what is the beggining of philosophy?

The philosophy of days past and dead philosohers make a good target because they do not move, and I think it a safe assumption based upon what we know that reality in gross, has not changed since old timey philosophers plied their trade.... They are not going to change their minds any more than most of those we talk to today, because those who live with us will not, and cannot; and the dead have no minds to change...

If, for no other reason, we may guess that if the dead philosophers were right we would be living in a better world, and in a sense, we are because of philosophy gave reason, and reason gave science and technology... But of morality we see we are the same, no different in degree from savages, or barbarians, no different from slaves and masters, no different from prostitutes and pimps, no different from drug addicts or exstatics... We have inherited the same world without the keys to turn it on, and make it bloom, bring joy and happiness to one and all, and of making mankind moral...

We are invested with a great death wish, that sees us spiritual, that yearns for spiritual completeness, heaven, knowledge, love, understanding when that is indeed, so much of bulox...The philosopher should earn his bread and butter so he has some sense of the struggles humanity must daily face, and have some sympathy... People like Nietzsche who never strained on a wrench, who never pulled his guts out to save his life could afford to invite disaster, and invoke anhilation, while most who have are contented with their daily bread and never cast their eyes skyward and ask why... Their bread is their why, the answer to all their wonderings, and if philosophy does not make their lives easier, but instead make war more certain to destroy their peace, makes poverty more likely to interupt their prosperity, and makes disease more likely to stir them from their rest; then what good is it???

Excuse me for being simple, and for casting the problem in simple terms... We make the choice to be great as individuals rather than being great as a people, and so long as we do that at every step of our existence from family to nation and internationally, we are doomed... We all need to say: Enough!... WE all need to know Enough... WE all need to take only Enough, and be honest about it... A good philosophy is one that translates into a healthy life style, but no one to date has turned a good morality out of philosophy... It is the other way around... People with a good morality do not need much philosophy, and philosophy is most often born out of the general distress of a rotton morality...

Whether they knew it or not, The Greeks were asking why their society did not work, and it did not work because their morality was failing them, and they were failing it... We philosophize today for exactly the same reason as philosophy has always labored, and with the same preconceptions, that good will come out of knowledge, when the fact is that knowledge, and the pursuit of knowledge comes out of our goodness... No rational person seeks evil as a goal, but so much of evil results from reason that we must ask: why??? Why do we accept the results as inevitable when it is not our goal???

Do you seriously claim that reason can lead to evil? I would take that challenge. And do so without keeping you in suspense.
Read my Language and Experience, and then see if you will take the challenge.

Science and technology have not led to anything like a universal good... Those who say knowledge is power follow the line that their knowledge is their advantage... When reason and science lead to Thermonuclear weapons, and that is used to threaten the peace and security of the world, how can you seriously consider other wise??? The potential for good if you justly use reason is not the same as the just use of reason... And if you only think for a moment you would realize that at injustice is always justified; that is, defended by reason, and reasonable... Altruism and humanitarianism, kindness, and love are justified by a spiritual connection, and moral forms that are entirely beyond reason... People do not do good for a reason, and all good acts justify themselves apart from reason... The Germans, for an example, have always been a most reasonable people, and their destruction of the Jews, an even more reasonable people was justified by the reason of the age, and it is not without reason that the Jews set themselves apart from others in culture, and in wealth, or in the honor of contribution to knowledge... What is their worth and what was the worth of either people that they should be mourned???... Were either people on the whole good, and is it reason that made them good when they were good???

I see your confusion. First you claim it is reason, now you lead me around to a use of reason. Do you expect me to chase you?

Let me ask a simple question. When someon murders another person, with a gun, a knife, or a club, does the gun, or knife, or club recieve the punishment?

IN THESE FEW LINES IT CLEARLY SHOWS THE DANGER OF YOUR MORAL FORMS BEYOND REASON...

Your group´s pursuit of no Justification and no Foundation is all aimed to get in where...to nonsense !

Human Sciences well aware of their Historical unproductive collection of fable narratives and thus astounding failure in building a valid explicative Theory for phenomena and their inner processes, all in all systematically surpassed by more hardcore fields of research as Neuroscience´s for instance, evade judgement and extinction by hiding their inconsistency´s with this creepy speech...but it will simply be a matter of time...don´t get your hopes to high !

...finally, let me just say that I am strongly convinced that the big next step already under way for a valid systematic approach on knowledge will be the deeper study of Pattern assembly processes and Regularity´s prevalent geometry´s in Nature as Order out of Entropy and the damn second law...eventually these will become the salvation of Epistemology, in a new more mature way of knowing, since one does n´t really need to go all the way down to get valid knowledge...and it will be not with certainty, but certainly through Reason...what else ? wait and see...

Now I see your point, that reason is an undifferential sort of tool, and if that is so no one can say it is good or evil, positive or negative.... If reason hurts our understanding of self, and result in the injury of humanity then I can clearly judge it, and not because it is not neutral, but that we are anything but, and reason should be used to understand us, and help us to control our own behavior rather than give our behavior free range...

People seek reason because they are not... It is one of the straws we grasp at to keep from drowning in anhilation.... We use reason to reach our goals which are anything but reasonable.... Understanding, and morality are anything but reasonable... People learn, and there reason serves a purpose, but knowledge, our conclusions, are not always arrived at by reason, but reasoning is what we do with knowledge... And intuition, and insight, and even affection as understanding can guide reason as our irrational fears and desires will not... Until we are moral, (and our whole society now works against morality), nothing will come out of our reasoning that can be called good...Reason in the service of madness makes monsters...

"If reason hurts our understanding of self"
I do not believe that anyone who can not spot self referential fallacies are reasonable at to begin with.

Reasoning is what we do with knowledge, and while I know a lot, have read much and have much in the way of life experience, still, when it comes to people and moral forms, and human nature and behavior, I can't say i know enough to put much faith in my reasoning... Reasoning seems to work quite well with the physical world where laws of behavior can be formulated... In the moral world, what people do is seldom so much based upon what they think, as how they feel, and what they think only justifies how they feel, or helps them reach irrational goals... But what do I know... This is only what I and a few others may have seen... We no longer reside in the age of reason...

The human psychology is based on two parts--both needed for survival. What we are, psychologically is determined by the thing we construct with our mind. That thing is the material of emotion bounded by the form of reason. We are what we make of ourselves. Without emotion we are not a thing, without reason we are not a thing.
Like a table, a certan form over a certan material. Both are needed to make some thing of some utility.
Plato constructed many metaphors of the relationship, however, it seems the point was missed.
Every thing is some material difference in some form. Everything.

Logic has two primitive categories. See Language and Experience on the internet archive. Emotion is a given, one must learn how to apply form.

You are stacking infinites... The things we construct with the mind, which reflect our reality are our forms, but they are hardly complete, or even real by themselves, and so these forms are infinite, incomplete....

Then, the mind is itself a construct, a moral form and infinite....

Now; it may be only a difference of expression, like looking at a mirror and saying that is me, but to say everything is some material difference in some form is not how I would express it... I would say every form is an expression of the difference between different classes of objects, and thing has that meaning, of Res, from which we have our word re-s-ality..

To say Emotion is a given, is like saying life is a given, and since each is an infinite, who can argue the point; but what meaning has the statement???... LIfe, like emotion may be a predicate to all that follows, but life, and emotion is exactly that which all our forms must prove real... None of our forms are about proving reality real, for who would seriously argue otherwise??? Our forms are about realizing ourselves, and since we relate through our forms they must also be about recognition, that is, to give us the sense of reality as well as the reality of life itself...

I apolize, Fido, you really are too far away from being able to make a rational statement to continue with. I have posted enough material on the internet archive, you will have to spend a long time with it before you even suspect the errors in your constructions.

Spare me oh wise one... Thank you for your presence...Too bad it is all wrapper and no toy...

It is no toy for someone too stubborn and arrogant to go to where the toys have been freely posted.
Your like a spoiled child.

Me like a spoiled child, alright... I too used to intelligent people who can make and take a point...

Puctuate it and you will see it.
My opinion would be; to know, that you could be wrong.
to know, means to perceive. One does not percieve an opinion, or in the future tense. i.e. could be.
Second, My opinion is present tense, would be is future.

Too many tense errors.
My opinion is, you are wrong. you may be wrong.

Punctuation is often lax in English, In language, ellipses are frequent, partly because we constantly correct our words, and often leave the correction to the listener. We often speak badly, but still get the point.

Hi NoOne phil; I do not know much of what you speak of but I do enjoy learning new things. before I learn new things I try to be sure that the info I am learning has credibility to it. Im not saying that yours does not, "what I am saying is that I question all the work that I study.

Even some of the best science was thought to be false by some of the great philosophers of the past and I am sure that trend will continue to repeat it self.

Can you amagine how copernicus and galileo must have thought about their peers? It must have been very hard to get a good peer review. Do you have other peers that agree with your work? do you have any good review comments about your work? Do you have others that have studied your work and say that your work is correct.

The reason I ask is because I do not want to work my brain to death before I get some understanding of what you think and what others think of your work.
I do believe that once you are able to show that others have reviewed your work and found it to be credible then others will follow as well.

You seem to think that others can decide for you, like voting.

No one can understand for you. Nor does truth, which is independent of gods and man, need even a single vote to justify it.

One does not seek understanding for the sake of others, but for the self.

I only seek one companion. That would be enough for me.

I do find truth in what you say and I hope that you can understand my caution about not just believing in anyones knowledge of what they think is truth.

A wise man once made a very important distinction.
We testify to what we have seen, and speak of what we have known.

Knowledge is not testimony. Knowledge is comprised of two words.
Know: which means to perceive,
and Ledger: book.
Book of perceptions or memory.
Knowledge is different then from wisdom, for wisdom is the ability to correctly manipulate one's knowledge.

Truth is subjective and only relevant from the observers point of view.

One man's truth is another man's lie.
Prove me a truth and I will prove otherwise.

Mark...