what is the beggining of philosophy?

@Dasein,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vg4AjD1fUaw

0 Replies

@reasoning logic,

All life forms began from a lowly inorganic matter with the right kind of environment that provides the necessary nutrients for it to develop into what we call life. Scientists have been looking into how life began, but they're still not sure of the how.

ID depends on this unknown.

2 Replies

@Dasein,

Humans migrated to all parts of this planet that all started in Africa. I will conclude that homo sapiens have "territory" ingrained in our genes which began about 160,000 years ago.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rut3voCYbJ4

1 Reply

@reasoning logic,

rl, Sorry, but my sound isn't working. I still have to figure out what went wrong, but I just returned yesterday from two weeks away from home. Can you summarize for me?

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

I am sorry but I would do a very poor job of summerizing but it is science that backs up what you say. This is a video that shows how the amino acids can be created which are needed to make protiens.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4wvXSrp9CZc

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

More specifically it started in the Olduvai Gorge in what is now called Tanzania.

I object to you defending it as an excuse. Humanity is a possibility, it's not a right. Monkeydom doesn't have any possibility. So, what you're telling me is that humanity and monkeydom are the same thing?

1 Reply

@Dasein,

No ****! I have visited Olduvai Gorge and the small museum there, and have known about Mary Leakey for about ten years. However, since then, there have been other discoveries that are older.

Quote:

"Ardi,' Oldest Human Ancestor, Unveiled
"Ardi" dates to 4.4. million years and may be the oldest human ancestor ever found.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

I'll bet if you look hard enough you will find another way to inform others of what you know instead of being a self-righteous jerk. I found what you said about Ardi very interesting and I did some research, however I don't appreciate having "No ****!" thrown in my face.

1 Reply

@Dasein,

No ****!

It started with this:

Quote:

@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

Quote:

Humans create war machines that kills thousands of people; it's a natural consequence of being "human."

You wrote:

Quote:
War is not a consequence of being "human". War is about the acquisition or preservation of territory, whether mental, physical, economical, spiritual, etc. All wars are about resources and the ones who fund the wars are the ones who end up with the resources.

Identifying your 'self' with some territory (wife, kids, job, country, religion, or da Bears!) requires you to defend that territory or acquire more territory, etc. It leaves you open to manipulation and domination.

I don't know that identifying your 'self' with some territory is behavior that is in your best interest.

To which I responded with:

Quote:

It's the same thing. You fail to understand the subject called homo sapiens. Many animals are also territorial, but they don't have the capacity to create a-bombs.

Those are facts you seem to love to argue with. Go to hell!
Please put me on Ignore.

2 Replies

@Fido,

north wrote:

reasoning logic wrote:

My opinion would be to know that you could be wrong. What is your opinion?

These words just do not seem to go to gather very well do they? [ know] that you could be [wrong]

the want to get to the truth

the want to be wise

Truth is an illusion [/quote]

frozen water is not an illusion

Quote:

and wisdom is vanity...

wisdom is beyond vanity

wisdom is discovery and therefore the want to understand , the discovery

to be practable as well

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

The most intelligent thing you've said so far is "Please put me on ignore".

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

"Facts" are unquestionable agreements you have made with the 'they' and the world to allow them to define your Be-ing.

"Facts" are the end of thinking.

"Facts" are for cowards who won't step out from behind their "facts" and invent themselves.

What YOU fail to realize is that there are no facts, there are only people like you puffing up their chest, looking for "facts" to defend. No wonder you're so angry. I wouldn't like to be locked up behind your "facts" with no other possibility either.

What's incredibly interesting is that you will only read this as an attack on your "facts" instead of questioning your 'facts' and seeing a possibility for you. As they say "Monkey see, monkey do".

1 Reply

@Dasein,

No, facts are based on logic, common sense, and evidence.

You can't attack any facts; as explained above.

2 Replies

My answer would be ?????? To question things is the beggining of philosophy; normally one of the following four things will follow a question. Silence, an answer, another question, or a change of topic.

0 Replies

"When you look out of your eyes at nature happening out there, you're looking at you. That's the real you, the you that goes on of itself......." - Alan Watts.

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

What you don't seem to notice is that YOU agree with the facts. You have decided to construct you around somebody else's facts and defend your cowardice/decision instead of stepping out and uncovering your 'self' by questioning/questing.

The world was flat before somebody questioned it.

I wish there was a way in this forum for you to "ignore" you. Since there isn't I'll acquiesce and grant your wish of ignoring you.

2 Replies

@Dasein,

Well what are the facts? Why is it that we say something is a 'fact'. Better still, what is the logic or semantics behind 'facts'?

I doubt that the world was flat before somebody questioned it. Is the world spherical now because we say it is spherical?

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

No, facts are based on logic, common sense, and evidence.

You can't attack any facts; as explained above.

Before Galileo, Aristotle was unquestionable, and after Galileo, Aristotle was questionable even if many chose not to do so.... A little healthy doubt is good for society and good for philosophy... Our reliance on fact is often a reliance upon authority, and is no measure of what we really know...
And I would doubt the relationship you claim for logic and fact... Logic grows out of what is known, but it only suggests a possible reality for which evidence must still be found... We must act on the logical to prove it actual.... All that is logically possible is not real, and much that is real is not directly logical in its behavior otherwise we might say we understand all that is... Do you see what I mean... When we understand a thing it is because we understand the logic behind its behavior... We know for example that steam is steam because it has more energy than water, and water has more energy than ice...

1 Reply

@Fido,

Fido wrote:

Before Galileo, Aristotle was unquestionable, and after Galileo, Aristotle was questionable even if many chose not to do so.... A little healthy doubt is good for society and good for philosophy... Our reliance on fact is often a reliance upon authority, and is no measure of what we really know...
And I would doubt the relationship you claim for logic and fact... Logic grows out of what is known, but it only suggests a possible reality for which evidence must still be found... We must act on the logical to prove it actual.... All that is logically possible is not real, and much that is real is not directly logical in its behavior otherwise we might say we understand all that is... Do you see what I mean... When we understand a thing it is because we understand the logic behind its behavior... We know for example that steam is steam because it has more energy than water, and water has more energy than ice...

Brilliantly said!

Facts are a human construct. A combination of characteristics. They are man's invention to create certainty where there is no certainty. (BTW-characteristics are a human construct too).

Logic is also a human construct and the result of proving an assertion. Proof provided must follow the agreed upon construct of logic. Logic is man's attempt at creating predictability (control).

Facts and logic are a re-presentation of the phenomenon of Be-ing/living. Facts and logic are but a semblance of the phenomenon being represented. They have nothing to do with the phenomenon called Be-ing/living.

Life as we re-present is a house of cards. We spend a lifetime arguing for our opinions about facts and logic and never do we take the time to notice that our opinions, facts, and logic have nothing to do with Be-ing/living. We just go on defending them as if they are true. We are all pompous asses!

1 Reply

what is the beggining of philosophy?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know