Existential Stuff Up!
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
21-10-2014, 02:39 PM
RE: Existential Stuff Up!
(20-10-2014 04:52 PM)Luminon Wrote:  
(16-10-2014 03:31 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  Plato is quoted as saying 'madness is divine' and if we follow this through to those philosopher king,s society would have been controlled by madmen, albeit divine ones.
I like the questioning of everything aspect of Socrates.......good fun if you don't weaken!Yes
I think the nature of reality as a whole is Platonically weird (he was right about that), but Aristotelian discipline makes it safer for everyone. The ocean is deep and marvelous, but ships can only exist by keeping it out and covering it in their own pace.

Knowing when to stop questioning is fun too. Stop, when questioning questions questioning itself! That is weakening.
The thing Socrates didn't and couldn't question was integrity. Without integrity, he'd have no business questioning anyone. Things have their nature and renaming them doesn't change their nature. A divine madman is still madman. Some ships may be more like submarines, but demands on integrity are universal.

Plato in looking to the essence of phenomena, such as the appleness of apple etc, I see as being concerned with remote existential possibilities.
Of course we need the logic and science of the secular world as this is our world.
Unfortunately some see the grandeur of the former as totally negating any other means on epistemological/ ontological reasonings.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-10-2014, 02:45 PM
RE: Existential Stuff Up!
(21-10-2014 02:39 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  Plato in looking to the essence of phenomena, such as the appleness of apple etc, I see as being concerned with remote existential possibilities.
Of course we need the logic and science of the secular world as this is our world.
Unfortunately some see the grandeur of the former as totally negating any other means on epistemological/ ontological reasonings.

Plato's essences exist only in minds, of course. There is no free-floating 'appleness'.

What do you mean by "negating any other means on epistemological/ ontological reasonings"?

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
26-10-2014, 08:36 PM
RE: Existential Stuff Up!
(21-10-2014 02:45 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(21-10-2014 02:39 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  Plato in looking to the essence of phenomena, such as the appleness of apple etc, I see as being concerned with remote existential possibilities.
Of course we need the logic and science of the secular world as this is our world.
Unfortunately some see the grandeur of the former as totally negating any other means on epistemological/ ontological reasonings.

Plato's essences exist only in minds, of course. There is no free-floating 'appleness'.

What do you mean by "negating any other means on epistemological/ ontological reasonings"?
As you seem to see knowledge totally ensconced within the scientific method I imagine all else is simply laughable to you. You may well be correct, but I still find room for subjective considerations.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-10-2014, 05:58 AM
RE: Existential Stuff Up!
(26-10-2014 08:36 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  
(21-10-2014 02:45 PM)Chas Wrote:  Plato's essences exist only in minds, of course. There is no free-floating 'appleness'.

What do you mean by "negating any other means on epistemological/ ontological reasonings"?
As you seem to see knowledge totally ensconced within the scientific method I imagine all else is simply laughable to you. You may well be correct, but I still find room for subjective considerations.

You can imagine what you will - you seem to do that quite a bit.

You are, of course, wrong - but don't let that stop you from presuming other people's positions. Thumbsup

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
27-10-2014, 10:44 AM
RE: Existential Stuff Up!
(26-10-2014 08:36 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  
(21-10-2014 02:45 PM)Chas Wrote:  Plato's essences exist only in minds, of course. There is no free-floating 'appleness'.

What do you mean by "negating any other means on epistemological/ ontological reasonings"?
As you seem to see knowledge totally ensconced within the scientific method I imagine all else is simply laughable to you. You may well be correct, but I still find room for subjective considerations.

Well if you want to just make tight nit judgements on others ideas, then I can see why you would think some strict science only view is going to envelop mankind... but that doesn't reflect reality even within the most scientifically focused people.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-10-2014, 04:23 AM
RE: Existential Stuff Up!
Topic: That's almost entirely made of stupid for reasons that have already been addressed in the thread but I'm going to say something nice about it:
I think it's kind of awesome how you've used "spider" as a verb and I intend to use that at some point.
(13-10-2014 03:20 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(13-10-2014 03:19 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  It is held by some that science has been empowered beyond its real worth.
By explaining everything by the scientific method, some believe that subjective
thinking, contemplation, feelings of awe, intuitive thought etc have been negated.

Sounds like a strawman used by post-modernists, new-agers, and theists. Drinking Beverage
What's wrong with post modernism and/ or what makes similar to theism and the bucket of bullshit that is the new age crowd?

Because I like post modernism as an aestheic choice in and I'm not familiar with it as used as an ethos's. (Ethoi?)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-10-2014, 04:33 AM
RE: Existential Stuff Up!
(28-10-2014 04:23 AM)Stuffed_Assumption_Meringue Wrote:  Topic: That's almost entirely made of stupid for reasons that have already been addressed in the thread but I'm going to say something nice about it:
I think it's kind of awesome how you've used "spider" as a verb and I intend to use that at some point.
(13-10-2014 03:20 PM)Chas Wrote:  Sounds like a strawman used by post-modernists, new-agers, and theists. Drinking Beverage
What's wrong with post modernism and/ or what makes similar to theism and the bucket of bullshit that is the new age crowd?

Because I like post modernism as an aestheic choice in and I'm not familiar with it as used as an ethos's. (Ethoi?)

Post-modernism is the bucket that holds the bullshit.

Deconstruction and post-structuralism in the hands of those ignorant of science gives them license to equate fact and fantasy.
Science is not "just another narrative", and to state this is to strip oneself of any credibility.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-11-2014, 05:08 AM (This post was last modified: 04-11-2014 05:20 AM by Luminon.)
RE: Existential Stuff Up!
(21-10-2014 02:39 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  Plato in looking to the essence of phenomena, such as the appleness of apple etc, I see as being concerned with remote existential possibilities.
Of course we need the logic and science of the secular world as this is our world.
Unfortunately some see the grandeur of the former as totally negating any other means on epistemological/ ontological reasonings.
What if aspects and properties of things do exist as essences? Of course, only mind is complex enough to express them. The complexity of mind has a lot of free variability to spare and so it can and does model "rational objects", which are really properties, not separate objects. Properties can be definite, absolute. No object is a perfect circle, but a gravitational field is 100% gravitational in nature, as far as we know, because it's a property of mass. Rational "objects" are real properties of mind, it is in mind's nature to model them.

Secular world? I wonder why does this word even exist. Either things are rational and empirical, or they are not, I don't know what religion has to do with it. I'd want to judge things inside and outside of churches on equal merit.

Religious societies are bad at using science. Syria and Iran are behind scientifically and USA is behind in stem cell research thanks to religion. Secular societies are great at science, but how good are they at logic? What I've seen so far is this attitude that science is something real around us, but logic is not. There are no ideal forms in the world, so we should not even try to use logic on the world. Logic is something that we do quite skillfully behind closed doors in mathematics classes - or when debating Christians. In the empirical world, we must use makeshift quick solutions that often contradict each other, but they get us by.

There is a curious dichotomy there, a nightmare to every sociologist - we have tremendous power of now technology - but social problems that are ancient. You know the old Greek writings that sounds just like people's complaints today. Science eradicated black plague, but did nothing about crime or poverty, for example. Somehow, the get-by solutions don't add up in the long run to get us somewhere else qualitatively. Yet science doesn't show any DUI gene or murder brain center or tax-evasion glands, there's little physical basis for these phenomena. Isn't that weird?

One thing we can do is to take a closer look to the "get-by solutions to empirical nuances". For example, a person with pussy is different from persons with dick, which is quite a nuance, so let's give the persons with dicks some institutional privileges long ago and the persons with pussy some institutional privileges today. Persons with more melanin are not the same as persons with less melanin, so let's give them jobs in cotton growing industry. Persons about whom lots of people agree upon are not the same as the persons who do the agreeing or disagreeing, so the former will have people in costumes to take money and lives of the latter. Get-by solutions indeed!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Luminon's post
04-11-2014, 05:45 AM
RE: Existential Stuff Up!
(04-11-2014 05:08 AM)Luminon Wrote:  
(21-10-2014 02:39 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  Plato in looking to the essence of phenomena, such as the appleness of apple etc, I see as being concerned with remote existential possibilities.
Of course we need the logic and science of the secular world as this is our world.
Unfortunately some see the grandeur of the former as totally negating any other means on epistemological/ ontological reasonings.
What if aspects and properties of things do exist as essences? Of course, only mind is complex enough to express them. The complexity of mind has a lot of free variability to spare and so it can and does model "rational objects", which are really properties, not separate objects. Properties can be definite, absolute. No object is a perfect circle, but a gravitational field is 100% gravitational in nature, as far as we know, because it's a property of mass. Rational "objects" are real properties of mind, it is in mind's nature to model them.

Secular world? I wonder why does this word even exist. Either things are rational and empirical, or they are not, I don't know what religion has to do with it. I'd want to judge things inside and outside of churches on equal merit.

Religious societies are bad at using science. Syria and Iran are behind scientifically and USA is behind in stem cell research thanks to religion. Secular societies are great at science, but how good are they at logic? What I've seen so far is this attitude that science is something real around us, but logic is not. There are no ideal forms in the world, so we should not even try to use logic on the world. Logic is something that we do quite skillfully behind closed doors in mathematics classes - or when debating Christians. In the empirical world, we must use makeshift quick solutions that often contradict each other, but they get us by.

There is a curious dichotomy there, a nightmare to every sociologist - we have tremendous power of now technology - but social problems that are ancient. You know the old Greek writings that sounds just like people's complaints today. Science eradicated black plague, but did nothing about crime or poverty, for example. Somehow, the get-by solutions don't add up in the long run to get us somewhere else qualitatively. Yet science doesn't show any DUI gene or murder brain center or tax-evasion glands, there's little physical basis for these phenomena. Isn't that weird?

One thing we can do is to take a closer look to the "get-by solutions to empirical nuances". For example, a person with pussy is different from persons with dick, which is quite a nuance, so let's give the persons with dicks some institutional privileges long ago and the persons with pussy some institutional privileges today. Persons with more melanin are not the same as persons with less melanin, so let's give them jobs in cotton growing industry. Persons about whom lots of people agree upon are not the same as the persons who do the agreeing or disagreeing, so the former will have people in costumes to take money and lives of the latter. Get-by solutions indeed!

Just when I was thinking "You know what this thread needs? More woo-woo bullshit.", you seemingly appear right on cue.

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes EvolutionKills's post
04-11-2014, 06:51 AM
RE: Existential Stuff Up!
I can't edit the above post anymore so I'm putting this here.
(28-10-2014 04:23 AM)Stuffed_Assumption_Meringue Wrote:  Topic: That's almost entirely made of stupid for reasons that have already been addressed in the thread but I'm going to say something nice about it:
I was lazy and despite what I'd said I hadn't read enough of the thread to say that the poem is largely made of stupid. I had made that assumption based on the snippet of the conversation above between Woof and Chas. I said that without actually having read all the poem. I read the first couple of stanzas and skipped to the end. Because again: Lazy.

It is also needlessly condesending in it's tone. (Rock spider.) I don't particularly like it (the poem) but "almost entirely made of stupid" is unacceptable here.

Mr. Woof: I apoligise.

Soulless mutants of muscle and intent. There are billions of us; hardy, smart and dangerous. Shaped by millions of years of death. We are the definitive alpha predator. We build monsters of fire and stone. We bottled the sun. We nailed our god to a stick.

In man's struggle against the world, bet on the man.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: