maintain your rather enigmatic status Mr Smith. Maybe you are an international spy who only answers direct questions put to you by @Jamal when he is debriefing you in one of the various secret underwater pods he and his minions own or have I been watching old 'our man Flint' movies again.
Perhaps your matrix disguise is just a ruse to put us of your trail and your true-life story was dramatised in:

Does the following ringtone annoy you or activate your secret programming?

Are lies, illusions (deception) dangerous? — Agent Smith

Should we fear being led down the garden path? Should we fear illusions? Should we fear lies? — Agent Smith

This seems a futile dance. It's okay if you prefer asking questions to answering them.

I appreciate the suggestion, but I am interested in some details, not yes/no responses.

You could start by answering the question