34
   

Are Philosophers lost in the clouds?

 
 
mark noble
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Aug, 2010 08:55 pm
@Fido,
Hi Fido!

Sorry to read about your ill-health. I don't want you to be sick, you're a nice guy.

I have a reality I love to bits. I wouldn't change a single thing about it. I even welcome change.

Have a splendid evening Fido!
Mark...
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Aug, 2010 06:57 am
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

Fido, Your choice to smoke is a subjective one; nobody forced you to start smoking. Even with the bad health consequences of smoking, you still choose to smoke.

Your qualifiers of reality and how we perceive our life belongs on the laffer curve.

Who are you talking to??? I don't smoke... I have Asthma and smoke is one of my triggers... Upstairs don't bother me, but it still clogs up my lungs so I don;t smoke... I'm not fast by any means... You need a calender to clock me; but I like to run... I am in great shape otherwise. Strong...
0 Replies
 
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Aug, 2010 07:20 am
@guigus,
guigus wrote:

Fido wrote:

cicerone imposter wrote:

Ah, but most humans react to what we see and perceive it to be. Out of the millions who visit the Gaza pyramids every year, how many do you think call it a triangle as its form?

We do not attempt to analyze its perfection; we all understand what it means when they tell us that the pyramids looks like a triangle. It's in the common understanding of language that is important; not how "perfect" it is.

The concept of a triangle could not be more simple or perfect, and yet in reality there is no such perfection found or created with the concept... What people think of the matter has nothing to do with the facts, which I do not know and do not pretend to know, but from insight say that the facts are that of reality falling short of concept in one sense and altogether surpassing concept in every other... Don't you believe as I, that to be a philosopher you must be willing to look beyond what others see??? The moment we generalize and classify any phenomena we are telling a great fib which is left for others to disprove...

There is no difference in kind of saying there is such a thing as a triangle or saying there is such a thing as a cat... Of course, there is such a thing as a concept of a cat, just as there is a concept of a triangle, and yet in both cases the concept defines only itself and not the reality... What is the essential element of a Cat??? It is its life, and yet life is a moral form and no true concept, so while we may conceive of a cat it is never a true cat, or rather, the concept is never true to the cat... And the concept of the triangle is never true to the reality, so it cannot define the reality and so, must only define itself...


Nothing has to be a perfect triangle to be triangular. And no triangle can exist without triangular objects. Neither the concept exists without referring to an object to which it applies nor an object to which it applies can exist without any concept referring to it. You usually favor this last aspect, hence your bias.

Technically, a triangle in reality would have to be perfect because the concept is of perfection; but your statement reveals to what extent even physical concepts are moral forms, because whether or not an imperfect example of a triangle is a triangle becomes a matter of agreement, and accord requires a relationship... If I want to be a dick and say I'm not going to buy slop when it comes to triangles then you can do nothing since, again, the definition of a triangle is simple... That one is one is simple too, but no where can real equality between units be demonstrated, so the abstraction is perfect as reality is not... And we accept that because one as one is usually close enough; but when we get into purely moral forms, and confuse equity with justice because of an understanding that one person is the same as any other person, then we have taken an error from our physical experience of the world and applied it to our moral and social forms, as a mistake and misunderstanding ...

Personally, I don't care what you call a triangle in the real world... I do recognize in your sloppy sort of thinking a real danger... Many people confuse their reality with their forms... Consider that every form is an aid and necessity of thought, but that no form is a substitute for thought...Measure your reality against your forms, and your forms against your reality...Consider, for example, how absolutely useless your concept of a triangle would be if it admitted every imperfect rendering as valid... Before long, a circle would be a triangle.
0 Replies
 
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Aug, 2010 07:23 am
@guigus,
guigus wrote:

Fido wrote:

guigus wrote:

Fido wrote:
Pyramids are a five sided object with a square base and triangular sides, but squarish does not make square, and triangular does not make a triangle...


Conversely, without triangles nothing would be triangular, and without squares nothing would be squared.

In a sense, you are correct since without our concepts everything would be what it is, and yet, without concepts we would not be ourselves either... Humanity is its own creation...It does not matter what we started out as because as we have conceived, so we have become...


Take care: we do not create ourselves just as we like. Concepts need objective reality as much as objective reality needs concepts.


I am certain it is a predicate of sorts, that objective reality exists with or without concepts.
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Aug, 2010 07:38 am
@guigus,
guigus wrote:

Fido wrote:

guigus wrote:

Fido wrote:
Do not forget that triangles do not exist in reality, and that for any given three points, like mountain peaks or stars that we provide the lines and angles, even the presumption of a point... It does not matter how much reason tries to polish reality to perfection because reality is always what it is, and never perfect...


The problem is that you consider as perfect a two-dimensional figure made of lines that are in turn made of points with no dimensions whatsoever, while considering as imperfect an object missing these properties, which only reveals a bias of yours (I would say a definitely idealistic one).

I have no bias... I prefer any imperfect reality with me in it to a perfect reality without me in it... And there my bias ends... You know, I am uneducated... I have read too much and suffered too much lonely thought... But, I really think there is more than one old timey philosopher who agrees with me, and with perhaps a better and more reasoned argument for it... So without wishing to defer to them completely since I like to think for myself because thinking with the knowledge others gave me makes it impossible to think for myself and yet that is the particular dead horse I like to try to flog, there fore I suggest you read more too...


You have just confirmed your bias: asserting you prefer an imperfect reality with you to a perfect one without you is just reinforcing the very concept of "perfection" that enslaves your thinking. Abstract forms are not perfection, they are just abstract, that's all. Do you really like to think? Then think.


Did I say I like to think... I am driven to thought by a deep anxiety and pain... If it were safe to do so I would live in my emotions... In any event, I disagree... Forms are perfection... The abstract dog never has mange or craps on the floor, or bites the hand which feeds it... It never is born missing a leg, and is always man's best friend... In Math, One is always one, and in reality we know better, and we all accept that our reality does not measure up to our forms, and so our lives are not cast in constant termoil we agree that reality is the equal of our forms when it is only an approximation of the form....When we abstract, we take the essence of every object into the form...Every object in reality has its own essence which is essential to all the objects of any class, but differs from the general in the specifics... The general, the abstraction, accounts for all variations without enumerating them.
0 Replies
 
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Aug, 2010 07:53 am
@mark noble,
mark noble wrote:

Hi Fido!

Sorry to read about your ill-health. I don't want you to be sick, you're a nice guy.

I have a reality I love to bits. I wouldn't change a single thing about it. I even welcome change.

Have a splendid evening Fido!
Mark...


My body is the picture of health compared to my mind... That is a swamp of discontent...

I should tell you about this old Indian woman up North, my neighbor, who died this spring at a very ripe old age... About ten years ago her doctor told her he would like to give her something for her mind because he thought she might be slipping... She said: Don't worry about my head, Doctor... Just keep my body alive...I never cared much for her when I was young... I stole thousands of apples out of her trees... But she was one hell of a gardener, and as I picked up the habit I found I had more in common with her than many in my own family. .. Talk about your hard workers...She worked that garden until she was frail, toothless, and finally blind, and then her daughters sat her in the sun while they worked the garden...
mark noble
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Aug, 2010 06:16 pm
@Fido,
Hi Fido!

Nice story. Do you, by 'indian', mean american (native) or from India?

Mark...
guigus
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Aug, 2010 01:03 am
@Fido,
Fido wrote:

guigus wrote:

Fido wrote:

guigus wrote:

Fido wrote:
Pyramids are a five sided object with a square base and triangular sides, but squarish does not make square, and triangular does not make a triangle...


Conversely, without triangles nothing would be triangular, and without squares nothing would be squared.

In a sense, you are correct since without our concepts everything would be what it is, and yet, without concepts we would not be ourselves either... Humanity is its own creation...It does not matter what we started out as because as we have conceived, so we have become...


Take care: we do not create ourselves just as we like. Concepts need objective reality as much as objective reality needs concepts.


I am certain it is a predicate of sorts, that objective reality exists with or without concepts.


And what about all that talk on moral forms?
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Aug, 2010 09:31 am
@mark noble,
mark noble wrote:

Hi Fido!

Nice story. Do you, by 'indian', mean american (native) or from India?

Mark...

By Indian I would mean specifically Ojibway, one of the roasters, a brave and feirce people, and a great nation, one of the Algonkin speaking Native Americans nations.
0 Replies
 
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Aug, 2010 10:20 am
@guigus,
guigus wrote:

Fido wrote:

guigus wrote:

Fido wrote:

guigus wrote:

Fido wrote:
Pyramids are a five sided object with a square base and triangular sides, but squarish does not make square, and triangular does not make a triangle...


Conversely, without triangles nothing would be triangular, and without squares nothing would be squared.

In a sense, you are correct since without our concepts everything would be what it is, and yet, without concepts we would not be ourselves either... Humanity is its own creation...It does not matter what we started out as because as we have conceived, so we have become...


Take care: we do not create ourselves just as we like. Concepts need objective reality as much as objective reality needs concepts.


I am certain it is a predicate of sorts, that objective reality exists with or without concepts.


And what about all that talk on moral forms?

Of forms (concepts, ideas )by which understand our world, some are physical and some moral, and this is an old method of classification as one looks at the health of an army by its physic, or phyisical well being, or its morale, or spiritual well being... What is purely moral is spiritual, as in forms like freedom, or justice which have no physical properties and which are no less found necessary... Just so with physical forms... There is no common identity without common consent, and so, it is the moral relationship which makes all physical classification possible... It is just an observation, and one I can suggest, and in no sense prove... It is like saying physical forms have being and meaning, and moral forms only have meaning... With physical forms, we do not know all about any given subject, but capture the meaning of them as essence, a spiritual quality... It is this capture of the physical world spiritually which allows, or goes along with mankinds spiritual conception of self, self consciousness, self awareness...

It is the rationalism, and reductionism of mankind, the thinking of things as individual things in themselves which has led to great advances in science, but also great wars, genocides, mass slaughters of civilians, and the great waste and exploitation of the environment... A native having a spiritual sense would never have considered the chain of events that led to the gulf oil disaster.... We can only allow such crimes because we think of all of nature as so many objects and ourselves too, as so many objects... Objectification of people allows for every sort of crime to be commited aganst them.. It is the ultimate justification, and it is immoral... Morality is the only task left to philosophy... We understand enough to get by when we understand enough to destroy the environment and ourselves... It is the moral sense we lack, the ability to see our lives through our forms of relationship, to see the forms through the relationship, and the relationship through the form which is keeping us from spiritual fulfilment... We know how to think... We are rational enough, but we have let immoral reason destroy the basis of morality in our lives...

Look at those who do the best in America -and it is those with working moral societes, who bring their morality to America to suffer the acid bath of A-culturalization....Law and religion have worked without pity on the natural forms of morality until even the family is in danger... Parents do not have authority, but influence; and they must settle for that.. Law is reasonable, as a form until is is bent to serve the rich alone; but if it does not provide justice it will never build a nation no matter how many natives are fed to it...And we cannot fix it, and we cannot get beyond it because we have no formal consciousness, because we see only the form as a thing, an object and not as something built by people out of moral forms for a moral purpose... We see the government and the law as things, and objects in themselves; which means we see them as real, when they are not; but only a reality built out of a moral form...Look at how government surrounds itself with impediments, and takes on the archetecture of bygone civilizations... It is to look real...But it has no more reality than the realtionship it was designed to feed and nurture, which is now gangrenous...

When government destroys the morality, the moral, spiritual, sense of the people, it destroys the ability of the people to demand change... An immoral people cannot be free, and a free people must be moral... It is self control grown out of a spritual sense of self that makes self government possible... We have never had true self government in this country, and freedom here has always been licence... As a social form built out of a moral form: Virtue; it has failed because the moral understanding behind it was flawed, and moral understandings and all understanding are, and will always be: FLAWED.

Yet, Clearly, Jefferson shows in the Declaration of Independence that he had a sense of forms, and also a sense of the fact, that all human progress requires an change of forms... His morality was metphysical; thinking all men Created.. How shall we move on when we know all mankind and all life comes from a common root??? I think a formal understanding is the beginning of moral understanding, that in learning how to think we will know what to think, and how to reach a moral understaning of our reality so that we do not cut our environmental branch off from under us... The spiritual sense of humanity has a purely practical purpose as philosophy itself does...
guigus
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Aug, 2010 09:48 pm
@Fido,
Fido wrote:

guigus wrote:

Fido wrote:

guigus wrote:

Fido wrote:

guigus wrote:

Fido wrote:
Pyramids are a five sided object with a square base and triangular sides, but squarish does not make square, and triangular does not make a triangle...


Conversely, without triangles nothing would be triangular, and without squares nothing would be squared.

In a sense, you are correct since without our concepts everything would be what it is, and yet, without concepts we would not be ourselves either... Humanity is its own creation...It does not matter what we started out as because as we have conceived, so we have become...


Take care: we do not create ourselves just as we like. Concepts need objective reality as much as objective reality needs concepts.


I am certain it is a predicate of sorts, that objective reality exists with or without concepts.


And what about all that talk on moral forms?
There is no common identity without common consent, and so, it is the moral relationship which makes all physical classification possible...


And it is physical reality that makes moral relationships possible...
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Aug, 2010 08:58 am
@guigus,
guigus wrote:

Fido wrote:

guigus wrote:

Fido wrote:

guigus wrote:

Fido wrote:

guigus wrote:

Fido wrote:
Pyramids are a five sided object with a square base and triangular sides, but squarish does not make square, and triangular does not make a triangle...


Conversely, without triangles nothing would be triangular, and without squares nothing would be squared.

In a sense, you are correct since without our concepts everything would be what it is, and yet, without concepts we would not be ourselves either... Humanity is its own creation...It does not matter what we started out as because as we have conceived, so we have become...


Take care: we do not create ourselves just as we like. Concepts need objective reality as much as objective reality needs concepts.


I am certain it is a predicate of sorts, that objective reality exists with or without concepts.


And what about all that talk on moral forms?
There is no common identity without common consent, and so, it is the moral relationship which makes all physical classification possible...


And it is physical reality that makes moral relationships possible...

No doubt about it... Even though we conceive of all reality spiritually, even our own being, the ultimate purpose is the understanding and manipulation of physical reality to support our lives, and physical being...It does not matter that forms are perfect and reality is not... It does not matter that forms are analogy and reality is, Reality... So long as we understand enough through our forms we should be able to survive, but we cannot understand ourselves and how our minds work or anything significant about human psychology without an understanding of forms, and it is because our moral understanding beomes our social forms, and truth as we see it is a facet of every person's life...So it is a serious game, and infinite game; and one for which no booby prize awaits the winner...
guigus
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Aug, 2010 09:59 pm
@Fido,
Fido wrote:
No doubt about it... Even though we conceive of all reality spiritually, even our own being, the ultimate purpose is the understanding and manipulation of physical reality to support our lives, and physical being...It does not matter that forms are perfect and reality is not... It does not matter that forms are analogy and reality is, Reality... So long as we understand enough through our forms we should be able to survive, but we cannot understand ourselves and how our minds work or anything significant about human psychology without an understanding of forms, and it is because our moral understanding beomes our social forms, and truth as we see it is a facet of every person's life...So it is a serious game, and infinite game; and one for which no booby prize awaits the winner...


Ideal forms are not perfect: perfection means completeness, and ideal forms are incomplete without reality, the same way reality becomes incomplete without ideal forms.

Regarding their being "analogy," here is what you are doing: a triangle is not an analogy - what could it be an analogy of? On the contrary, reality could be an analogy of a triangle, an "imperfect shadow" of it (Plato). You are taking reality to be the "moral forms" you tireless refer to, so it becomes a shadow of a more perfect reality - an ideal one - a result you then regret. But it was you to make reality a shadow of ideal, "perfect" forms in the first place. Thus blame yourself.
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Aug, 2010 02:51 am
@guigus,
guigus wrote:

Fido wrote:
No doubt about it... Even though we conceive of all reality spiritually, even our own being, the ultimate purpose is the understanding and manipulation of physical reality to support our lives, and physical being...It does not matter that forms are perfect and reality is not... It does not matter that forms are analogy and reality is, Reality... So long as we understand enough through our forms we should be able to survive, but we cannot understand ourselves and how our minds work or anything significant about human psychology without an understanding of forms, and it is because our moral understanding beomes our social forms, and truth as we see it is a facet of every person's life...So it is a serious game, and infinite game; and one for which no booby prize awaits the winner...


Ideal forms are not perfect: perfection means completeness, and ideal forms are incomplete without reality, the same way reality becomes incomplete without ideal forms.

Regarding their being "analogy," here is what you are doing: a triangle is not an analogy - what could it be an analogy of? On the contrary, reality could be an analogy of a triangle, an "imperfect shadow" of it (Plato). You are taking reality to be the "moral forms" you tireless refer to, so it becomes a shadow of a more perfect reality - an ideal one - a result you then regret. But it was you to make reality a shadow of ideal, "perfect" forms in the first place. Thus blame yourself.

If we take a step away from triangles to a form more complex, then consider that if look at a cat we cannot conceive of the cat in any exacting detail... We know little of nature in specific or general, and this is true of cats as well so that our concept of Cat, is only an analogy of cat... Yet within every concept is the notion of perfection so that the idea is the perfect... Even the concept of imperfection is perfect imperfection, even when it is incomplete, and an infinite...We think with our forms, and move them in our metaphorical minds like chess pieces... What good would it serve to think our forms imperfect when if they were they could not represent a conserved identity???..

Look at number for an example... One in reality is never like another, but in concept one is one, and not only that, but all numbers are in perfect ratio to one, when, if no ones are the actual equal of each other, this would be impossible... Two facts underpin our acceptence of number as perfect concept... One is that it is a moral form we all accept as having a virtue, goodness and truth as its aim, and because of utility, in that it usually works because where one is less than one, another one is more than one so the average is one no mater how many ones are considered...

So think about your words, that reality is incomplete without forms... I think we must presume that reality is what it is, and so, complete in that sense without concept or without people to conceive... The notion of completness itself when applied to reality by us is foolish, since reality is an infinite, and we have no way to verify what we apply as a concept to it... It is what it is, and what it is not....
IRFRANK
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Aug, 2010 11:51 am
All this is very interesting.

I might ask, what else is worth studying other than Philosophy? Once we are beyond the safety, shelter, and food stage, what could be more important? Are philosophy and religion the same discussion? Is philosophy the discussion or search for the answer to "How can one be happy?"

To say that philosophers have their heads in the clouds is an irrelevant and irreverent statement. So what? Is the other choice not one of roaming around and struggling for survival without any overall improvement?

If there is no real need for philosophy and/or religion, then why so many churches? Is there not a very real need in man for meaning and understanding?

Would we not just be a highly intelligent animal without it? Maybe we are just that.

Also I would say that the term philosophy is too broad to expect any accurate answer. Which branch: ethics, logic, .....
tsarstepan
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Aug, 2010 11:58 am
@IRFRANK,
IRFRANK wrote:

All this is very interesting.

Some beg to differ.

IRFRANK wrote:

I might ask, what else is worth studying other than Philosophy? Once we are beyond the safety, shelter, and food stage, what could be more important? understanding?

I'm totally scoffing at your cultural dismissal of everything else that exists in the known universe.

What could be more important?
The visual arts (painting, movies, photography, sculpture, etc...), literature (science fiction, poetry, memoirs, short stories, personal essays, etc...), history, current events, politics, the sciences (biology, astronomy, etc...). I could go on and on and philosophy hasn't been mentioned for at least the first 100 pages of this list.
mark noble
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Aug, 2010 12:22 pm
@IRFRANK,
Hi Irfrank!

Nice post!

Philosophy is a religion to some (not I).

Kind regards!
Mark
0 Replies
 
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Aug, 2010 01:25 pm
@tsarstepan,
Does not philosophy speak of all of what you have listed. Could we have any of what you have listed without philosophy? Is your list your philosophical point of view?
guigus
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Aug, 2010 01:36 pm
@Fido,
Fido wrote:
If we take a step away from triangles to a form more complex, then consider that if look at a cat we cannot conceive of the cat in any exacting detail...


So now the cat is a "form"? Can you make a cat from triangles? Perhaps you are talking about a computer model of a cat. But if you can make a detailed model of a cat with a computer, why can't you "conceive of the cat in any exacting detail"? Isn't that precisely what you had to do to build that model in the first place?
0 Replies
 
guigus
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Aug, 2010 01:43 pm
@Fido,
Fido wrote:
Look at number for an example...


Are you talking about printed numbers?

Fido wrote:
One in reality is never like another, [...]


Especially when the printer is broken.

Fido wrote:
[...] but in concept one is one, and not only that, [...]


Don't answer yet, you can win a washer!

Fido wrote:
[...] but all numbers are in perfect ratio to one, [...]


What does that mean?

Fido wrote:
when, if no ones are the actual equal of each other, this would be impossible...


What does that mean?

Fido wrote:
Two facts underpin our acceptence of number as perfect concept...


Whatever those facts are, this "perfection" thing is really becoming a problem to you.

Fido wrote:
One is that it is a moral form we all accept as having a virtue, goodness and truth as its aim, and because of utility, in that it usually works because where one is less than one, another one is more than one so the average is one no mater how many ones are considered...


Mathematical perfection!
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
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/18/2024 at 10:05:42