hen it is very likely that you are a deluded fool — universeness

Rather than argue about whether Abraham was a real person I think that it is within the stories that the substantive issues lie. The story of the sacrifice of Isaac, for example. It is held up as a shining example of faith, but I see it as an example of fanaticism. — Fooloso4

This is nothing more that personal placebo effects, imo. — universeness

You asked: "how do we have knowledge". The point is that knowledge of how to make clothes is something that begins with rudimentary attempts, not developed knowledge. — Fooloso4

I think Jesus was a real person, but that real person is not the person(s) created by the legends or the persons created by the interpretation of the NT legends. The "Christian thing" has from the beginning been different things. — Fooloso4

I think that the ancient fables/stories she see's such value in have caused far more trouble than they were ever worth. — universeness

The metaphor of the tree of knowledge is not intended to be an explanation, magical or otherwise. But the story does point to desire and vulnerability as leading to knowledge. Even before eating Eve saw that the fruit of the tree was desirable for gaining wisdom (3:6). They saw that they were naked and sewed together fig leaves to cover themselves. (3:7) This was the beginning of technical knowledge. But this attempt was not adequate. God made garments of skin for them (3:21). The problem of nakedness is that they were aware that they were vulnerable, exposed. They hid because they were naked and afraid. (3:10) — Fooloso4

The myth of anamnesis. I discuss it a bit in my thread on Plato's Phaedo. — Fooloso4

You aren't into history, are you?
— Athena
Yes I am, what point/judgement about me, are you trying to make by those words? — universeness

We can validate this because people were recording their political agreements and histories, and even primitive tribes left evidence of their existence and movements.
However, the stories are not without bias and it takes a lot of digging to be sure which story is the most accurate.
— Athena
So yeah, we have to separate reliable evidence, and those ancients who wrote down lies and claimed they were writing truth. Evidence for the existence of Abraham is not enhanced by evidence that a town or city he was placed in existed, or that Babylon or Sumer existed and we know the names of some of their Kings etc and some of the events that may or may not have happened, in the exact way they were memorialised/reported. Archeology can certainly find artifacts from of a time or a place, and use them to infer or gather data, but archeology has not found any indicator whatsoever, that is very compelling evidence, that the biblical character of Abraham ever existed. Same with the biblical moses, jesus, the disciples, Paul etc etc. Was Jesus also an illiterate? Why are there no writings signed Jesus Christ or the Aramaic equivalent? We also have no evidence at all, that the god Zeus or the goddess Athena existed, even though we accept that the ancient Greeks and ancient Greece existed and we know some of their names and some of the events that may or may not have actually happened. You agree, yes?

archeology has not found any indicator whatsoever, that is very compelling evidence, that the biblical character of Abraham ever existed. — universeness

Was Jesus also an illiterate? — universeness

In the Bible Jesus reads and writes a couple of times. One is in Hebrew and the other times the language is not specified but it could be Greek — Frigorifico

Education has been defined as, "teaching and learning specific skills, and also something less tangible, but more profound: the imparting of knowledge, positive judgement and well-developed wisdom. Education has as one of its fundamental aspects the imparting of culture from generation to generation (see socialization)".

While curriculum and texts for schools has been found in other areas of the ancient near east, no direct evidence—either literary or archaeological—exists for schools in ancient Israel.[1] There is no word for school in ancient (biblical) Hebrew,[1] the earliest reference to a "house of study" (bet hammidras) is found in the mid-Hellenistic period (2nd cent. BC) in the book of Ben Sira (51:23).[2]

However, the writing of the Bible as well as the variety of inscriptional material from ancient Palestine testifies to a relatively robust scribal culture that must have existed to create these textual artifacts.[1] The best unambiguous evidence for schools in ancient Israel comes from a few abecedaries and accounting practice texts found at sites such as Izbet Sarta, Tel Zayit, Kadesh Barnea, and Kuntillet ʿAjrud.[1] However, these were probably not schools in the traditional sense but rather an apprenticeship system located in the family.[1]

The total literacy rate of Jews in Israel in the first centuries c.e. was "probably less than 3%". While this may seem very low by today's standards, it was relatively high in the ancient world. If we ignore women (on the ground of their not participating in society), take into consideration children above the age of seven only, forget the far-away farmers and regard literacy of the non-educated people (e.g., one who cannot read the Torah but reads a bulla, that is: pragmatic literacy), then the literacy rate (adult males in the centers), might be even 20%, a high rate in traditional society.[3][4][5] — Wikipedia

The words in bold talk about the world of Abraham. and the words underlined cites the bible as the source. This is no evidence at all that Abraham was a real boy, any more than the world of Gilgamesh or the world of harry potter, suggests they were real either. — universeness

But, I am an atheist who does not think that any of the biblical characters were real. — universeness

And the Lord God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.” (Genesis 3:22)

Man should not be allowed to become gods. Death, like life, is both a blessing and a curse. The dualism of blessings and curses in this story should not be overlooked. They go hand in hand. They are tied to the dualism of knowledge. Knowledge is productive. Its fruits are both good and bad. Adam knew Eve. — Fooloso4

I want to know so much more about why you chose Asian philosophy.
— Athena

It chose me. It is common to ask an instructor to teach courses outside their area. Some instructors will just find a textbook, and let it do most of the work. Some textbooks have teacher editions that discussion questions and sample tests. That is not the way I do things.

I use primary texts. Rather than reading about philosophers and schools we read and attempt to interpret and discuss their work. To keep this short I had to do a lot of reading to prep. — Fooloso4

I want to know more. Which philosophers did your class examine?

I am thinking, that some philosophers are extremely difficult to read and I like the shortcut of reading someone else's explanation of what the original person said. But mind you, until relatively recently I have done my reading on my own without others to discuss them with and that does not have the same motivation of knowing one will interact with others. I am stumbling in the dark with philosophy without guidance.

I also attempted to read the Bible for myself and found it to be as terrible as Socrates found the stories told of the gods. For me, the Bible says so many stupid and horrible things it is not worth my time, but then I read your explanations and I am favorably impressed by your deeper understanding. If they give trophies to people who expand the thinking of others, you deserve one because I am pretty belligerent when it comes to the Bible. I still think the Christian thing is very problematic and harmful to democracy but you have shown a well-educated person can see more meaning of the stories than a less educated person.

I think the quotes you chose make it clear Judaism is a tribal religion, not an explanation of a universal god whose children are equal under the sun. And that tribal religion comes with a hierarchy that is not compatible with democracy. I am edging us back to the subject of this thread- Is our greatness the result of working together or the result of great leaders? What part does God play in this? I am getting at the international point of view and the fact that in some countries Americans are obnoxious people because they believe they are God's chosen people and that what they want, God wills for them. As the story goes we are blessed by God and those who oppose us are evil. Why else would God give us the technology of nuclear weapons if He did not want us to rule? Or as Zeus might say, that technology for war is a forbidden fruit and the longer it takes for us to have such technology the better. :wink:

The Greeks had a war with the Maccabees because the Greeks favored merit hiring and did not comply with the Jewish notion of God-chosen men and inherited rights to certain jobs. Martin Luther did not question God chose who would be masters and who would be slaves. Only recently has science begun explaining how past favoritism unjustly held some men down. The US is still struggling with old beliefs that justify divisions of humans. The question of greatness has social, political, and economic ramifications. The US was a New Social Order, but I don't think anyone today understands that because we replaced education for good citizenship and good moral judgment with education for technology and left moral training to the church.

:worry: Oh darn, I am dealing with a mental breakdown. My brain absolutely will not follow the linear process essential to comprehensive thinking. I am trying to clear up my thinking so I can make a comprehensive statement about democracy and the human potential. Then religion comes into the discussion and things are so complex for me, and I am afraid I am getting further from my goal. In the past, the goal was to write a book and I did great until bumped into the Christian issue. Trying to deal with the Christian issue without offending anyone took down my effort to write a book like an iceberg took down the Titanic. But the original Greek understanding of humans and gods is nothing like the God of Abraham's understanding of humans and God.

I did not find evidence of "moral training" but moral philosophy was often represented. — Fooloso4

I met with the head of philosophy at my university back in 1988. I had been somewhat annoyed by the approach taken over the year, which was essentially telling us how to think. He laughed and said, 'Son, you're not here to learn about philosophy, you're here to parrot back to us that which we think is correct. If you want to learn philosophy, leave this course.' Which I promptly did 30 minutes later. I never regretted the choice. Anyway now I'm here, sniffing around to see what I might have missed. — Tom Storm

By way of comparison, I went on to teach courses on Chinese, Japanese, and Greek philosophy. — Fooloso4

Abraham is a human ...
— Athena

If you mean he was a real person, a historical figure you will not find much scholarly support. If you mean that these stories had their antecedents then yes, but as they have come to us they reflect other ideas as well. — Fooloso4

By Cynthia Astle
Updated on May 04, 2019
Archaeology has been one of biblical history's greatest tools to sift out verified facts of Bible stories. In fact, over the past few decades archaeologists have learned a great deal about the world of Abraham in the Bible. Abraham is considered to be the spiritual father of the world's three great monotheistic religions, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. — Cynthia Astle

Where was Abraham from? The Bible states that Abraham was raised in “Ur of the Chaldeans” (Ur Kasdim). Most scholars agree that Ur Kasdim was the Sumerian city Ur, today Tall al-Muqayyar (or Tall al-Mughair), about 200 miles (300 km) southeast of Baghdad in lower Mesopotamia.Nov 19, 2023 — Britannica

According to Plato's Euthyphro the answer is no. Their less than exemplary behavior is the basis of Socrates' criticism of Euthyphro's misguided piety. — Fooloso4

An incantation, a spell, a charm, an enchantment, or a bewitchery, is a magical formula intended to trigger a magical effect on a person or objects. The formula can be spoken, sung, or chanted. An incantation can also be performed during ceremonial rituals or prayers. Wikipedia — Wikipedia

I don't know if a complete survey of such political attitudes has been done. But I recently saw a video of a Trump supporter, who said something like "if he was not praying daily, how could he get to be a billionaire?", and by implication, president. SomeTrumpers seem to believe his own propaganda, that he is a born --- and born-again --- Genius.

Perhaps a combination of inborn superiority and a close relationship with god, will make you a leader : economically and politically. Apparently, a significant portion of the political spectrum believes something like that. :meh: — Gnomon

For Plato the good is what is higher. In the Christian West the death of God is for Nietzsche the rejection of anything higher. That is so in part because God was held to be what is higher. Nietzsche makes the connection with the notion of a value free objective science. He asks what we will find to stand as something higher. — Fooloso4

AmadeusD — AmadeusD

I think it is intended to mimic the Bible, which I know you also dislike. — Fooloso4

Alas, in my old age I lost my bippy. — Fooloso4

Unlike some philosophers Nietzsche doe not speak about timeless truths. If things were different the issues he addresses would be different. What he would say and how interesting it would be I don't know. — Fooloso4

If there was an Abraham this is not a god he would have recognized. The idea of omnipotence was a later development. From what I have read the major influence was Greek philosophy and the idea of a perfect being. — Fooloso4

By the time of Plato, if not before, the gods had already been diminished in importance and influence. — Fooloso4

Even with those who believe in God there is interest in what other religions, sects, and cultures have to say. — Fooloso4

By 'individualized' are you just speaking to a 'group' adequately delineating itself? I ask, as i don't recognize what you're describing in these movements at all really. The whole 'eating it's tail' trope around identitarian groups having very much gate-keeping qualities about them comes to mind.

I might be over-blowing that particular aspect - but it does seem to me that the Frankfurt/Horkheimer origins speak to a very distinct flavour of anti-individualism, essentially replacing individual conceptions with group-accepted ones, in turn attempting to pit these against the conceptions and gate-keeping of other groups in a 'power struggle'. This is never done on the individual level, so i guess I'm wanting a bit more to understand the position that deconstructionist thought has any focus on individuation beyond lip-service? — AmadeusD

The Great Man Theory assumes that world-changing leaders are born, not socialized. In fact, most of them --- Alexander the Great, Napoleon, (Trump???) --- were ass-holes in social interactions, and dictatorial in their governance. Their fervid followers followed them, not because they were nice guys, but because they were perceived to have the "right-stuff" to change the world from the unsatisfactory status quo. It's the job of collectivist-socialist nerds to counteract the immoral excesses of the world-conquerors.

But even the bureaucratic leaders of the masses sometimes turn-out to be ass-holes ; perhaps due to the absolute power corrupts principle. The rest of us have to choose which band-wagon to jump on. Or to arduously make our own path. Fortunately, Democracy allows us the freedom to choose neither King nor Communism. But even that option is an uphill struggle without a clear path to follow. :smile:



Essentially, according to the Great Man Theory, people in positions of power deserve to lead because of characteristics granted to them at birth, which ultimately help them become heroes. No great man lives in vain. The history of the world is but the biography of great men.
https://thedecisionlab.com/reference-guide/anthropology/great-man-theory — Gnomon

Ostracism (Greek: ὀστρακισμός, ostrakismos) was an Athenian democratic procedure in which any citizen could be expelled from the city-state of Athens for ten years. While some instances clearly expressed popular anger at the citizen, ostracism was often used preemptively. It was used as a way of neutralizing someone thought to be a threat to the state or a potential tyrant, though in many cases popular opinion often informed the expulsion. The word "ostracism" continues to be used for various cases of social shunning. — Wikipedia

Living without a god. Living without something higher. Plato does this with the idea of the good. — Fooloso4

I, the last disciple and initiate of the God Dionysus

But if we have killed God then what? — Fooloso4

I think it must be just the opposite. A person must overcome the burden Christianity has imposed on us. We must question rather than obey the tablets of "thou shall nots". See the chapter "The Three Metamorphoses of the Spirit" in Zarathustra. — Fooloso4

It's good to interact with you again. It definitely seems that emotions have immense power. I know that I get fairly instant reactions to life events. They seem to determine the quality and nature of experience itself. I even find that I see differently and hear differently according to mood. Music seems to sound differently if I am sad or happy. — Jack Cummins

Childhood experiences probably play an extremely significant role in forming the core frames of emotions. There does appear to be a link between childhood trauma and mental illness, including PTSD and many other issues. Stress at all times is a major trigger for becoming mental ill, but the first years may be at the core of emotional life and defense mechanisms. It is likely to be linked to the plasticity of the brain. — Jack Cummins

for the sake of this deed he shall be part of a higher history than all history hitherto.

You might find the book "God: An Anatomy" by Francesca Stavrakopoulou
interesting. It deals with how the stories and concepts of what comes to be the god(s) of the Bible develop from one culture to another. As the title indicates, the focus is on gods as physical beings. — Fooloso4

From the second section on consciousness I am reminded of Dewey on the meaning of conscience (con - with, science -knowledge) to be, with the knowledge of others. What one would do if others were aware of what we are doing. — Fooloso4

Plato makes great use of mythos, both existing mythos and those he creates. There is a logos to mythos. Although we typically think of logos as reason and logic, its range of meaning is much greater. Etymologically its root meaning is to collect or gather. In the dialogues, however, an appeal to mythos often occurs when argument fails. — Fooloso4

Certainly stories from one culture became part of those of other cultures, but I do not think we should think of it as plagiarism. It is, rather, closer to what happens in fashion style. — Fooloso4

I thought you wanted to know more about the virtues of a warrior.

The warrior's virtue is the ideal they fight for that gives them purpose beyond themselves, beyond the abyss that war leaves man engulfed within.

143 from Joyful wisdom isn't saying "Gods are literally made this way," it's showing the basis for Polytheism is that Deities are individuals who champion ideals. Much like a warrior who champions ideals.

The easiest way to defeat warriors and Gods is to remove/replace the ideal in which they fight/stand for. — Vaskane

And while there's no motivation for an individual to become liberated, — dani

As I see it, it is more of a question of the particular person. It is connected to the Socratic claim about the examined life. What I need to be aware of may not be what you need to be aware of. — Fooloso4

True. The most important consequence of modern liberalism, for better and for worse, might be to reorient us around the individual. Some take this so far that they reject the notion of a common good. For them the rights of the individual stands at the center. — Fooloso4

From a young age I rejected the idea that we should start writing with an outline. For me writing is a way of thinking. — Fooloso4

Which ties back into 143 from the Joyful wisdom with creating your own ideal, and the greatest utility of polytheism, a warrior fights for their ideal due to it being the transfiguring and redeeming aspect that lifts them out of the abyss of nihilism. — Vaskane

The existence of Ma’at in Egyptian society and its myths in the meaning of both the
pharaonic and individual adherence to rules and principles to keep on the right path
reveals that most Egyptians did have a good understanding of just and unjust social
behaviour. In terms of consciousness, this implies that Egyptians were self-reflexive;
they were moral human beings capable of reflecting upon their own behaviour over a
period of time. This assertion is supported by the Italian neuroscientologist Antonio
Damasio’s theory of consciousness. In ‘The feeling of what happens’ (2000), Damasio
makes a distinction between three cumulative forms of human consciousness: 1. the
protoself: a person’s bodily state, which is the most basic representation of self. 2. The
core self: the awareness of the biological bodily state and emotions in the here and
now, which is a more evolved form of consciousness. 3. The autobiographical self: a
person’s reflection on the awareness of emotions over a longer period of time. The
autobiographical self is the third layer and most evolved form of consciousness. It
draws on memory and past experiences which involve the use of higher thought
processes. It requires a person to have a language, an autobiographical memory
capacity, and reasoning ability. Damasio believes that the autobiographical self is a
necessary condition for both rational and mythological thinking. Therefore, to his mind,
mythological thinking does not belong to a lower form of consciousness. Damasio
stresses that myths are not the product of the core self but, similar to rational thinking,
are the result of self-reflexive thoughts of the autobiographical self, which is both an
individual and a group member. An adult constructs this self with its experiences,
ideas, images, evaluations, likes, dislikes, achievements and failures. Although the
autobiographical self is unique to a person, he or she shares narratives with members
of the same peer group, community, or culture. This means that besides using our own
experiences, we include the experiences, ideologies and beliefs we inherit from
(deceased) members of our cultures, which makes us part of the larger narratives of
mankind. The autobiographical or self-reflexive self is thus the result of mythological
and logical individual thoughts of a person, whose consciousness is at the same time
constructed by and part of the collective consciousness of humanity as a whole
(Damasio 2000). — Multgo-13

I supported Womens' Lib and that resulted in me becoming "Mr. Mom" - a single parent - for a while. But life moved on in unexpected but welcome ways. — jgill

How can we tell what is to be learned by looking inward unless we look inward? — Fooloso4

Education in music for the soul and gymnastics for the body, Socrates says, is the way to shape the guardians' character correctly and thereby prevent them from terrorizing the citizens. Thus, the guardians' education is primarily moral in nature, emphasizing the blind acceptance of beliefs and behaviors rather than the ability to think critically and independently. — Ariel Dillon

A mother hating herself and a mother hating something about herself are not the same. The latter is a practice of love, the former need not be. If it is, it is misdirected. I am not a mother, but I was "Mr. Mom" back when this was either a joke or something seen as suspicious or wrong. To borrow a phrase from Thoreau, as the artist of my own life, the form it has taken is not something foreseen or foreknown. — Fooloso4

Don't get me wrong Athena in that I am very aware of the truth of 'those who ignore the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them.' I am not saying that the thoughts and fables of the ancients have no value, but I am saying that they are not good enough to form the basis of our moral codes or human rights or global constitution or prime directives, in our spacefaring future as one united species. — universeness

BUT, not the classics, they must make room for the new enlightenments to come. — universeness

Nietzsche takes an exhortation from the Greek poet Pindar:

Become who you are.

To know and to be who you are is a struggle. It takes honesty. We too easily lie to ourselves about ourselves. And honesty takes courage. The warrior's virtue.

To become who you are requires becoming an enemy to that which you come to hate about yourself. Nietzsche uses the analogy of the art of the sculpturer who, unlike the painter who adds to a blank canvas, removes all that is extraneous, superfluous, and false. — Fooloso4

I apologize for getting defensive over Nietzsche's works. I'm high functioning on the spectrum. High — Vaskane

I don't understand the "controversy." Some individuals may be considered "great." Clearly, it doesn't follow from this that "we" are "great." Neither does the fact that "we" are great mean that each of us are "great." — Ciceronianus

Are organisations like NATO or the 6 retail shops owned by the family of a friend of mine, also 'conscious life forms?' — universeness