There is also an interesting link between the act of growing marijuana (substance farming/horticulture) and the spiritual connection people feel for the drug and its effects. — Grre

Hey Grre, I'm glad to know that there are others interested in this topic. I've been growing my own for a little over 3 years now, and that did indeed totally change my relationship to the the drug. I fell in love with the plants themselves, and I'm honored to be able to tend to them. Plus it's the best bud I ever had, considering how disrespectfully most folks treat their bud on the streets.

I belong to a Cannabis-growing forum where numerous people have written about getting off opoids and other prescription drugs with the help of weed. This must send the big pharma demons screaming and tearing their hair out. There is just too much that is right about Cannabis for the economy and the environment, but I understand that this is extremely threatening to so many. One more sad comment about the state of our culture in the usa.

When I was younger, I couldn't read when I was high, but I certainly can now; amazing how we grow into Cannabis--or how she envelops us...

You are unable to convince me of anything. I can't take you seriously.

I'll look to what silver linings there might be — StreetlightX

At the very least, we need someone in office who sees the threat posed by global warming and will stop doing everything in his power to accelerate it.

I have no problem with human to human evil. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

Perhaps this is your problem, which is why I suggested you look at that book. If you're only interested in justifying and rationalizing hatred and anti-social behavior, then just continue to compare us to other animals--which is a straw man, or wolf, if ever I saw one.

The author thinks religion comes first — Gnostic Christian Bishop

What???? The book has nothing to do with religion!!!!

Everyone has the same aptitude? What does that mean? Everyone has an aptitude for incest? To be a psychopath like Dahmer? To be a genius like Einstein? To hate?

We're born with the same instincts, but what else is the same aptitude in all people?

I'm reading a very interesting book currently: The Reproduction of Evil: A Clinical and Cultural Perspective by Sue Grand. Care to join me?

Now go away or I shall taunt you a second time. — Terrapin Station

I'm not going anywhere. Taunt if you must.

I've long had difficulty with the way philosophers talk about concepts. — Banno

Yes, and especially in cyber-space it is very challenging to exchange ideas with others when it takes so long to find the common ground--or at the very least, understand what the other person assumes or means when she uses the word concept--, but impatience and cursory dismissal don't help to open communication and exchange of meaningful ideas.

But to call it ‘evil’ is to deny our contribution to it by our ‘natural’ resistance and fear. — Possibility

What did I call "evil"? Nothing. I wrote that the concept of God contains everything in it, although we have no way of grasping what infinity is. As far as evil is concerned, I was only referring to what occurs on this planet: that's all I can refer to. So until I know more, evil is definitely anthropomorphic. Neither humanity nor its capacity to commit evil is exterior to the concept of God.

As if "it exists as an abstract concept" said anything — Banno

It said something to me; maybe you weren't listening. One line ripostes get boring fast.

Your taunts are taking a toll on my toil on trolling.

@Baden Is this Spam?

trolling research is trolling. — Terrapin Station

That's meaningless...

it exists as an abstract concept. — Possibility

exactly. Because it is a delightfully abstract concept that contains everything within it, and we really don't have a clue as to what everything is...

But I have concluded that it contains evil as well. I'm pondering what that means to me.

I'm sure you are familiar with concepts like the cycle of abuse and the cycle of violence. It benefits no one. — Tzeentch

Trolling research lists contagion as one of the problematic results of online nastiness. Everyone acting out their PTSD, thereby triggering someone else's PTSD, and so on. Meanness metastasizes, like cancer.

From your link:
"Those most lacking in knowledge and skills are least able to appreciate that lack....The Dunning-Kruger effect requires a minimal degree of knowledge and experience in the area about which you are ignorant (and ignorant of your ignorance)."

First off, can't we assume that most everyone on this forum does actually know something about philosophy? That members have more than a minimal degree of kn. and experience? Maybe not about every single topic that arises, but we are all familiar with the discursive specificities of philosophy.

Many of us are definitely under the impression that we're smarter than we actually are and an interesting question would be to ask how and in what way it's an impediment to true knowledge. — TheMadFool

My view on this: the real issue is denial. If someone's in denial about how much intelligence s/he possesses, that's a psychological impediment preventing the subject from knowing her/himself realistically, without having to distort self-image.

So what is "acting out" and what makes it immoral versus just imprudent or something that some people disapprove of. — schopenhauer1

Acting out: https://dictionary.apa.org/acting-out Trump is pretty much acting out all the time. He's a deeply traumatized child.

Morality concerns the way we behave and relate to others (and to ourselves); let's leave imprudence and disapproval aside.

I think this is meant for another member...

No, it’s not. — NOS4A2

This has nothing to do with vegetarianism; you'd like to trivialize my description of what the two have in common, but your comment is irrelevant to my argument.

Eeeeewwwww. You're welcome to it. You have a stronger stomach than I do.

5. Seemingly supports far-rightwing Fascism by promoting pollical violence. — 3017amen

Darn!!! I did forget that!! I was trying not to use the word fascist so as not to rile the fascist-leaning members of this forum. :-}

In other words, Trump’s psychology reminds you of Hitler’s psychology. — NOS4A2

It's fundamentally the same psychology. I know lots of folks are quite happy having a sociopath with no self-control in the white house.

What was it about Trump that reminds you of Hitler? — NOS4A2

1. Totalitarian personality, tremendous anger manangement problem.
2. He believes everything that comes out of his own mouth: malignant narcissism and dissociation from reality.
3. He believes he has the right to control the whole world.
4. He's a total racist who'd like to shoot border crossers and feed them to crocodiles.

Wouldn't it be the easy way out to love one's own kids and then treat other people and relations with cruelty? — schopenhauer1

How do you see this as an easy way out? From what???

Is meanness at a workplace ever called for or is it usually always some sort of either character flaw or some hot-tempered thing in the heat of the moment, perhaps from some stressful situation? — schopenhauer1

I think the whole point is that there are people who think it's ok to be mean in whatever situation, and I view those folks as lacking control and believing it's ok for them to "act out." Acting out is never ok in my book.

I think it's pretty abhorrent to compare Trump with Hitler, really. — Wayfarer

So I conclude that the "shoot em in the legs" comment didn't bother you, nor what happened to all the detained children left in their own soiled clothes for days on end. Sounds like a concentration camp to me.

Born with a criminal mind and a delinquent attitude — Gnostic Christian Bishop

How do you know that you were born with these and didn't acquire them as the result of trauma and abuse?

Sorry, I personally find it morally abhorrent to work with a nascent Nazi party. — Maw

I've found it terrifying how much trump reminds me of Hitler. And he's whipping his supporters up into an irrational frenzy of hatred and anger. And yes, as you noted, we're seeing Nazi-like tactics used on those he considers "inferior races." Butter wouldn't melt in his mouth: he's a cold-blooded, reptilian-brained psychopath.

I do not think it is indicative of a fundamental character flaw, but instead of unresolved negative emotion. This can be somewhat benign, or it can be rooted in much deeper psychological issues. — Tzeentch

I think that meanness is indicative of a character flaw and unresolved negative emotions. How can character not be influenced and revealed by the ways in which we act out our emotions?

Trauma can create a flawed character as well as a damaged psyche: many people who are the victims of severe abuse in infancy and childhood become abusers, and many have paranoid-schizoid splits that make it extremely difficult for them to realize consciously that they're repeating the same horrible behavior that was done to them. Actually, it's not so uncommon at all for most people to split off from their own mean behavior and not recognize it for what it really is. I'll never forget a colleague I had years back who had been shamed and humilliated by her doctoral exams committee (mean, insecure people), and she loved to be mean to undergraduate students. Meanwhile, she saw herself as the loving mother of four children.

So I'd have to call it a character flaw when people have a "dark side" that they never really own as responsible for nasty behavior. When I lose my temper, I think of my own behavior in these terms.

It’s not an ideological thing. It’s personal. — Noah Te Stroete

So how do you know that it's not ideological, whatever it is you mean by that term?

Does Jesus/Yahweh love us or is he stalking us? — Gnostic Christian Bishop

The two figures you refer to are in no way the same thing.

Thanks so much for posting that. It's clear that psychopathic disregard for the planet and all its inhabitants is the corporate norm. I don't think that's anything new, but it has now reached catastrophic proportions.

You provide us with a really generous deconstruction of various categories, and I so appreciate the alternate terminology you have provided.

I've always been (except for period of experimentation in early 70s along with David Bowie) a hetero woman-- a tomboyish one. Many students, over the years, made the Freudian slip of saying "yes sir" to me (I've been in the South and Southwest where "yes sir" and "yes ma'am" are used with elders) instead of yes ma'am. So I've always been aware that some students were unconsciously registering something in me that they perceived as either masculine or non-feminine.

I've had friends say I'm queer because I'm unmarried and childless. When one never strictly thought within the hetero-normative pressures to "act" this way or that or to have "gender-targeted" goals; when one has always perceived so incredibly much diversity along the spectrum of gender (behavior/identity); when one was drawn to the marginalized individualists who never could deny who they were...

This stuff is not ridiculous. It's very far from ridiculous, but it's sure gonna make some folks uncomfortable

AMERICAN DEMOCRACY
The government promises to give you two cows if you vote for it. After the election, the president is impeached for speculating in cow futures. The press dubs the affair "Cowgate".

That seems generous to say the least. The American "Democracy" version looks more like this (from where I sit, within it): You can have as many cows as you can get your hands on, you can exterminate all other farmers or any interloper on the grazing land, even it it belongs to them, and when the land is rendered useless, claim another piece of land and exterminate whoever is there. And finally, when the cows' methane gas has caused severe global warming, you can declare yourself the winner.

It seems to me that there is a "good parenting" privilege, where if you were raised by two loving, selfless parents you end up better off than those that don't when you're an adult. — Harry Hindu

Hear, hear! And those who are fortunate enough to have good parenting seem to be more able to rise above less-than-ideal circumstances because they were brought up to believe that they could achieve anything. I teach quite a few students who come from the underclass (rural and inner city poverty) and it's pretty easy to tell what kind of parenting they've had.

I never was that into Plato (beyond the required freshman course on Western Civ that I took in the 70s), so it's all Greek to me...

However, I am not sure how well I synthesize ideas...especially when reading. There is still a tendency to pick out only those passages that fit own agenda. Important parts might be disregarded... — Amity

I believe that this is inevitable unless one has a photographic mind (which I certainly don't). I like the way you put it, and you make me realize that there always is an agenda that shapes my focus.

I think God created man in his own image, gave man free will and after seeing how bad man can be became so ashamed, even afraid, and simply ran away, hopefully, to a better place, leaving vague inconclusive clues of what he'd hoped we could've and should've been. — TheMadFool

I like that. I imagine God feeling severely depressed about how wrong the creation of humankind went, realizing the incalculable amount of unnecessary (in addition to the necessary suffering) suffering that humans have inflicted on each other and the rest of the species. And in spite of (or maybe because of) the free will clause, God still feels profound guilt in addition to the depression for inflicting such a fucked up species on the world. If it ever comes out of the depression and guilt, perhaps it will try something more proactive than the Flood, which didn't really change anything.

quote="Jacques Maritain"]if the deepest hopes of mankind are not destined to turn to mockery, it is because a God-given energy better than nature is at work in us[/quote]

What are the deepest hopes of humankind? Humankind appears to be hell-bent on destroying all life on the planet.

This is new to me. I would like to hear more about this. What are the series of movements ? — Amity

Synthesis of ideas is never static; it's always in movement. This is how one might avoid a tendency to "materialize" one's beliefs and render them totalitarian, absolutely correct. I learned this from reading Theodor Adorno. Hillel also says, "Learning not increased is learning decreased." I think that about says it all.

Adorno used the Greek phil. concept of hypostasis as a metaphor to deconstruct, so to speak, the notion that ideas have an inviolable solidity, meaning or truth to them. For one thing, he was a dialectical materialist, so this is a world view about as far away from Platonic concepts as you can get, since (historical) contexts and meanings are in continual transition and transformation.

In one essay, he used the concept of hypostasis to create a metaphor based on the medical meaning of an accumulation of sediment which has separated from the liquid it was suspended in. He was referring to the action of ideology as mystification and distortion of ideas about a social reality.

This brief summary may not help at all to explain, but it's the best I can do. Adorno taught me never to "cling" to my ideas: it's not healthy.

I, however, take your words seriously. — god must be atheist

Now you are lying. You never took my words seriously; your entire premise--that I can explain what I teach in one statement--is just silly. I never even told you what my subject matter is, but the idea that a professor teaches one thing is... not even worth responding to again.

You removed the context of what I wrote in order to create your little solipsistic strategy which was always focused on tearing down one or another of my statements. What makes me saddest of all is the overwhelming impression that you were never interested in any serious kind of exchange of ideas. My perception is that you were only interested in your need to prove me wrong. I feel compassion for you, but I won't engage with your hostility and deliberate distortion.