How does it seem to be about this`? I'm not skeptical, I just have no idea what this means. — Coben

Well, here I reveal my distaste for continental philosophy. There's a strange rift that has never been bridged between the continentals and analytics of philosophy. I suppose that's a task for some new philosopher of the ages.

How's the method of wallowing working for you? — Shamshir

Wallowing helps in innumerable ways. It is a way of life to wallow. It should become a religion. The Church of Wallows.

I think this has been true by more than one troller.. I mean poster today. — schopenhauer1

As I said earlier, I commend your doggedness; but, it really comes off as some version of fundamentalism or as per your other topic, profound neuroticism. But... I know (or think I know) that this is philosophy and everything else is a trifle.

Doubtless, your being trolled @schopenhauer1

Profundity lays here.

I suggest a healthy wallow or two ...

Starts out nice and then digressing into platitudes about God.

I was more leaning towards the point of the colors changing wrt. to the timelapse photo of the flower. Does that clarify anything?

Well think of a camera taking a timelapse photo of a flower. The colors are changing but the object exists spatially in the same place? I'm on my phone so sorry for the crappy posts.

So, the same logic at play just for us existing in a progressive flow of the fourth dimension being time...?

Have you read the book: Flatland?

I understand that. But, in a world where higher order dimensions influence lower dimensions in a manner of totality, then we can't reach conclusions about things existing in the same or distinct manner, I think.

Yes, but that only be asserted from a God's eye view. So, in a Hilbert space of n->oo how can we assert such things?

What about dimensionality?

*Wallows sadly*

As @unenlightened would say (who definitely deserves a mention) the most polished turdiest of turds, eh?

So wallowsome...

No cold water please. Just enjoy the wallowing.

https://tenor.com/oZTp.gif

Yes, a wallow is in order.

A lot of things. Not to disrespect the current administration though, as @Michael commented, the admins were a little more engaged and active on the old PF. Also the members were of high caliber, as Gassendi1 for example was a doctorate from Princeton if memory serves me right.

The fact that we had hard categories in place organized the clutter a bit better.

@Banno was more active back then in the ethics and philosophy of language sub-forums also.

Yadayada...

When to tease, titillate and torture :cool:

It takes time to start again. Renew and refresh. — Amity

Not kosher.

Tweeny nein.

You can't deny there was something special about that forum...

The Cynics whom we should all admire wished every desire could be fulfilled akin to the sexual one a la masturbation.

It is win/win to not reproduce under any circumstance. That is the initial "logical" asymmetry. — schopenhauer1

Sounds like fundamentalism to me. What about the farmer who needs working hands on the farm? Surely it's a selfish reason but a reason nonetheless...

This is the only safe space on the internet. Take it for what it's worth along with my topic:

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/6132/internet-a-hindrance-to-ones-identity/p1

I don't want to start a new topic; but, can someone lay out the reasoning behind claiming that death is not an event in one's life?

I'll elaborate. The end of this analysis is very depressing. First, it confirms that the schizophrenic or psychotic will never be able to attain the highest goods that society has to offer (despite notable cases like Philip K. Dick) or others.

These themes are rife in his books and essays.

I'm going to be blunt here and say that the end of the analysis is suicide. If one's self cannot attain deep aspirations, as we all mostly have, or belonging, as Reagan closed off all mental asylums, which some could have called "homes". then there is very little to live for a schizophrenic.

Let me provide an anecdote. I was having one of those strange days that I knew wouldn't end well. Towards the start of the night, I had delusions that reality is actually run by aliens that secretly run society as they see fit. Sorta a synopsis of "They Live!" movie. What was different this time was the amount of mental stock value I was putting into this delusion. It all seemed to make sense that angels were fighting aliens over the fate of humanity.

It's worrying because I felt my core logical faculties to start melting or being eroded, meaning that my condition was lapsing or something. Suicide wasn't the only thing that came to my mind, more like worry and exasperation of my mental condition.

My small bubble was bursting. A new guiding belief about why we can't all get along together started forming, which paradoxically was out of my control (don't ask me about the people who think they do have any control over such a delusion)...

What's this talk about megalomania and Buddhism? Are you high?

Ok, nevermind the efforts required to synthesize a novel compound out of scratch.

Looks like Mickey Mouse with a hard 'on. Nice. — Baden

Dude. I'm so proud at the moment being. This compound is called "Imidazenil" and is better than any other benzodiazepines because if you were to immediately stop taking it you won't go through benzodiazepine hell withdrawals.

Created this as a non-tolerance forming benzodiazepine with no dependency issues. I'm amazed with it.

Call me pessimistic but I just can’t see Bernie beating him. — Wayfarer

Supposedly when Bernie was running in 2016, he had the highest comparative advantage over Trump among other presidential candidates.

Call me optimistic but it's either Biden making concessions to Sanders/Warren or bust for him. The other contenders are focused squarely on scoring points by making Biden look bad.

If it comes down to Biden or Trump, I will be really disappointed.

2020 isn't that far away!

And Sanders really stands a chance after the DNC leaks the last election. I think...

It doesn't seem to be happening, as far as I can tell. — Bitter Crank

I'm saving money for this:

Doubt anyone wants to spend a "million" years with anyone, and doing "what"?? Just because death is no longer a problem doesn't mean people wouldn't have problems.
Would all our desires be met? Shopenhenauer would argue otherwise; desire begets new desires. — Grre

Well, I would like to learn more about mathematics. It's something that is irresistibly beautiful and edifying.

I remember learning calculus for the first time, and Christ was I taken back by the concept of the epsilon-delta definition.

Read the Denial of Death or even Benatar in The Human Condition. Both authors talk in length about existentialist crises, our innate desire for immortality ect. ect. quite fascinating stuff. — Grre

Thanks, another one of those books I will just have to figure out when and how to read.

No we should certainly not. I personally think the human species should go extinct sooner rather than later. All things considered. — Grre

Uhh, and why is that? Are you perchance a misanthrope?

I think that death is the opposite of a waste. I think death is what gives life value, otherwise we would be what, just existing forever and ever? — Grre

I'm not sure about that. I think, that if people had an extra 50 years to live longer, then the entire world would dramatically be changed for the better.

I have heard of NO developments anywhere that would lead me to think that I, or anyone else, could live far beyond the normal lifespan. — Bitter Crank

Then you haven't been looking far or wide enough. It's really the latest fad for my generation. That is to enhance mental functioning through various means. I don't think its a fad that will die off anytime soon.

Have you by any chance heard of cryonics? People are signing up for life insurance policies to freeze themselves when they die so that one day they can be "awaken" back to life. Just Google it.

These sorts of incremental improvements may happen, IF the effects of global warming--food and water shortages, new diseases, intense environmental challenges, large die-offs from epidemic disease, etc--don't swamp our ability to support luxury-oriented bio-medical research. Luxury would be finding a really effective new antibiotic, not helping people live 200 years. — Bitter Crank

Those are at least known-knowns. I would be more worried about known-unknowns or unknown-knowns and the all terrifying unknown-unknowns, like an asteroid hitting the Earth or some such.

Whatever you are going to accomplish, you will most likely accomplish it before you are 80. Probably before you are 60. So, you had best get busy and do what ever it is that you are going to do (because it is what it is). — Bitter Crank

I don't think it's anything ego-driven contrary to popular sentiment. I just have come to accept life with all its up's and down's as inherently rewarding. I definitely want to witness the advent of AI, fusion energy becoming a reality, and us as an interplanetary species. Other than that I like philosophizing here and there.

What do you tell a Stoic who claims that one should only be concerned about things within their control?

I would say that the distinction is fundamentally fallacious... What about you?