Strangely, I have found that some people do plan their lives in a very clear way. I have never felt able to do as much as I would like to, because I am aware of far too many waves. I think that a lot of people have felt life has been unpredictable since the time of the pandemic, but I feel that I am accustomed to it. Everything seems to change constantly, and I just try to go with the flow, and to the best of my abilities.

Do you think anything it has been a predominant idea that everything wasknowable? I would imagine that some philosophers and other thinkers in the past did think we could construct a clear picture However, this view has not been so clearcut since quantum physics replaced the Cartesian-Newtonian paradigm. If anything, I think that many do question the whole foundation of knowing, especially after postmodernism. I do believe that a lot is uncertain, but I do think a systems approach does provide some basis for sketching some foundations amidst our uncertainty.

I find that the more I try to plan life, with possible courses of action, something different to what I expected seems to arise. Perhaps it is captured in the quantum physicist Heisenberg's principle of indeterminancy. In the thread I started about a real philosopher, people were discussing a saying, possibly attributed to Socrates, about not knowing anything. I am not sure that it is helpful to go as far as saying that, but it does seem that we need to live with some flexibility because reality is unpredictable.

I was impressed with the book at the time but not entirely convinced by it. I think that fuzziness can be a way of brainstorming. However, I am more in favour of trying to gain as much clarity as possible. But, of course, we face so much uncertainty in life.

I recommend a book which I read a few years ago on the usefulness of fuzziness in thinking, by Bart Kosko (1993), 'Fuzzy Logic.'

Yes, I think that it is unlikely that Socrates said that we can't know anything. Of course, we cannot know everything, but to settle for just saying that we don't know anything would seem to defeat the whole purpose of philosophy. However, our knowledge is limited and life is unpredictable.

I do see 'standing around doing nothing' while the ship sinks as one of the dangers of the current philosophers. Also, saying we don't know anything, as discussed by a few people here, whether Socrates said it or not, doesn't seem particularly helpful. All this would seem like dismissing the philosophical quest. It seems better to try to put ideas together systematically, as you are doing.

I do think that it is debatable how much thinking is good for us. One model which I think is useful is Jung's one on the four functions: feeling, sensation, intuition and thinking. He sees the development of these as being varied in individuals, with most people having one more dominant and one or more less developed. He suggests that the ideal is to have all four developed. I do believe that my most developed function is thinking and Jung suggests that it is often that if that is dominant, feeling is the less developed. I am aware that I am more likely to say 'I think' rather than 'I feel.' But, I do try to work on my emotional side and have read a few books on emotional intelligence with this aim in mind.

I imagine that people who are drawn to philosophy are probably the thinking type. I know some people who don't enjoy thinking at all, and engaging in conversations which is analytical is not something they wish to do. I find thinking enjoyable, but sometimes find it hard to switch off and I am inclined to overthink at times. I also often find it hard to get off to sleep because I can't switch off my thoughts and worries. So, it is probably about getting balance. I listen to music and, try to meditate sometimes, to try to switch off thoughts. I do think that meditation is particularly helpful, but I don't do it as often as I probably need to do it. I tend to put it off and have not really incorporated it into my regular routine.

I think it resilience is extremely important because it so easy to end up to become broken down or defeated by suffering. Some people probably have more inner strength than others which helps them face difficulties. It may be a people who are used to coping with difficulties have developed this strength and other coping skills for endurance, whereas those who encounter a sudden difficult change may not have the inner resources to cope so well. However, while people may develop resilience through obstacles, it may be that too much stress, without enough time of calm, can be detrimental because most people have some limitations and they may reach breaking point.

Why do you think Cobra is trolling? I can't see anything wrong with her discussion, but perhaps I am missing seeing something.

You have raised an interesting discussion. I am not sure that the feeling of strong dislike and feeling hatred and that of wishing harm is absolute. Perhaps the latter is the exaggeration form of it and most people don't go that far. It could be that the more a person becomes accustomed to the mental state of feeling and thinking thoughts of aversion or hatred, that it becomes a possible starting point is hatred, in its meaning of wishing harm.

I think that hatred, in strong aversion or wishing harm to those with specific attributes is connected to psychological projective processes. Take your example of hatred of the fat person, it may be that specific undesirability of fatness as an aesthetic quality is projected onto the individuals who are perceived as fat. The example of hatred of fat people also raises the connection between hatred of others and hatred of self. I have worked with people who have eating disorders and it does seem that they often have internalised self hatred.

The whole area of self hatred is also of importance in thinking about individuals who self harm. I have heard people who harm themselves in ways such as cutting saying how the cutting is a way of purging themselves of the anger and hatred they have towards themselves. The whole area of self harm was expressed strongly in the culture surrounding 'emo' music culture. I think that emo culture is less strong now, but it is often during adolescence that people experience strong feelings of self hatred, and this is probably related to the sense of identity development. However, many people in adulthood do self harm and experience suicidal ideas in adult life.

Perhaps, it is worth me paying more attention to him. Which albums do you recommend?

I listened to it on my phone with a CD playing in the background, so I didn't give it full attention. I only know his album, 'So'. I easily twisted it in the direction of talking about evolution, so I am probably inclined to bounce from one idea to another. It may be a bit of a skewed philosophical method really. It is probably association of ideas.

I like the Peter Gabriel song about monkeys. Actually, my first philosophical shock was the theory of evolution because it was not what I had been brought up to believe. I was in a comprehensive school at the time and asked my parents to get me moved to the Catholic school. However, a few years later I discovered that some of my teachers believed in evolution. I think that my mother still believes the Book of Genesis account. I was also surprised to find out that one of the friends I went to school with does too, including the actual existence of Adam and Eve.

I expect that deconstruct and analysis are similar but deconstruction implies more of a situation of being thrown into an absence or suspension of meaning in the process, rather than just the detailed examination.

I do think that we are at a crossroads and probably there will be changes, some bad and some good. It is hard to know who will be affected and in what way. It may be that the people who are complacent and least expecting change who may be the most affected. The question is how much influence do each of us have? I had a certain amount of influence while working in health care, but I am not sure how much exactly.

Getting out of confusion is important, but the whole process of being in it and finding the way are central to understanding too. I am not talking purely in an abstract way, but do believe that I have learned so much from the chaos of taking ideas apart. In this sense, I embrace the postmodernist idea of deconstruction. However, I don't see the broken state as the end, but I am still putting the ideas together.

I think that confusion can be a starting point. We would not need to find the way if we hadn't got lost in the first place. I have got lost literally many times, including ending up taking a wrong bus and finding myself in the country wastelands in the night. The wilderness and wastelands are the precipice of discovery.

In what way do you think that philosophy stands out as the muse? Is it about analytic understanding?

As you are fairly new to the forum, I am interested to know your views of what it means to be a philosopher. I am not asking that to put you on the spot, just to give you a chance to speculate if you wish, as this is an open area of debate really.

I am not completely sure that fearing change is an actual sign that things are so bad. Perhaps it is the opposite. Currently, many of us have the economic stability and resources to look after ourselves. There are inequalities and some have far less educational opportunities. However, for many in our current time it does appear that we have health care to enable us to live as long as possible. I would not say longetivity is all that matters, of course, because quality of life is essential. However, I think that while there are flaws in health care, we are in one of the most privileged times of history. All that could be lost.

One problem which I see in England, and I am sorry if I seem to be not addressing America, is some ideas which I have seen such as specific plans to introduce sugar tax. The idea seems to be of plans to introduce specific measures to enforce healthy lifestyles. While I am believe that healthy diet is important, I am not sure that I would wish to see that enforced by the government. That would seem to be a form of totalitarianism.

The main reason why I am opposed to the eradication of the health care system which we have is that I think that it may end up being replaced by a far more oppressive one. I think that any new system which could be implemented may give less empowerment to individuals and be more coercive, and restricting of civil liberties and less favourable towards vulnerable minority groups.

I was read Bucke's, 'Cosmic Consciousness' fairly recently and I think that it is a fascinating area for discussion, but similarly I would not wish to derail the thread. The whole area of debate opened up by Gus's exploration of the ideas of Jaynes and associates ones, opens up fascinating possibilities for discussion, but I imagine that we need to be patient to wait and see what direction he wishes the thread to take. I certainly would not wish to mess it up.

I do believe that novelist are able to juggle and play around with ideas in philosophy. I have not read Hemmingway at present, but apart from existentialist philosophers such as Camus, a couple of the most interesting philosophical novelists who I have come across are Philip K Dick and Will Self. I find Will Self's critique of sanity as a fascinating exploration of the whole surreal evaluation of our understanding of reality.

You may find it strange, but I find the whole area of psychology of theories as one of the most interesting. I read ' Beyond Freedom and Dignity,' by B F Skinner and it is so interesting in the consideration of the whole question of free will. Perhaps, if I manage to get a copy of it I will create a thread on it. I do believe that it is a book which is central to the whole interface between psychology and philosophy. It was so central to the development of determinism as a philosophy. I actually find psychology to be a fascinating area but, unfortunately, my own experience is that it can become shallow when the philosophical arguments underlying it are not understood in their fullest depth.

Of course, I am not wishing to suggest that anyone should not see themselves as a philosopher. You probably know enough about me to know that I am not prescriptive and I believe that creation of identity for ourselves. I really began this thread when I began to think about what is a real philosopher when I was in discussions with someone on the thread about fantasy and decided I was playing at being a philosopher on this site.I feel that life is full of surreal games. But, this morning I liked playing around with the idea of being a shadow philosopher.

After reflection and interaction, I decided that my real area of interest was what is philosophy involve really. We spend time pursuing our interest in it and the various perspectives because it is so large a subject. However, we could perhaps strip it down to the basic central core issues. However, believe that people would not even agree, because it comes down to our underlying values. Really, I do think that every human being who exists has to work out some kind of philosophy in life. Of course, it is ongoing, although it is possible that many people don't change the views they are brought up with in many ways. I am not sure that everyone in the world enjoys thinking.

It is interesting that Wittgenstein suggested that a philosophy could be written in jokes. I have never been a big fan of comedy, but I can usually see the funny side of life. I think that sometimes philosophy can seem so intense and there needs to be some light side. I believe in the idea of life being tragicomic, and, often, daily life can be so surreal.

Yes, it is a tension between us fitting into the world mentally and the world fitting towards us. In many ways, it is easier to change our thinking than the world. But, even then, it surprisingly difficult even with psychology to aid us. I have never had cognitive behavioral therapy but have read books on it. It does seem to be like a philosophical approach really because it looks at specific form of examining errors in thinking. I have wondered why it seems to have remained in psychology and has not been used more as a foundation for an analytic approach within philosophy applicable to our daily thinking about life.

I see your point about the idea of the muse. I suppose where it gets complicated philosophically is whether muses exist or are a symbolic idea. I would be inclined to believe that the muses are parts of our personal psyches, in the creative process of arts, philosophy and science rather than as objective forces. Of course, that is in line with the scientific paradigm of current thinking.

It is hard to know sometimes how many the fault lies within us or outside of ourselves when we are suffering. We could ask what is suffering objectively? Here, I think that some might argue that physical suffering is more real than mental, but I would see that perspective as rather narrow. But, of course, in thinking about our own suffering, as the cognitive behavioral theorists recognize it is our interpretation of experience which leads to our suffering, not the experience. It may be on that basis that we can begin to create our own philosophical interpretations of life. We can draw on thinkers of the past, but perhaps we need to make our own unique philosophies to live by and to help us become people who have some influence as well. But, it is not easy, especially for the shadow philosophers, such as me.

Perhaps I have built a corner of refuge for the shadow philosophers, trapped in the cave, who would like to be able to grasp ultimate reality, but if nothing else, can express their dreams of that reality.

Yes, I believe that we need muses for philosophia, rather than just philosophy texts. Possibly the reason why many people may go outside of the disciplines of philosophy, such as those within academic institutions is because the writers of some texts in the twentieth century, were rather obscure. It may not have had the zest of writings of earlier times. I am not saying that analytical thinking is not important. However, in order to inspire people, it may be that the philosopher of the future will have to go in a direction which will leave the reader turning pages in suspense, as meaning leaps from the pages.

It is probably about entering into certain mental states rather than actual philosophy. I remember one of the consultant psychiatrists I worked with joking that the lyrics of Oasis were thought disordered. I got into understanding my shadow side, in the Jungian sense, through exploring new metal and punk. As far as philosophy from lyrics, I recommend albums by U2, such as 'The Unforgettable Fire' and ' The Joshua Tree'.

I read a lot, ranging from psychology and philosophy, as well as many other forms of writing, but I would be completely miserable without music, although I usually don't do the two together because they require full attention.

I think that you are missing so much by not having an affinity with rock and other related genres. But, of course, I realise that is my bias. I grew up listening to such music and was searching through record shops in childhood and adolescence. I would spend hours looking for a wonderful album, reading the lyrics before being them. I don't search in such an intense way, but I do feel that the music I listen to is central to my existence. I do like live music events as well. On the psychiatric ward I was working on last year, a patient who used to talk about music with me, said, 'If you became manager, I expect we would have a jukebox on the wall.' However, it is hard to explain the wisdom gained from the various music genres, it because it is experiential.

I am not sure how health care is different in America but in England there I am more worried that we are on the verge of losing what we have rather than wanting it all to go. Personally, I am able to read up on health matters but that is because I have worked in health care. I usually only go to the doctor if feel that I need some specific medicine or some interventions which I cannot get without a prescription. However, when I interact with so many people, who are intelligent, they really don't seem to have much knowledge of health. It may be a problem of the education system, and it may be at this level that improvement can take place rather than by trying to dismantle the health care system itself.

In some ways, it could be that the true philosopher kings or queens may not emerge from the world of philosophy but from within the arts, especially music. I think that it is possible that some people may take offence at such a suggestion. I am not wishing to put philosophy down, especially as I am genuinely interested in it. I am just thinking that is sometimes the lyrics and songs that guide me through life as much as the books I read. Certain albums by the Doors, U2, Dylan, David Bowie and all the current ones are central to my life and philosophy quest. I wonder to what extent many other people feel that way too.

I replied to your second post before seeing your first. Thanks for the link with listings of philosophy activities in London. I was not really looking prior to lockdown and was busy working. However, after all these months stuck in a room, I will be glad to go out and explore new horizons and unknown possibilities.

Yes, I think we need some kind of philosopher king to show us the way. The only problem is that the philosophers are not really considered as kings at all. But, @Joshs just pointed out that Nietzsche's, Spinoza and Kierkergaard were not famous in their time. So it may be that the true philosopher kings or queens will probably not be seen at the time. I am sure that probably applies to Simone Weil, your biggest influence. I do believe that the important thinking which may be needed will not be looking back on the past but on where humanity is going.

Absolutely, I sometimes think that the Doors track which is most relevant for the current time is, 'When the Music's Over.'

That's interesting. I have never actually heard of the British Society of Phenomenology. I may look it up. I am fairly interested in phenomenology but have not read that much on it at present. Are you entirely self taught in philosophy or have you studied a related field, such as psychology?:From posts which I have read by you, it seems that your interests lie in the border between philosophy and psychology.