| Topic: |
Science > Philosophy |
| User: |
"WhisperingWolf" |
| Date: |
04 Nov 2005 08:19:11 AM |
| Object: |
Konnichiwa |
Konnichiwa minna-san,
I don't mean to offend anyone, but please tell me that this group has
some actual intelligence to it. I've visited three other philosophy
boards and they seemed to believe that all philosophy came from the
bible. While I don't mean to criticize anyone's religion, I do believe
that philosophy is far beyond religion. I've not yet had time to view
many of the topics here, but I did see one that interested me. Someone
went into detail about what is philosophy, I like that. Apologies for
any drabble.
~WhisperingWolf
.
|
|
| User: "minus" |
|
| Title: Re: Konnichiwa |
04 Nov 2005 10:26:49 AM |
|
|
(calls out through the doorway) excuse me but are people actually
having fun at this party cause I've been to two other parties and they
all just sat around and talked about Jesus. I looked through the
windows and it looked like some people were dancing and I could just
come in an join but I see some purpose in standing out in the hall and
eliciting.....hmm. A contract? A promise?
.
|
|
|
| User: "FED UP" |
|
| Title: Re: Konnichiwa |
04 Nov 2005 01:20:26 PM |
|
|
"I don't mean to offend anyone, but please tell me that this group has
some actual intelligence to it."
Well if you didn't mean to offend anyone by this, implicitly implying
that religious people are stupid,
you got some serious social problems.
" I do believe that philosophy is far beyond religion."
Wrong....they go hand in hand.
Definitions;
Philosophy -- the study of truths and principles of being,knowledge,
or conduct.
Religion -- a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose
of the universe.
If you don't see a close relationship here....I've discovered even
more problems.
This site is in no way limited to religion.
But you certainly shouldn't mind if somebody may tackle a problem with
a religious perspective on things.....should you ?
But now WhisperingWolf...let's see what you've got !
I'm really expecting a great display of brilliance....something that
will bamboozal all the ignorant religious types I'm sure.
.
|
|
|
| User: "WhisperingWolf" |
|
| Title: Re: Konnichiwa |
04 Nov 2005 01:59:11 PM |
|
|
Pardon, but I don't believe I ever implied that religious people were
stupid or the like. Simply that an all religious discussion is not so
much philosophy as it is 'bible study'. I see the relationship but not
the need for exclusive conversation on such matters. I certainly don't
mind conversation on such topic but I do mind when the conversation is
limited to Christanity and not tolerant of other religious views. I'm
an author by nature and as such hate to limit my views and discussions.
That was what prompted my post.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "6 feet over" |
|
| Title: Re: Konnichiwa |
04 Nov 2005 04:45:02 PM |
|
|
Not to worry at least from me my friend. I would like to think that all
philosophy has some intelligence to it anyway. Of course, some of us
may not be at the level you wish, but you can't expect to find what
want when the topic is philosophy. But lets not be harsh with one
another; I've found that the attempt of throwing light upon the unknown
by us creates confusion and anger among us. And yet let us have neither
in our contradictions:
The clash of our ideas is what makes us understand each other. We can
see how every one in the world sees reality. We can peer into our
hearts, minds and souls together. We can come to love one another for
our diverse perspectives, instead of hating each other for our supposed
stupidities.
And you will not get around religion of any kind, no matter where you
look. Religion is what we believe in, get our morals and values from,
how we practice activities in our daily lives. Without religion, where
then does philosopy lie? Without application, where then thinking?
Consideration without
action................................................
exactly
I truly believe we can love each other in our attempts in finding out
what we don't know. I need and want to love. I believe in love. And I
think that those among us- philosophers, politicians, dreamers,
wanderers, scientists, every one, even between our pushing around,
stepping upon, bashing, raging, needing to be right, shooting
metaphorical bullets at those we think is wrong; yes we can still love
eachother in spite of. And so from me, philosophy not only bring about
intelligence, it does love as well.
.
|
|
|
| User: "tooly" |
|
| Title: Re: Konnichiwa |
04 Nov 2005 07:28:01 PM |
|
|
"6 feet over" <madfro48@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1131144302.871994.192420@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Not to worry at least from me my friend. I would like to think that all
philosophy has some intelligence to it anyway. Of course, some of us
may not be at the level you wish, but you can't expect to find what
want when the topic is philosophy. But lets not be harsh with one
another; I've found that the attempt of throwing light upon the unknown
by us creates confusion and anger among us. And yet let us have neither
in our contradictions:
The clash of our ideas is what makes us understand each other. We can
see how every one in the world sees reality. We can peer into our
hearts, minds and souls together. We can come to love one another for
our diverse perspectives, instead of hating each other for our supposed
stupidities.
And you will not get around religion of any kind, no matter where you
look. Religion is what we believe in, get our morals and values from,
how we practice activities in our daily lives. Without religion, where
then does philosopy lie? Without application, where then thinking?
Consideration without
action................................................
exactly
I truly believe we can love each other in our attempts in finding out
what we don't know. I need and want to love. I believe in love. And I
think that those among us- philosophers, politicians, dreamers,
wanderers, scientists, every one, even between our pushing around,
stepping upon, bashing, raging, needing to be right, shooting
metaphorical bullets at those we think is wrong; yes we can still love
eachother in spite of. And so from me, philosophy not only bring about
intelligence, it does love as well.
What about mass consciousness?
I'm afraid of being a bottle rocket, energies spent on nothing but a little
sparkle against the night sky.
Where does love take us in other words? Any ideas?
.
|
|
|
| User: "turtoni" |
|
| Title: Re: Konnichiwa |
04 Nov 2005 08:44:56 PM |
|
|
"tooly" What about mass consciousness?
I'm afraid of being a bottle rocket, energies spent on nothing but a
little sparkle against the night sky.
Where does love take us in other words? Any ideas?
Learning new theories about how the consciousness works could lead to some
fundamental changes in operation.
--
"He who fights monsters should look into it that he himself does not become
a monster"
.
|
|
|
| User: "tooly" |
|
| Title: Re: Konnichiwa |
05 Nov 2005 04:08:37 PM |
|
|
"turtoni" <turtoni@alt.philosophy> wrote in message
news:0P2dnfUKnsM-gfHeRVn-vg@comcast.com...
"tooly" What about mass consciousness?
I'm afraid of being a bottle rocket, energies spent on nothing but a
little sparkle against the night sky.
Where does love take us in other words? Any ideas?
Learning new theories about how the consciousness works could lead to some
fundamental changes in operation.
Ok, but could you expand on what theories you might be referring to? Most
postings I read about here on new ideas of consciousness all seem to be
focused upon the organic/material reduction that neuro-science places upon
us. I do not want to become 'emotionless' [as a choice]. In fact, it is
'emotion' that I pursue, more so than anything else. I see all else as
'means' to certain emotional states; even objectivity and rationalism
[paradoxically leading to certain emotionalities of state that are stable
etc].
(uh...or did I miss one of your postings which I'm reading BTW; I mean,
about such theories?)
I am presently interested in learning about 'emotion' as experienced through
mass consciousness...much as at rock concerts perhaps or other large arenas
that offer epiphany-like promise (see my thread way back when about
Woodstock?).
--
"He who fights monsters should look into it that he himself does not
become
a monster"
.
|
|
|
| User: "turtoni" |
|
| Title: Re: Konnichiwa |
05 Nov 2005 06:51:22 PM |
|
|
"tooly" <rdh11@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:m1abf.1600$Dk.1096@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
"turtoni" <turtoni@alt.philosophy> wrote in message
news:0P2dnfUKnsM-gfHeRVn-vg@comcast.com...
"tooly" What about mass consciousness?
I'm afraid of being a bottle rocket, energies spent on nothing but a
little sparkle against the night sky.
Where does love take us in other words? Any ideas?
Learning new theories about how the consciousness works could lead to
some fundamental changes in operation.
Ok, but could you expand on what theories you might be referring to? Most
postings I read about here on new ideas of consciousness all seem to be
focused upon the organic/material reduction that neuro-science places upon
us. I do not want to become 'emotionless' [as a choice]. In fact, it is
'emotion' that I pursue, more so than anything else. I see all else as
'means' to certain emotional states; even objectivity and rationalism
[paradoxically leading to certain emotionalities of state that are stable
etc].
(uh...or did I miss one of your postings which I'm reading BTW; I mean,
about such theories?)
I think I have to be careful about that. Not being someone could be
distrubing.
I am presently interested in learning about 'emotion' as experienced
through mass consciousness...much as at rock concerts perhaps or other
large arenas that offer epiphany-like promise (see my thread way back when
about Woodstock?).
The best story I could offer is one of imaging yourself as a Shaman while
dancing to some cutting edge music in some offbeat location, feeling that
you are drawing down and connecting with something greater than you. And
receiving recognition from the surrounding tribe and "DJ" for your presence
and aura, confirming the feelings whilst at the same time remaining
completely humble and as a stranger to disappear later.
--
"He who fights monsters should look into it that he himself does not become
a monster"
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "turtoni" |
|
| Title: Re: Konnichiwa |
05 Nov 2005 07:17:01 PM |
|
|
tooly:
I am presently interested in learning about 'emotion' as experienced
through mass consciousness...much as at rock concerts perhaps or other
large arenas that offer epiphany-like promise (see my thread way back when
about Woodstock?).
Found this:
http://theparty.netraver.org.za/Trance.html
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "WhisperingWolf" |
|
| Title: Re: Konnichiwa |
05 Nov 2005 06:40:33 PM |
|
|
Most postings I read about here on new ideas of consciousness all seem
to be
focused upon the organic/material reduction that neuro-science places
upon
us.
I don't think I've heard these theories before. Would you care to
elaborate?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "WhisperingWolf" |
|
| Title: Re: Konnichiwa |
04 Nov 2005 08:24:01 PM |
|
|
Wow, and to think all I wanted was to be certain that I wasn't part of
another bible study board calling themselves Philosophy. Yes I do
believe that religion and philosophy are sibling subjects., and I thank
all of you have added input. You all have shared your thoughts, views
and made me feel as though this is truly a place that I wish to be a
part of. Thank you. My first introduction to philosophy was through
Plato's Republic. Ever since then I've been quite hooked. I ask
everyone this - do you believe your destiny is written? Or do you
believe that you have the power to choose your destiny? Remember of
course that fate is what you will do, destiny is who you will become.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Brian Fletcher" |
|
| Title: Re: Konnichiwa |
06 Nov 2005 07:27:34 AM |
|
|
"WhisperingWolf" <Moon.LaFleur@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1131157441.927493.28880@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Wow, and to think all I wanted was to be certain that I wasn't part of
another bible study board calling themselves Philosophy. Yes I do
believe that religion and philosophy are sibling subjects., and I thank
all of you have added input. You all have shared your thoughts, views
and made me feel as though this is truly a place that I wish to be a
part of. Thank you. My first introduction to philosophy was through
Plato's Republic. Ever since then I've been quite hooked. I ask
everyone this - do you believe your destiny is written? Or do you
believe that you have the power to choose your destiny? Remember of
course that fate is what you will do, destiny is who you will become.
Fate implies inevitability; destiny, destination.
Part of your destiny IS the power to choose. How you choose, and what your
motives are, create very specific outcomes (karma or fate). The outcomes
become more recognisable as self created. Your destiny as a creator becomes
clearer.
There is no destination, per se.There is no destination, per se.
BOfL
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "RyanT" |
|
| Title: Re: Konnichiwa |
05 Nov 2005 11:43:23 AM |
|
|
What makes philosophy interesting is that for every theory proposed,
there is always logical contradiction that "proves it wrong" somehow.
If you look at some of the wiki articles that exist on the net, you'll
probably see what I mean. Here's how this idea is right, now, here's
why its wrong. If anything, I should get people to stop taking
structuralized thinking too seriously.
Plato's works are very powerful, and have left an enormous influence on
western civilization. The influence, however, is not always a good
thing. You can contrast his ideas of innate knowledge with Aristotle's
works, which you might be interested in, mostly because the clash
between the innate and empirical is something that everybody has to
deal with in everyday life.
WhisperingWolf wrote:
Wow, and to think all I wanted was to be certain that I wasn't part of
another bible study board calling themselves Philosophy. Yes I do
believe that religion and philosophy are sibling subjects., and I thank
all of you have added input. You all have shared your thoughts, views
and made me feel as though this is truly a place that I wish to be a
part of. Thank you. My first introduction to philosophy was through
Plato's Republic. Ever since then I've been quite hooked. I ask
everyone this - do you believe your destiny is written? Or do you
believe that you have the power to choose your destiny? Remember of
course that fate is what you will do, destiny is who you will become.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sir Frederick" |
|
| Title: Re: Konnichiwa |
04 Nov 2005 03:52:37 PM |
|
|
On 4 Nov 2005 06:19:11 -0800, "WhisperingWolf" <Moon.LaFleur@gmail.com> wrote:
Konnichiwa minna-san,
I don't mean to offend anyone, but please tell me that this group has
some actual intelligence to it. I've visited three other philosophy
boards and they seemed to believe that all philosophy came from the
bible. While I don't mean to criticize anyone's religion, I do believe
that philosophy is far beyond religion. I've not yet had time to view
many of the topics here, but I did see one that interested me. Someone
went into detail about what is philosophy, I like that. Apologies for
any drabble.
~WhisperingWolf
Sorry,
We only talk about hard core religion here.
The harder the core the better.
Perhaps it could be called XXXX rated religion.
That, and, we have no room for humor.
.
|
|
|
| User: "turtoni" |
|
| Title: Re: Konnichiwa |
04 Nov 2005 06:42:38 PM |
|
|
"Sir Frederick" <mmcneill@fuzzysys.com> wrote in message
news:djlnm1l2s9rb2vlr4pdr1q07u81g4npj35@4ax.com...
On 4 Nov 2005 06:19:11 -0800, "WhisperingWolf" <Moon.LaFleur@gmail.com>
wrote:
Konnichiwa minna-san,
I don't mean to offend anyone, but please tell me that this group has
some actual intelligence to it. I've visited three other philosophy
boards and they seemed to believe that all philosophy came from the
bible. While I don't mean to criticize anyone's religion, I do believe
that philosophy is far beyond religion. I've not yet had time to view
many of the topics here, but I did see one that interested me. Someone
went into detail about what is philosophy, I like that. Apologies for
any drabble.
~WhisperingWolf
Sorry,
We only talk about hard core religion here.
The harder the core the better.
Perhaps it could be called XXXX rated religion.
That, and, we have no room for humor.
I story. Therefore I am story.
--
"He who fights monsters should look into it that he himself does not become
a monster"
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Wordsmith" |
|
| Title: Re: Konnichiwa |
04 Nov 2005 01:35:44 PM |
|
|
Philosophy is open-ended. Theology tends to dogmatism. When they
collide, sparks fly. But there's no reason both can't benefit from the
friction.
W : )
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "George Dance" |
|
| Title: Re: Konnichiwa |
05 Nov 2005 06:44:37 PM |
|
|
WhisperingWolf wrote:
Konnichiwa minna-san,
I don't mean to offend anyone, but please tell me that this group has
some actual intelligence to it. I've visited three other philosophy
boards and they seemed to believe that all philosophy came from the
bible. While I don't mean to criticize anyone's religion, I do believe
that philosophy is far beyond religion.
For sure; philosophy and religion could not be more opposed.
Philosophy is the study of controversial questions (questions for which
there are no agreed answers, and even no agreed method for discovering
same). In philosophy, anything can be proposed, and anything can be
criticized.
In contrast, in religion nothing is controversial - all questions
either come already answered, or at least can and must be answered
using only one method (argument from authority, a method which plays
next to no role in philosophy).
.
|
|
|
| User: "WhisperingWolf" |
|
| Title: Re: Konnichiwa |
06 Nov 2005 07:27:14 AM |
|
|
George-san, thank you. Not many people understand the distinction the
way you and I do. I have a question for you though. I've run into some
people who have claimed that philosophy *is* their religion. Now while
I am not saying that I doubt their dedication to this art, I don't
myself believe that philosophy can be seen or taken as a religion. What
do you think?
.
|
|
|
| User: "George Dance" |
|
| Title: Re: Konnichiwa |
06 Nov 2005 01:21:49 PM |
|
|
WhisperingWolf wrote:
George-san, thank you. Not many people understand the distinction the
way you and I do. I have a question for you though. I've run into some
people who have claimed that philosophy *is* their religion. Now while
I am not saying that I doubt their dedication to this art, I don't
myself believe that philosophy can be seen or taken as a religion. What
do you think?
I believe that such people have a completely wrong view of philosophy
(one that Karl Popper has called 'oracular philosophy') The question
being; if this is the wrong view, where did it come from and why does
anyone have it?
I don't think I'm in a position to write a definitive explanation of
that. However, I can suggest some possible reasons, and expand on
those by quoting from Popper's /Open Society & its Enemies./
1) The facts of the Western philosophical tradition: specifically, the
1,000-year control of European philosophy, from the fall of Rome until
the Englightment, by the Catholic church, and the drastic molding of
philosophy that followed:
"But some part at least of the authoritarian Church of the Middle Ages
succeeded in branding [...] practical humanitarianism as 'wordly', as
characteristic of 'Epicureanism', and of men who desire only to 'fill
their bellies like the beasts'. The terms 'Epicureanism',
'materialism', and 'empiricism', that is to say, the philosophy of
Democritus, one of the greatest of the Great Generation, became in the
way synonyms of wickedness, and the tribal Idealism of Plato and
Aristotle was exalted as a kind of Christianity before Christ. Indeed,
this is the source of the immense authority, of Plato and Aristotle,
even in our own day, that their philosophy was adopted by medieval
authoritarianism. But it must not be forgotten that, outside the
totalitarian camp, their fame has outlived their practical influence
upon our lives. And although the name of Democritus is seldom
remembered, his science as well as his morals still live with us."
2) The common or folk view of philosophy that resulted from (1), which
was either also held (as I'd charitably suggest), or deliberately
pandered to (as Popper appears to be suggesting by some philosophers
themselves:
"For some reason, philosophers have kept around themselves, even in our
day, something of the atmosphere of the magician. Philosophy is
considered as a strange and abstruse kind of thing, dealing wiht those
mysteries with which religion deals, but not in a way which can be
'revealed unto babes' or to common people; it is considered too
profound for that, and to be the religion and theology of the
intellectuals, of the learned and wise. Hegelianism fits these views
admirably; it is exactly what this kind of popular superstition
supposes philosophy to be. It knows all about everything. It has a
ready answer to every question. And indeed, who can be sure that the
answer is not true?"
3) The idea of philosophy as, not a search for truth, but a means of
propaganda - of advancing particular interests or purposes - which i'd
also see as a consequence of (1):
"The best witness is Schopenhauer, himself a Platonic idealist and a
conservative if not a reactionary, but a man of supreme integrity who
cherished truth beyond anything else. There can be no doubt that he was
as competent a judge in philosophical matters as could be found at the
time. Schopenhauer, who had the pleasure of knowing Hegel personally
[...], drew the following excellent picture of the master: 'Hegel,
installed from above by that powers that be, as the certified Great
Philosopher, was a flat-headed, insipid, nausiating, illiterate
charlatan, who reached the pinnacle of audacity in scribbling together
and dishing up the craziest mystifying nonsense. This nonsense has been
noisily proclaimed as immortal wisdom by mercenary followers and
readily accepted as such by all fools, who thus joined in as a perfect
chorus of admiration as had ever been heard before. The extensive field
of spiritual influence with which Hegel was furnished by those in power
has enabled him to achieve the intellectual corruption of a whole
generation.' And in another place, Schopenhauer describes the political
game of Hegalianism as follows: 'Philosophy, brought a fresh repute by
Kant. . . had soon to become a tool of interests; of state interests
from above, of personal interests from below. . . The driving forces of
this movement are, contrary to all solemn airs and assertations, not
idea; they are very real purposes indeed, namely personal, official,
clerical, political, in short, material interests. . . Party interests
are vehemently agitating the pens of so many pure lovers of wisdom. . .
Truth is certainly the last thing they have in mind. . . Philosophy is
misused, from the side of the state as a tool, from the other side as a
means of gain. . . Who can really believe that the truth also will
thereby come to light, just as a by-product?. . Governments make of
philosophy a means of serving their state interests, and scholars make
of it a trade. . .' "
4) The rise of oracular philosophy, as reflected by Hegel (et al), that
resulted from the conjunction of (2) and (3):
"This romantic period of oracular philosophy, called by Schopenhaur the
'age of dishonesty', is described by him as follows: 'The character of
honesty, that spirit of undertaking an inquiry together with the
reader, which permeates the works of all previous philosophers,
disappears here completely. Every page witnesses that these so-called
philosophers do not attempt to teach, but to bewitch the reader.'"
5) And, finally, the continuing (immense) influence of (4) (which is
the harder to challenge for its being an implicit subtext):
"Hegel's influence has remained a most powerful force, in spite of the
fact that scientists never took him seriously, and that (aprat from the
'evolutionists') many philosophers are beginning to lose interest in
him. Hegel's influence, and especially his cant, is still very powerful
in moral and social philosophy and in the social and political sciences
(with the sole exception of economics). Especially the philosophers of
history, of politics, and of education are still to a very large extent
under his sway. In politics, this is shown most drastically by the fact
that the Maxist extreme left wing, as well as the conservative centre,
and the fascist extreme right, all base their political philosophies on
Hegel; the left wing replaces the war of nations which appears in
Hegel's historicist scheme by the war of classes, the extreme right
replaces it by the war of races; but both follow him more or less
consciously. (The conservative centre is as a rule less conscious of
its indebtedness to Hegel.)"
All these quotes, and much more, can be found at:
http://lachlan.bluehaze.com.au/books/popper_open_society.html
I'd encourage you to look there, but also to read the original source;
Popper's books, especially /Open Society/, are widely available (though
not, AFAICS, on the net; perhaps because they're still copyrighted)..
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Accidental" |
|
| Title: Re: Konnichiwa |
04 Nov 2005 01:18:38 PM |
|
|
WhisperingWolf wrote:
Konnichiwa minna-san,
I don't mean to offend anyone, but please tell me that this group has
some actual intelligence to it. I've visited three other philosophy
boards and they seemed to believe that all philosophy came from the
bible. While I don't mean to criticize anyone's religion, I do believe
that philosophy is far beyond religion. I've not yet had time to view
many of the topics here, but I did see one that interested me. Someone
went into detail about what is philosophy, I like that. Apologies for
any drabble.
~WhisperingWolf
Don't let wandering fundies get you down. They're a confused lot, and
often get caught up in things larger than themselves. They usually
stumble out as fast as they've stumbled in.
Typically what happens is they see some particular religious idea as
important enough to spam over every newsgroup they can get their hands
on, and then rational people feel intruded upon, and some sort of holy
war ensues. Just avoid the draft and you'll be ok.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "RyanT" |
|
| Title: Re: Konnichiwa |
04 Nov 2005 04:41:17 PM |
|
|
You may consider the somethingawful.com debate and discussion forums
board for HARDCORE philosophy. Will cost you 10 bucks, but it's well
worth it. Trolls get banned there fairly quickly, so the atmosphere is
very civil, and there are a lot of experts working or studying in the
field. They will, however, make fun of you if you're arguments arn't
very sound, but sometimes that can be helpful.
There are some people here who have interesting things to say, but you
gotta kind of look harder for it.
WhisperingWolf wrote:
Konnichiwa minna-san,
I don't mean to offend anyone, but please tell me that this group has
some actual intelligence to it. I've visited three other philosophy
boards and they seemed to believe that all philosophy came from the
bible. While I don't mean to criticize anyone's religion, I do believe
that philosophy is far beyond religion. I've not yet had time to view
many of the topics here, but I did see one that interested me. Someone
went into detail about what is philosophy, I like that. Apologies for
any drabble.
~WhisperingWolf
.
|
|
|
|
|
