You probably shouldn't let us in on that... :eyes:
— Baden
Oh, crap. I promise to but more effort into my OP's from now on, and stick to the guidelines.
:fear: — Purple Pond

Hah ! That'll learn ya :snicker:

Even if the arguments are not your own, you should still describe at least some of the ideas surrounding the topic in some detail. We normally delete short OPs based on questions alone as it suggests the OP writer hasn't thought much about the issue and will hardly be able to contribute much less lead the conversation. — Baden

Indeed. That is why I would prefer someone else to start the thread. I like the idea of starting with your quote but I think that someone with greater knowledge and experience should lead it.
Baden, I know you are too busy. However, would you have anyone else in mind ? Earlier you mentioned unenlightened...

We can discuss that. I suggest posting a draft of your OP here, and then we can comment on it. We already had two attempts at it. Hopefully we can create at least one quality discussion out of this.

The starter of a thread usually takes responsibility, no ? To fully engage...
— Amity
There's only so much a discussion creator can do. The rest is up to the participants. — Purple Pond

I agree that there is only so much a discussion creator can do. Also that the quality of a forum and its threads are down to the contributors.

However, I worry that if I started one about Happiness, I would not be able to follow the forum guidelines, particularly the first two:

Don't start a new discussion unless you are:

a) Genuinely interested in the topic you've begun and are willing to engage those who engage you.
b) Able to write a thoughtful OP of reasonable length that illustrates this interest, and toprovide arguments for any position you intend to advocate.

In a) I might be willing but it can quickly become overwhelming if there is a lot of interest and input.

b) In an exploratory thread, I would not be advocating a philosophical position as such. There would be no 'arguments' to support any non-existing position.

Wow, all this work and we have yet to created a single discussion. I'm not sure it's worth the effort. Oh, well, I still think it's fun. :grin: — Purple Pond

Yes. It reminds me of meetings about meetings. However, I think this discussion has been fruitful.
So far, so good :smile:

However, if your definition was used to start an exploration in a very general sense, then hopefully that would inspire specific examples. Either from posters' life experience or particular philosophy/ philosophers.

What do you think ?
— Amity

All for it. :up: — Baden

What do others think ?

All you have to do is present your idea for discussion, and hopefully someone else will take up the challenge and create a good discussion. — Purple Pond

What constitutes a 'good discussion'. It's quite easy to start one. The difficulty lies in creating a quality product. The starter of a thread usually takes responsibility, no ? To fully engage...

We can probably leave me out of the title I think. But your comment is much appreciated. :smile: — Baden

So would a title like 'Happiness in a Sentence' be a good one or would it point to a 'Love is...' hallmark card series of comments. Actually, I do like quotes as starters. Would you be happy to be quoted in any OP ?

If I were to write the OP, I would probably set it up as an exploration of what happiness is in a very general sense first then focus in on specific examples or experience as they become relevant in the progress of the discussion. ButI wouldn't want to make it about my biography. :monkey: — Baden

Aw, what a spoilsport :cry:

The discussion needn't be about your or anyone's biography - although I would love to read everyone's story someday ! We can show but not tell :cool:

However, if your definition was used to start an exploration in a very general sense, then hopefully that would inspire specific examples. Either from posters' life experience or particular philosophy/ philosophers.

What do you think ?

Happiness: Something like the proper mixture of sensitivity, creativity and strength achieved through habit and self-reflection; a self-sustaining stability of not-wanting rather than the result of procuring something wanted; the satisfaction that comes with focusing outwards on a regular basis while recognizing choice and freedom in each moment in the context of a healthy and active imagination; originality in identity and character in a way that fosters same in others; consistent quality in thought and action.

A promising topic imo. — Baden

Now that made me happy. Reading something beautifully expressed and creatively philosophical that made me think, nod a little in the right way, and is clearly from a position of life experience. No references to a particular philosopher, book or encyclopedia but a distillation of many. Probably.

Not only a promising topic but...an article, or a book, in waiting :wink:
However, it would have to include major philosophical, if not psychological, neurological professional thinkers and writers on the subject. No ?

Is it best to focus on only one or two aspects ? Hence the need for a focused title and OP.
How would you start? What were the influences which moved you to your destination ?
Perhaps that would be the discussion. To unpack your definition...

The title ?
'Baden's Happiness in a Sentence'.

"It is equally interesting to discuss matters sexually, rather than to discuss sexual matters."

How would that work ... everything would be sexual innuendo! — Kippo

The possibilities are endless.
That would be the topic of another thread. Of course every good thread starts with a wiki.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_sex

am pretty confident that post is somebody's homework, and they were just trying to get somebody on the forum to do it for them. Note how it just has two questions, written in the way that homework questions usually are. It contains no thoughts, suggestions or anything to indicate that the poster has thought about or is even interested in the topic.

If Baden hadn't already closed the thread I would have reported the post. — andrewk

I agree. It looked iffy.
I think Baden's instincts, given his experience, were spot on.
I have responded to another iffy one. Even with this suspicion, it gave me a chance to exercise some thinking/writing skills. And others reading it might have learned something...who knows.

But yeah, all power to the mods for keeping this forum running well and without clutter.

And be sarcastic as much as humanly possible, although it'll be lost on someone like me, because I have Asperger's syndrome. — S

Ah but then you have the compensation of being the Wisest Among Fools :nerd:

It is more interesting, IMO, to discuss matters philosophically, rather than to discuss philosophical matters.

Well they are different discussions so I suppose a preference is inevitable. One is harder to engage with I guess, but worth the effort no doubt. — Kippo

Well, yes and no. Perhaps.
Replace the philosophical with the sexual and you can see you can do both, equally interesting.

It is equally interesting to discuss matters sexually, rather than to discuss sexual matters.

[ Feedback welcome :smile: ]

How to start a philosophical discussion, per typical Internet discussions:

No matter what someone said, both (a) disagree with them, and (b) tell them that what they said (i) isn't adequate and (ii) isn't clear. (Nevermind that you're supposedly disagreeing with something you didn't quite understand per (b)(ii)--if they catch that, or no matter what they say, really, simply repeat (a) and (b).) — Terrapin Station

:smile:

Not much different to politics then. 'Let me be clear....the Houses of Parliament joke.

You're not David Chalmers by any chance ?
Most helpful for a beginner.

http://consc.net/philosophical-humor/
http://consc.net/misc/philosophicalterms.html

Well, I don't think there are any issues anymore. So, let's wait to hear from Fooloso4... — Wallows

I am not a participant in the reading, and that is what should matter. Carry on...best wishes.

Disgraceful. Continuing false allegations against Fooloso4. And the ignoring of same.
— Amity

I never said anything against Fooloso4. I even said in my previous comments that I think he is right.

Anyway, I hope Fooloso4 might be able to contribute more to these issues. Quite interested in his input. — Wallows

You missed out the relevant part of the quote by Pussycat. I will bold it.

I think that he is doing a good job, but partly. For the other part, its really bad: he makes his own views pass as W's, most commonly they appear at the end of a paragraph.
— Pussycat

You didn't say anything against Fooloso4 but by ignoring the accusation against him you failed to support him.

Yes. His contributions are valuable. You keep asking questions of him and others. It's a good way forward. He keeps on giving. So generously.

I think that he is doing a good job, but partly. For the other part, its really bad: he makes his own views pass as W's, most commonly they appear at the end of a paragraph.
— Pussycat

What do you disagree with? — Wallows

Disgraceful. Continuing false allegations against Fooloso4. And the ignoring of same.

I am attempting to follow the Tractatus step by. What W. presents is already a distillation, which I have further reduced to a set of quotes followed by my own brief comments. In what follows I will first restate those comments and then tie it all together. — Fooloso4

Fooloso4 - You have been doing an excellent job of moving the discussion forward.
You have persevered with patience under the most trying of circumstances.
You have my full support and appreciation.

My hope for this discussion is for anyone who has knowlage or insight on the physical manifestation of energy through a spiritual or mental reserve to share their thoughts. — Reverie of Renaissance

'A physical manifestation of energy' - isn't that simply an act, bodily sensation, movement or behaviour ?
'Through a spiritual or mental reserve - what do you mean by this ? Do you see a difference between the spiritual and the mental?

I think all of us have a source of energy or power of some description which enables us in some way or other. At the most basic, it is physical: food, water. Nutrients which supply the brain. Important for all functioning.

It sounds like you think you have extra special powers of connection to a 'vast flowing network'. Some do feel a strong sense of oneness at times; other times there might be a sense of alienation because of feeling different. Perhaps some have a stronger sense of empathy than others. That might be aligned to personality, belief system or mental health. Or life experience.
The mind can exert a powerful influence...

Your '( examples from across the world)' - I am sure there are plenty stories out there of extraordinary feats of mind over matter.

I think the point of writing a novel is to entertain people in some way.
— Andrew4Handel

Ideally, the point of writing a novel (worth anything) is to give a reader something they couldn't have got without reading it, whether that be a type of unique experience or knowledge or whatever form of edification. If it's to be worth anything of lasting value, it wouldn't be simply another entertainment, of which there is no shortage and that can be got at a moment's notice just about anywhere. It's not elitist to recognize that or to try to understand the value that's placed on classics. — Baden

Exactly. This.

A problem I have had with fiction is that it seems like lying
— Andrew4Handel

If the reader knows it's fiction, it's not a form of deceit, so whatever form of lying remains is fairly harmless. — Baden

I don't even know why this would be a problem. It's a story. We are living our own narratives and yes, we sometimes don't see or know the whole truth. We only have our own perspective - unless we get to read about others...or share tales, tall or otherwise.

My idea of a philosophical novel is one that makes a clear proposition or arguments and defends it. I think any novel can feel philosophical or inspire philosophical thought. — Andrew4Handel

I think any novel or novelist writing about the human condition will inevitably contain aspects of philosophy. It is perhaps a matter of degree how any personal views of the author are incorporated into a story.Some are practically autobiographical in nature and are inspired by important life experiences, observations or themes.

I think it rare that any philosophical novel would make a 'clear proposition or arguments and defends it'
Where would be the fun in that? Goodness, hardly any Real Philosophy Book or Philosopher makes things clear. Hence the whole forum discussion scenario...

But I just wanted to know a specific explicit argument like the one contained in The Matrix derived from one of these novels. If you want to encourage people to read these works it is worth giving an interesting summary of what to expect. — Andrew4Handel

Where in The Matrix do you find the 'clear proposition' with a 'specific explicit argument' ?
Just curious. I haven't read the book, but have watched the film.

I can read about philosophical influences in wiki:

Philosophical influences

It has been suggested by philosopher William Irwin that the idea of the "Matrix" – a generated reality invented by malicious machines – is an allusion to Descartes' "First Meditation", and his idea of an evil demon. The Meditation hypothesizes that the perceived world might be a comprehensive illusion created to deceive us.[7] The same premise can be found in Hilary Putnam's brain in a vat scenario proposed in the 1980s.[7] A connection between the premise of The Matrix and Plato's Allegory of the Cave has also been suggested. The allegory is related to Plato's theory of Forms, which holds that the true essence of an object is not what we perceive with our senses, but rather its quality, and that most people perceive only the shadow of the object and are thus limited to false perception.[32]

----------
We can talk about any novel having philosophical influences but it need not necessarily contain an explicit argument for a specific, explicit argument.

If you want to write a philosophical novel, then I think it would be a good idea to start with yourself.
Know Thyself. And that is why some fiction might be required. You wouldn't necessarily want to bear all and expose other real life characters to the glare of publicity. Or would you ?

It might be a good idea to try to be more sensitive with absolute newbies wrt exemplifying their poor OPs though. I hadn't considered that when I was modding this one and was thinking more about all the OPs I had recently just deleted and wanting to get the message out there that we were looking for more effort. — Baden

Understood. And thanks for all your hard work. This is a place I hope to continue using - it meets my standards well enough :wink:

Thanks for taking the time to explain further. I have always appreciated those who take up the challenge of moderation, using a bit of wisdom, humour and sense as their guide.
I think more care is required when responding to a new poster who fails to meet the prescribed guidelines. A quality response would be less harsh. Who knows what 'decent conversation' might have emerged.

Pirsig is very hot on the dynamic/static distinction in relation to 'quality'. It's complicated, and a bit off topic.

the TLP is two dimensional. But, that's how language seems to operate.
— Posty McPostface

Well there you have it, language is two dimensional, but it operates - and operates recursively, and that makes it dynamic. So there is TLP, the last word in philosophy, and the fact that the limits of expression have been expressed extends the limits of expression, so that they cease to be the limits, though there are still limits. ( I'm struggling at my own limits of expression here, but if I can make this understandable, then it becomes possible to explore further again.) Looking at the picture of language as a picture, I see something that has been unclear, become clear. So my world has changed.

I might have a go at a separate thread if I can find the right levers... I think I'm talking about transformations of insight - awakenings. — unenlightened

[ Apologies for interrupting the current flow a little. I've just taken a look at previous contributions and found this. At one time I was interested in Pirsig and his concept of 'Quality' from his 'Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance'. Did you start a separate thread on it ? Not too sure how dynamic/static aspects fit in to the picture ? What did you mean by the part I emphasised in holds? ]

If you paid them like bankers, judges, and politicians, they would be perfect in every way. — unenlightened

:smile:

Yes. The discussion has been moved to the correct box by the moderators.

Those poor imperfect unpaid souls who every now and again crack down on poor little beginners who haven't yet cracked the code. It's not about pay, or perfection but having a certain attitude.
I just have concerns that those new to philosophy or forums get put off dipping their toes in.
Whereas those who are in with the in-crowd seem to get away with more - perhaps they've earned it.

In the meantime, if you follow the guidelines, you won't go far wrong, and even if sometimes someone gets away with not following them, that does not entitle you to do the same. — unenlightened

Good advice. I checked it out. I can do a) - some of b) - I don't always have a position to advocate and so no initial arguments. I think that holds true for many who even if they do, they hold back.
c) - well, OK. But some are just eye-catching hooks to draw in interest.
d) - starting an original topic. Is that even possible in philosophy? Perhaps new to the person writing or thinking about it for the first time...or simply a different perspective on e.g. 'self.

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/480/site-guidelines

Starting new discussions:

Don't start a new discussion unless you are:

a) Genuinely interested in the topic you've begun and are willing to engage those who engage you.

b) Able to write a thoughtful OP of reasonable length that illustrates this interest, and to provide arguments for any position you intend to advocate.

c) Capable of writing a decent title that accurately and concisely describes the content of your OP.

d) Starting an original topic, i.e. a similar discussion is not already active.

(No bumps allowed. If you want to attract replies, think of a better way).

So, this leads me to believe that you know nothing, or very little, about metaphysics, or philosophy for that matter, and you are just doing guess work here.
— Pussycat

Believe whatever you want about me, but pay attention to the text. Where does the text contradict anything I have said about it? Where have I made a false step?

Therefore I am sorry, but I won't be discussing anything more with you, not before you you do a bit of studying first at least, to get the basic philosophical concepts cleared out.
— Pussycat

That is uninformed, condescending, and evasive. The real problem here is that if my analysis is right then some of your basic claims about the text are wrong. And so, instead of addressing my analysis you create a smokescreen. — Fooloso4

A quiet, considered response. No matter anyone's qualifications or experience, the least anyone can do is show respect. Fooloso4 listens and responds patiently and carefully.
Keeping it on track.

A possibly more esteemed opinion of the matter is available here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ihuJM8wVJw4. — Luke

Love the 8yr old daughter's response. And his 'Cool. Thank You'.
How perfectly simple, civilised and charming.

I see I missed out a 'p' in the title. Will I be forgiven. Or can I change it, thanks !?
Filosofee rools, KO !

The Guardian article cited by Amity is very helpful in addressing your question. — Fooloso4

Also the 614 comments so far responding below the line !

At the risk of getting even more off topic. [ anyone able to connect the dots between willpower, will, the soul and Socrates ? ] - I am concerned that I didn't acknowledge my confusion in my response to Valentinus. I really didn't get the following:

Valentinus:
' I thought about different passages to quote but the quality I am singling out is a way to hear what is being said more than a thesis. I argued for a thesis in my previous citations because my interpretation was challenged. Fair enough. But I am more interested in the listening part of my own idea than ruling out other readings.'

I understand that there are many different translations and interpretations of Plato. Ways of reading.

From the above, how does one 'hear what is being said' ( an evocative reading ?) without there being some kind of understanding of meaning ? So already there is some kind of a mental 'thesis' not necessarily to be proven, especially if subjective in nature. A theory. A view.

So, one might 'hear' a 'level of intimidation' and then make some references to the relationship between father and son. No doubt there are many ways this can be understood or spun. But what anyone 'hears'
or 'sees', regarding any connections, should be made explicit - that is a 'thesis' presented.
It isn't a matter of being more interested in one than the other. It's not either/or...but both.

That is my take on it.
An interesting aside to the discussion.

I have chosen Nietzsche because I feel for what I have read so far that he is very misunderstood. — Helen G

I am one of those who misunderstood Nietzsche. I am still not attracted to his works despite the enthusiasm of others. So think of me as an interested part of your audience - persuade me if you can that he is worth my effort and time.

I found an interesting article about the myths surrounding him:

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/oct/06/exploding-nietzsche-myths-need-dynamiting

I apologise for offending anyone with Mis-spelling his name or the mention of Hitler. But we all have to start somewhere and I thought this would be a good place. My presentation is a mere five minutes long — Helen G

You were right to visit a philosophy forum to discover views. This is the best, most informative one in my experience.
Not all forums are equal - just as posters and tutors vary in helpfulness.

So if your presentation is 5 minutes long, I guess marks will be allocated for different aspects.
Including Introduction, Main body and Conclusion. Hopefully you will have been given guidance on this.
No matter how passionate you are about Nietzsche or Philosophy - the important thing is to pass this course. If you haven't already, find out the marking criteria for content and ability to choose and present key information etc.

A good resource for you might be:

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/nietzsche/

Good Luck !

Thanks for keeping me posted about any revival.
I had thought I might discover some decomposing compositions deep in an archival vault :mask:

Reviving the short story competition seems a good idea to me as long as admins are allowed to participate. :up: — Baden

So where can I find all the short stories and this competition ?

If ever an article runs by me, I will be sure to share. For sure :up:

Backtracking a little, I see that my question disturbed the flow of your conversation with Fooloso4. From your earlier reply to him:

In any case, it is rare to find metaphor and mythology mixed freely with observations of what "is" as is done with such abandon in the Republic. I don't think the "noble lie" applies to all the observations made in the Republic. But it influences it in every place.
There are so many indictments of character made in varying levels of subtlety that make me think I am not just being sold a bill of goods but am reading a diagnosis.
6 days ago — Valentinus

I wonder if you can show me any examples [ edit: of bolded part ]. I am interested in reading the Republic.
— Amity

I thought about different passages to quote but the quality I am singling out is a way to hear what is being said more than a thesis. I argued for a thesis in my previous citations because my interpretation was challenged. Fair enough. But I am more interested in the listening part of my own idea than ruling out other readings. — Valentinus

Thanks for taking time and trouble to find the part which would help me understand what you were meaning.The following is most helpful. I will take time out now to read.

'Books 8 and 9 of the Republic address the tyrannical soul, both as something created by certain conditions and what being that kind of thing is like on the level of the individual. Socrates treats the emergence of the tyrant as a product of the Demos and that exposition fits with the "city of words" model that claims the Demos needs to be saved from itself. While reading Book 8, note how the argument is built upon the relationship between father and son. The political is tied with the most intimate relationship of parenting. (leaving aside, for the moment, the glaring lack of any recognition of the other parent).

In parallel to this idea, there are many places where Socrates criticized the plutocracy and much of it happened in fairly subtle ways but also became challenges of the kind that became an argument. One example can be found in Gorgias, especially starting around 517. So, I offer the following from Socrates at 521...'

Thanks Baden for everything.

Well I messed that last post up good style :sad:
How do I sort it out ?

don't know what I would say to someone about writing a short story or a poem, — Baden

What would be the equivalent of write a rough thesis?
Perhaps in a creative writing class: Decide what you want to write about ?
But if spontaneously poetic you don't need that as a starter for 10.

Interesting.