1
   

how the philosophy is spreading

 
 
sneer
 
Reply Thu 18 Jun, 2009 01:33 pm
Different philosophy systems are grafted in societes in many ways. My concern is, why humans want to infect others with ideas? And what could be most effective tool to do that?
Of course, the religion, sect, party, mass meetings - all this is the social know-how of this process, effective and proven throughout ages.
The Internet is nothing challenging, because philosophies are spread neither by dialogue nor communication, but usually by one-way evangelization. In that means, the Internet is only medium, worse than tv or radio. Why worse? Because it's more free than others, because it contains more Chaos, because ideas might be proven in seconds, because the communication between Subjects is not only easy, but as well common.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 821 • Replies: 9
No top replies

 
jgweed
 
  1  
Reply Thu 18 Jun, 2009 03:14 pm
@sneer,
"...philosophies are spread neither by dialogue nor communication, but usually by one-way evangelization."

First, I am not sure this is quite true. Surely, for example, the Critique of Pure Reason, or Being and Time are not evangelization, but more an attempt to create a dialogue with the reader, to communicate ideas and positions.

If anything, isn't what is spread by mass-media of all sorts more like propaganda than philosophy? I have not heard of a mass-meeting of desperate and enthusiastic Neo-Platonists ready to march on Paris or Washington.

Lastly, doesn't the freedom (at least so far and a few repressive nations excepted) of the Internet, while admittedly making the separation of the wheat from the chaff difficult, actually open up the possibilities of authentic communication by encouraging more philosophic communication, even from isolated souls in the hinterlands perhaps of small towns in the Bible Belt? This may seem somewhat Victorian and an imitation of J.S. Mill, but isn't a certain amount of chaos one the best ways to fertilize real thinking and new perspectives?
Cheers,
John
sneer
 
  1  
Reply Thu 18 Jun, 2009 03:58 pm
@jgweed,
jgweed;70164 wrote:

First, I am not sure this is quite true. Surely, for example, the Critique of Pure Reason, or Being and Time are not evangelization, but more an attempt to create a dialogue with the reader, to communicate ideas and positions.
[...]
I have not heard of a mass-meeting of desperate and enthusiastic Neo-Platonists ready to march on Paris or Washington.


my intention of use "spread" was "becomes commonly accepted". And "philosophy" meant "practical philosophy system", like christianity, buddhism, communism, fascizm. Sorry for being imprecise.
richrf
 
  1  
Reply Thu 18 Jun, 2009 05:20 pm
@sneer,
Hi there,

I think there are all ways for people to communicate to experiment and play the game of life. I don't consider one way better or worse than another. Just experiments, and what comes out is something new.

Philosophy is just discussion about various topics that come under the general title of understanding life. So people can talk about philosophy in class, at home, at work, over the Internet, at a coffee house. Different people. Different thoughts. Different experiences. All part of the exploration. And everyone picks their own way. Some may not do it at all. For them baseball is enough - though George Will tries very hard to combine the both. Smile

Rich
GoshisDead
 
  1  
Reply Thu 18 Jun, 2009 05:45 pm
@richrf,
Philosophy is primarily a hereditary disease.
Elmud
 
  1  
Reply Thu 18 Jun, 2009 05:50 pm
@GoshisDead,
GoshisDead;70186 wrote:
Philosophy is primarily a hereditary disease.
Kind of like OCD and SAD?
GoshisDead
 
  1  
Reply Thu 18 Jun, 2009 05:51 pm
@Elmud,
ROFL yeah Kinda like that, Its the Autism of Memes
0 Replies
 
jgweed
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Jun, 2009 06:22 am
@sneer,
"my intention of use "spread" was "becomes commonly accepted". And "philosophy" meant "practical philosophy system", like christianity, buddhism, communism, fascizm. Sorry for being imprecise."

Thanks for the clarification, which does further the discussion. The problem with using the word philosophy is that it has on the one hand a precise definition, and on the other a more casual one. It appears that, given your examples, it is the latter that is being employed to describe a "world-view" (Weltanshauung).
Regards,
John
0 Replies
 
sneer
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Jun, 2009 07:19 am
@richrf,
"worse or better" means "less or more effective" when we talk about ideologies.
if small group of people talk about Platon, it's not really spreading, but rather a dialogue, contemplation or scientific discussion.
gone
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Jun, 2009 03:25 pm
@sneer,
'Chaos' eh...:detective: lol
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
Paradigm shifts - Question by Cyracuz
 
  1. Forums
  2. » how the philosophy is spreading
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/25/2024 at 10:07:29