First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last
Post Reply Can you define the cosmology/philosophy you operate under?
1515 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 11/19/17 , edited 11/19/17

SnipeStar wrote:


VegaStarX1 wrote:


SnipeStar wrote:

i always laugh at these "philosophical" questions- asking them is just as meaningless as asking what color sound is


What are you? Do you know what you really are? I'm sure you are not going to get this question right for maybe your whole lifetime since you don't ask questions.


correction- i don't ask meaningless questions in an attempt to make myself sound smarter than i am


People that don't bother asking questions that will cause you to learn and expand choose to be ignorant.
yeah you aren't "learning" or "expanding" by asking these fruitless questions


I'm sure you only laugh at philosophy because you can't comprehend the deep ideas that come from it so you blow it off as nonsense.

what i laugh at are condescending psuedo-intellectuals who think they sound smart by wasting time with meaningless questions


Why are these questions meaningless?

Be careful, you might find yourself using philosophy when you answer.
561 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
37 / M / Everywhere
Offline
Posted 11/19/17 , edited 11/19/17
As long as you have beliefs you have a philosophy and everybody has beliefs. As long as you have a brain and you think you will have a philosophy or a collection of beliefs.

A definition of philosophy from the online Merriam Webster dictionary: a :the most basic beliefs, concepts, and attitudes of an individual or group.

People that mock people who are trying to understand their world are people who have died inside and are stuck in their evolution. Society has killed their spirit.

Anybody can be anything they desire to be.

206 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M
Offline
Posted 11/19/17 , edited 11/19/17

SnipeStar wrote:

i always laugh at these "philosophical" questions- asking them is just as meaningless as asking what color sound is


There are philosophers who think like you, i.e. only ask questions that will produce any kind of "visible" result. But there are many problems that come with this, and the history of mathematics, physics and philosophy has shown that something that seems meaningless at first, turns out to be very productive at a later point.

To disregard any kind of philosophical question would be foolish on your side. Virtually any kind of science or humanity is based on a philosophical foundation and virtually any kind of application will have to pass some kind of ethical question.
Your statement itself can be seen as a philosophical stance - so is what you say meaningless?
12429 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M
Offline
Posted 11/19/17
Disclamer: I don’t study philosophy (In the sense that I don't know who anybody is in the philosophical world, or what various philosophical systems are.) cause I care more about other stuff. I’m much more interested in just self inquiry and analysis of my own experience and others, more interested in practical ways of viewing the world, myself, and others to achieve whatever goals I have in mind. If your gonna ask me about some of my points and come from a place where your heavily influenced and conditioned to view things from that lens understand that I’m not gonna know any terms you use/people you reference and probably won’t even care to invest my time to try and learn those things. Overall I’m pretty unknowledgeable and retarded.

I guess I can start with how I view myself, humans, and the world.



Now let’s get onto what I don’t subscribe to. ( While I don’t subscribe to this model of the world in a sense I’m still very much like everyone else, conditioned to think this way and view the world this way, and I’m trying to navigate myself out of it.)



So yeah that's pretty much all that I'm willing to divulge cause I'm bored with this and wanna do something else. It's honestly just a lot of simple stuff cause I prefer to be simple a decent amount of the time since it makes life easier.
923 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
32 / M
Offline
Posted 11/19/17 , edited 11/19/17
While skepticism is an important quality I admire, radical skepticism about knowledge claims outside of one's immediate experience I view with some hesitation. That's because philosophy inculcates the habit for discursive thinking, which is fundamental to our shared institutions and the impact they have in the world. Communities organize themselves around codified sets of beliefs, and it is communities that are the basis for collective action. Learning to critique beliefs on their own terms is how progress is made towards engagement with other individuals. Together, collective action, which is one of the few protections we have against misfortune and chance, becomes possible. Learning philosophy, on the one hand, is simply learning what individuals have thought through the ages, and provides us a way to pattern knowledge into a framework for individual thinking. On the other hand, it teaches dialectical thinking that draws out the capacity for discourse, essential to so much of collective decision making.
33028 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / Texas
Offline
Posted 11/19/17
My belief on people, some days I think things are okay with people and other times I think they are children fighting over nonsense but no worries. If they want to be at each others throats let them, in the end we all come through the same entrance and leave through the same exit.

As for my philosophy, well it's practically just "hakuna matata". Life will always have its up and downs but that doesn't matter. Even if there is nothing but obstacles in my way I still maintain my happiness. If nothing in life matters what is the point in being sad about it, it just means life is a blank canvas to paint your own meaning on.... well the plain and simple is

Do what makes you happy and don't let life keep you from being happy because in the end whatever life throws at you won't matter.
3068 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
29 / F / The margins
Offline
Posted 11/21/17

mxdan wrote:

That still exists but as I've eluded to in other threads philosophy has evolved and permeated our culture in several key ways. The first major change in modern terms was the Enlightenment which lead to a revolution that understood that key truths about the world could be found externally in our surroundings. That truth wasn't endowed by knowledge found in teachings handed down in religious texts but in individual contributions that were held to a methodology that could be scrutinized and reinterpreted. Suddenly philosophy was something to strive for. This was the Modernist way of thinking.

[...]

Through the work of people like Jean-François Lyotard and Jacques Derrida (Famously hard to understand in case you want to read up on him) we had philosophers who were now trying to emphasize subjectivity rather than objectivity. I'm overtly simplifying this but basically what you had were people who started to believe that progression without the ethics to pick out net positives in experience, were useless, as it lead to terrible things more often then not. The rise of Postmodernism in the 1960's. The short of it is the rejection of objective reality in substitute for moral relativism. Philosophers who advocate this train of thought think that any stance can be justified with enough time to do so and that people are rooted in their baser desires for any number of issues.

This new way of looking social constructs has largely influenced the way people have come to think about the modern world philosophically. People do in fact justify everything regardless of the objective science we may have.


I think you're confusing modernism with the Enlightenment; they're two different things.

Further, postmodernism is not the same as moral relativism. When it addresses morality, it's suspicious of moral absolutism - and tends to focus on how such absolutes aren't absolute at all - but that's not the same as being relativist. For example, it's hard to say that "pick[ing] out net positives in experience" is relativist or subjective. And I highly doubt you'd find a philosopher who thinks any view can be justified given enough time. Science isn't objective, either, as it functions off of paradigms created by the scientific community, and these are incredibly subjective.

As Secret-of-Terra said about the widespread perspective on science (he seems to know rather well what he's talking about; I didn't even have to clean up the Kant part), the descriptions you gave above are what people are used to hearing about modernism, postmodernism, and such, because they're easily digestible stories. But the reality is more complicated.
mxdan 
11779 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / A Husk.
Offline
Posted 11/21/17 , edited 11/21/17

auroraloose wrote:


mxdan wrote:

That still exists but as I've eluded to in other threads philosophy has evolved and permeated our culture in several key ways. The first major change in modern terms was the Enlightenment which lead to a revolution that understood that key truths about the world could be found externally in our surroundings. That truth wasn't endowed by knowledge found in teachings handed down in religious texts but in individual contributions that were held to a methodology that could be scrutinized and reinterpreted. Suddenly philosophy was something to strive for. This was the Modernist way of thinking.

[...]

Through the work of people like Jean-François Lyotard and Jacques Derrida (Famously hard to understand in case you want to read up on him) we had philosophers who were now trying to emphasize subjectivity rather than objectivity. I'm overtly simplifying this but basically what you had were people who started to believe that progression without the ethics to pick out net positives in experience, were useless, as it lead to terrible things more often then not. The rise of Postmodernism in the 1960's. The short of it is the rejection of objective reality in substitute for moral relativism. Philosophers who advocate this train of thought think that any stance can be justified with enough time to do so and that people are rooted in their baser desires for any number of issues.

This new way of looking social constructs has largely influenced the way people have come to think about the modern world philosophically. People do in fact justify everything regardless of the objective science we may have.


I think you're confusing modernism with the Enlightenment; they're two different things.

Further, postmodernism is not the same as moral relativism. When it addresses morality, it's suspicious of moral absolutism - and tends to focus on how such absolutes aren't absolute at all - but that's not the same as being relativist. For example, it's hard to say that "pick[ing] out net positives in experience" is relativist or subjective. And I highly doubt you'd find a philosopher who thinks any view can be justified given enough time. Science isn't objective, either, as it functions off of paradigms created by the scientific community, and these are incredibly subjective.

As Secret-of-Terra said about the widespread perspective on science (he seems to know rather well what he's talking about; I didn't even have to clean up the Kant part), the descriptions you gave above are what people are used to hearing about modernism, postmodernism, and such, because they're easily digestible stories. But the reality is more complicated.


True, postmodernism is an extremely hard concept to define. And I'm glad you cleared that up. That's a conceptual error I wasn't even aware I was making. People seem to define subjectivity and relativity interchangeably all the time but when you think about it they aren't the same thing at all. Thank you for the help.
561 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
37 / M / Everywhere
Offline
Posted 11/22/17 , edited 11/22/17
All knowledge is self knowledge and it all comes from within. All knowledge from the past, present, and future (Time is simultaneous) comes from our Eternal Soul. Who we are within is projected outward as our mirrors.

From the perceptive of observing or being the one aware of our thoughts, emotions, and actions we can choose what thoughts, emotions, and actions that we want to become. This is the idea of karma which is the law of cause and affect in quantum physics.
143 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Offline
Posted 11/22/17

Matthew 22:36-40

36 “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”

37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.' 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”
1581 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / F / PA, USA
Offline
Posted 11/22/17

VegaStarX1 wrote:

People that mock people who are trying to understand their world are people who have died inside and are stuck in their evolution. Society has killed their spirit.



You say that, yet you can't be bothered to respect the opposition. Although it isn't especially wise to mock the philosophical, it is downright hypocritical of you to carry on and belittle others, too.

Also, I'm wondering if you've had a previous CR account. Your account theme reminds me of someone who used to haunt CR forums and vanished around 2013.
42569 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
waffle
Offline
Posted 11/23/17
fuck the alt right
fuck the sjw left
fuck you all
i'm in the political party of fuck you
561 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
37 / M / Everywhere
Offline
Posted 11/23/17 , edited 11/23/17

Cardamom_Ginger wrote:


VegaStarX1 wrote:

People that mock people who are trying to understand their world are people who have died inside and are stuck in their evolution. Society has killed their spirit.



You say that, yet you can't be bothered to respect the opposition. Although it isn't especially wise to mock the philosophical, it is downright hypocritical of you to carry on and belittle others, too.

Also, I'm wondering if you've had a previous CR account. Your account theme reminds me of someone who used to haunt CR forums and vanished around 2013.


It was just an honest observation of him. How is it belittling if that is how he is? My intention was not to insult him. You sometimes have to honestly tell people how they are since they are not capable of reflecting on themselves due to the lack of self awareness.



400 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M / Jacksonville FL, USA
Offline
Posted 11/30/17 , edited 11/30/17
Active philosophy would probably be Stoics, while my internal worldview is more in common with pre-Christian Norse/Germanic peoples (A Heathen worldview, if you will). There is some Aristotelian-Thomism in there too, but I am in no way a Christian.
37836 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 11/30/17 , edited 11/30/17
Absurdism. I can't help but think about the answers to some of these questions, but ultimately I don't see much value in chasing after them. I'm not sure it's possible to even understand myself, let alone the universe, my place in it, the nature of humanity, what it all means... I enjoy reading people's thoughts on these grand questions. It's fascinating, but futile. There is so much in the world I don't understand, is that really where I should start?

I am an athiest and value science as the best way to understand the universe. I don't really expect science to deliver me any answers though, and it's possible the scientific method could be insufficient.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.