What do you mean, "what are my philosophies"? I'm not going to outline the things I'm working on, dude. I have my own philosophies. I'm actively working on my own stuff in the fields of metaphilosophy, epistemology and the philosophy of mind. I'm also working on contributions to scepticism and daoism, but I don't classify myself as either (anymore). I recently finished the outline to my definition of consciousness, which only took me 20 years, so I'm making progress. And again, no, I'm not going to showcase that to you.

Is the structure or design of our markets/economy hindering us from developing a better way forward? — Benj96

I discussed this topic with Bing Chat recently. Here:



Oh, btw. Avocado pits can be used as a resource for the production of vegetable oil. Just sayin'.

I recall on a thread before someone saying they don't feel comfortable calling themselves a philosopher.

I'm wondering what you fellows out there do feel comfortable labelling yourselves. — Yohan

"If God, if mankind, as you affirm, have substance enough in themselves to be all in all to themselves, then I feel that I shall still less lack that, and that I shall have no complaint to make of my “emptiness.” I am not nothing in the sense of emptiness, but I am the creative nothing [das schöpferiche Nichts], the nothing out of which I myself as creator create everything."
-Max Stirner, The Ego and Its Own" introduction, "All Things Are Nothing To Me"

• Card magic (sleight of hand)
• Singing
• Computer games
• Lifting weights

Thanks but I understand the geometry. I was just assuming ethereal lovers were imagining something real versus thought stuff only. — TiredThinker

:up:

And the pupil shouldn't advise the teacher. — Bartricks

:rofl:

Yes. It was originally a deck for card games. You appear to be enthralled by that fact. :lol: — frank

And you seem to be "enthralled" by some vague recollection of shards and snippets of the life of A.E. Waite (you called him "some guy" earlier). Note that decks like the Minchiate and Marseilles decks predate the Rider-Waite one.

Anyway, yeah, I focus on the issue that tarot cards are playing cards. Because it might just be relevant to the discussion. Or, we could just talk about imaginary tarot cards with a made up history or something. I know I'm bowing out then.

Yeah, I know. They almost disappeared altogether until some guy saw gypsies using them for divination and he decided they must be ancient wisdom from Egypt (I guess because the gypsies he knew were Egyptian.). Through him the cards travelled into occult groups like the Golden Dawn. — frank

What? No they didn't. A tarot deck is just a regular deck of cards with a few cards added to the suits and with an extra set of trump cards. We generally use the French suits these days (Spades, hearts, clubs, diamonds), but the suits generally used in tarot decks aren't uncommon in certain countries in Europe.

Any deck you see now is decorated with symbols that link them up to astrology and/or cabalism, so Benj is correct that as we've received them, tarot decks are designed to ping archetypes as they appear in astrology.

:roll:

Anyway, if Benj96 wants to know how tarot cards where meant to be properly used, try reading up on the game of grosstarock. I provided a link earlier.

Gypsies used the old game decks for divination before they were adopted by occult people. Obviously the deck has been redesigned a thousand times since then, so Benj is correct. — frank

So the game decks where used by gypsies before occultists got a hand on them? Uh huh. Hey dude, the claim was that tarot cards where "specifically designed with common tropes and archetypes in mind", so your comment doesn't even connect. Or maybe you're trying to say that because gypsies used those decks before occultists did, this somehow points to the designs referring to "common tropes and archetypes"?

Whatever. What I'm saying is that those cards started out as playing cards. What occultists call the major arcana are just trump cards used in card games of the tarot family, which use 78 cards in a deck. The makers added the pictures to make them visually appealing, Basically the same as art on Magic: the Gathering cards. They could have used naked ladies with giant boobs as illustration too, since it really doesn't matter. Case in point being, I'm sure you can get one of those tarot decks on amazon right now.

Why did I start about the major arcana? Because the regular suits don't actually have illustrations depicting scenes when you're looking at the oldest extant cards. They just denote the value and the suit. Like the 2 of coins has, surprise, 2 coins on it in the Minchiate deck.

I have heard many metaphysical people that believe in afterlife, psychics, and the like talk about other dimensions or even higher dimensions. But what exactly do they mean other than places that aren't here? To my knowledge dimensions are only things that have been applied to mathematics? — TiredThinker

This video is a great illustration of higher dimensional objects:

Lets consider a big hypothetical, a thought experiment for a moment here and see where it leads. — Benj96

OK, sure.

If you were given the choice to walk in God's shoes for a moment (whatever that means to you), if you were suddenly the creator. The start of all - the alpha, the end of all - the omega, and everything in between, what would you do with your time as this entity?

I'd get absolutely shitfaced, and no one could stop me. People would be like: "Hey God, whatsup", and I'd be like "hey dude, I'm high af".

Would you sit back and merely observe? Practice non-interference so to speak. Or would you reveal your true identity? Would you spread your truth? If so who would you tell and why?

What?

Tarot cards appear to have been designed very specifically, with common tropes and archytpes in mind. — Benj96

Yeah? No.

Various card games require various deck set ups. A 32 card deck is called a piquet deck. Likewise, a full set of 78 cards is called a tarot deck. There are specific games you can play with such 78 card decks, and that's where tarot cards come from. The whole idea of an occult tarot was a later invention and had very little to do with the actual card games.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grosstarock
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarot_card_games#Tarock

My guess? Ossified belief systems, ego and cognitive dissonance.

The lie of trickle-down economics. — Michael

This. The whole idea has been debunked for decades now, so it's not even a lie at this point. It's just piss.

Coolest stuff here is if you watch those youtube clips where guys get those glasses that let previously color blind people see colors. The initial wtf reaction, and then they do understand what red, blue and so on are without asking. — Ansiktsburk

Yeah, some folks have really strong reactions which are pretty fun to watch. :smile:

The standard philosophical agreement is that it's impossible to say that the colour red that I see isn't the colour blue to you. — GLEN willows

Except for, you know, colorblind people. Why is it that you never get these kinds of discussions with them? Oh right. Because that whole spiel about qualia is nonsense.

Hi dude, welcome to the forum!

Flat Earthers — SteveMinjares

Yes.

Alien Conspiracy Theorists

Yeah.

Lost Atlantis

This too.

Paranormal investigators

Obviously.

And my favorite Big Foot hunters

Yes.

I lied.

Scepticism =/= being sceptical of something. Just sayin'...

This might just be relevant:

The Right Mind And The Confused Mind

The Right Mind is the mind that does not remain in one place. It is the mind that stretches throughout the entire body and self.

The Confused Mind is the mind that, thinking something over, congeals in one place.

When the Right Mind congeals and settles in one place, it becomes what is called the Confused Mind. When the Right Mind is lost, it is lacking in function here and there. For this reason, it is important not to lose it.

In not remaining in one place, the Right Mind is like water. The Confused Mind is like ice, and ice is unable to wash hands or head. When ice is melted, it becomes water and flows everywhere, and it can wash the hands, the feet or anything else.

If the mind congeals in one place and remains with one thing, it is like frozen water and is unable to be used freely: ice that can wash neither hands nor feet. When the mind is melted and is used like water, extending throughout the body, it can be sent wherever one wants to send it.

This is the Right Mind.

The Mind Of The Existent Mind And The Mind Of No-Mind

The Existent Mind is the same as the Confused Mind and is literally read as the "mind that exists." It is the mind that thinks in one direction, regardless of subject. When there is an object of thought in the mind, discrimination and thoughts will arise. Thus it is known as the Existent Mind.

The No-Mind is the same as the Right Mind. It neither congeals nor fixes itself in one place. It is called No-Mind when the mind has neither discrimination nor thought but wanders about the entire body and extends throughout the entire self.

The No-Mind is placed nowhere. Yet it is not like wood or stone. Where there is no stopping place, it is called No-Mind. When it stops, there is something in the mind. When there is nothing in the mind, it is called the mind of No-Mind. It is also called No-Mind-No-Thought.

When this No-Mind has been well developed, the mind does not stop with one thing nor does it lack any one thing. It is like water overflowing and exists within itself. It appears appropriately when facing a time of need.

The mind that becomes fixed and stops in one place does not function freely. Similarly, the wheels of a cart go around because they are not rigidly in place. If they were to stick tight, they would not go around. The mind is also something that does not function if it becomes attached to a single situation.

If there is some thought within the mind, though you listen to the words spoken by another, you will not really be able to hear him. This is because your mind has stopped with your own thoughts.

If your mind leans in the directions of these thoughts, though you listen, you will not hear; and though you look, you will not see. This is because there is something in your mind. What is there is thought. If you are able to remove this thing that is there, your mind will become No-Mind, it will function when needed, and it will be appropriate to its use.

The mind that thinks about removing what is within it will by the very act be occupied. If one will not think about it, the mind will remove these thoughts by itself and of itself become No-Mind.

If one always approaches his mind in this way, at a later date it will suddenly come to this condition by itself. If one tries to achieve this suddenly, it will never get there.

An old poem says:
To think, "I will not think"-
This, too, is something in one’s thoughts.
Simply do not think
About not thinking at all.

-Takuan Soho, "The Unfettered Mind"

Ah well, now you know :wink:
A story about life philosophy, and attitudes towards any perceived 'evils' or sufferings.
I think a good one, don't you ? — Amity

Maybe.

The story of the Taoist farmer I think you’re referring to is from the Huainanzi. — Possibility

No wonder it didn't ring a bell. It's not one of the texts I'm familiar with.

The early realisation that negative events in my life - life in general - was not all about me, gave me a whole new perspective. 'Bad' things, as we know, happen to 'good' people and v.v.
But not all is what it seems.
There's a story out there - I think in taoism - which demonstrates this very well. — Amity

There are many stories in the main texts of daoism. Not sure which one you're talking about. Do you happen to have some more clues?

Yesterday I met an editor who showed me a contemporary book on metaphysics priced at 85,000 euros (= $ 100,880.5500). Only 25 copies have been printed and 7 have been sold so far this year. I will not talk about the content, because I could barely read any of its 500 pages. — gikehef947

PDF link? j/k

Talking about the role quantum mechanics plays in any purported 'theory of consciousness' is like talking about the role QM plays in a theory of music – reductionist pseudo-scientistic nonsense – classical structures like neurons are too hot for quantum states (e.g. entanglement, superposition) to cohere at all (vide Stenger, pace Penrose). — 180 Proof

:100: :up:

So. The old forum is completely gone by now, as far as I can tell. But! There still are some pages saved on the Wayback Machine:

https://web.archive.org/web/20210901000000*/www.philosophyforums.com

It certainly isn't an indepth archive (just a few snapshots here and there), but looking at the old forum, seeing names I've not seen in ages on my screen again makes me feel things. Posting it here in case someone missed this and is feeling nostalgic or something. :smile:

You're missing your point. If you read an analysis of the dilemma it points to logical argumentation of the kind that was taught to would-be lawyers by Prodicus, Protagoras and other ancient rhetorician, and by Plato too, and is still taught in law schools. Proficiently arguing either side of a case is essential in today's legal profession. There is no ethical point made there by either side, it's just formal argumentation. Therefore your Protagorean ethical conclusions are just your own inventions. — magritte

:up:

Many folks get this wrong about Gorgias too.

Vampire bats also exhibit altruistic behavior: