26
   

what is the beggining of philosophy?

 
 
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2010 01:11 pm
@Fido,
Yes it does seem that way, is not that what philo means?
A Quote from philo I found interesting even though it may not pertain to the subject matter. { not that I agree with all of it but not bad from someone 2,000 + years ago]


Ethics The soul is first aroused by the stimuli of sensual pleasures; it begins to turn toward them, and then becomes more and more involved. It becomes devoted to the body, and begins to lead an intolerable life (βίος ἄβίωτος). It is inflamed and excited by irrational impulses. Its condition is restless and painful. The sensibility endures, according to Gen. iii.16, great pain. A continual inner void produces a lasting desire which is never satisfied. All the higher aspirations a stilled. The end is complete moral turpitude, the annihilation of all sense of duty, the corruption of the entire soul: not a particle of the soul that might heal the rest remains whole.

The worst consequence of this moral death is, according to Philo, absolute ignorance and the loss of the power of judgment. Sensual things are placed above spiritual; and wealth is regarded as the highest good. Too great a value especially is placed upon the human nous; and things are wrongly judged. Man in his folly even opposes God, and thinks to scale heaven and subjugate the entire earth. In the field of politics, for example, he attempts to rise from the position of leader of the people to that of ruler (Philo cites Joseph as a type of this kind). Sensual man generally employs his intellectual powers for sophistry, perverting words and destroying truth.

The biblical patriarch Abraham is seen by Philo as the symbol of man leaving sensuality to turn to reason[13]. Philo holds that there are three methods whereby one can rise toward the divine: through teaching, through practise (ἄσκησις), and through natural goodness (ὁσιότης).

kennethamy
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2010 01:51 pm
@reasoning logic,
reasoning logic wrote:

Yes it does seem that way, is not that what philo means?
A Quote from philo I found interesting even though it may not pertain to the subject matter. { not that I agree with all of it but not bad from someone 2,000 + years ago]


Ethics The soul is first aroused by the stimuli of sensual pleasures; it begins to turn toward them, and then becomes more and more involved. It becomes devoted to the body, and begins to lead an intolerable life (βίος ἄβίωτος). It is inflamed and excited by irrational impulses. Its condition is restless and painful. The sensibility endures, according to Gen. iii.16, great pain. A continual inner void produces a lasting desire which is never satisfied. All the higher aspirations a stilled. The end is complete moral turpitude, the annihilation of all sense of duty, the corruption of the entire soul: not a particle of the soul that might heal the rest remains whole.

The worst consequence of this moral death is, according to Philo, absolute ignorance and the loss of the power of judgment. Sensual things are placed above spiritual; and wealth is regarded as the highest good. Too great a value especially is placed upon the human nous; and things are wrongly judged. Man in his folly even opposes God, and thinks to scale heaven and subjugate the entire earth. In the field of politics, for example, he attempts to rise from the position of leader of the people to that of ruler (Philo cites Joseph as a type of this kind). Sensual man generally employs his intellectual powers for sophistry, perverting words and destroying truth.

The biblical patriarch Abraham is seen by Philo as the symbol of man leaving sensuality to turn to reason[13]. Philo holds that there are three methods whereby one can rise toward the divine: through teaching, through practise (ἄσκησις), and through natural goodness (ὁσιότης).




A Quote from philo I found interesting even though it may not pertain to the subject matter.

Why then would you put it on the thread?
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2010 01:59 pm
@kennethamy,
To get you thinking philosophically! How does it feel to think of other issues other than english and spelling? Now I will need to find away to get you interested in other things other than correcting people's mistakes.
Seems that I have got you focused on subject matter now so I may be getting closer
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2010 02:06 pm
@kennethamy,
Possibly it is in the service of avoiding tunnel vision.

Quote:
The soul is first aroused by the stimuli of sensual pleasures;


I think that's an important idea in philosophy. My first stirrings of a philosophic cast of mind arose lying in bed until lunch time in a semi-daze. As they developed they became associated with lying down generally.

I think that is how to become a philosopher. Artists usually picture philosophers in a relaxed and meditative state. One can never get any philosophy out of people who are up at the crack of dawn and who run around all day like a blue-arsed fly.
0 Replies
 
mark noble
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2010 02:14 pm
@reasoning logic,
Hi RL!

I must also put forward the causal implications of the beginning of philosophy.

The beginning of something must commence with the end of something (you can only be going up, when you have ceased going down, otherwise you are motionless, instead of moving).

Ergo, philosophy commences when ...........? ends.
I put this to each of you: What was there before philosophy, that is here no more?

Mark...
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2010 02:18 pm
@mark noble,
Instinct to survive.
mark noble
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2010 02:54 pm
@cicerone imposter,
At What point in the chain of human evolution do you believe this took place?

And at what point in a person's life does it take place, if at all?

Mark...
Arjuna
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2010 03:13 pm
@mark noble,
mark noble wrote:

Ergo, philosophy commences when ...........? ends.
I put this to each of you: What was there before philosophy, that is here no more?

Dang it mark... you're insightful. Philosophy commences when...

I don't know what you call it. It's like when the temperature drops and water starts condensing out into drops. Philosophy precipitates and falls out... of something cloudy. Very Happy
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2010 03:17 pm
@mark noble,
It can't be the instinct to survive. That's common to all life. Before philosophy there would have been a constant and unremmiting expression of the instinct. No time to think of irrelevancies. It must be having time to relax. A capacity of elites and especially those in a slave economy.

It likely begins with having that time and it being a pleasure. Being comfortable expressing aggression maybe.

0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2010 03:21 pm
@mark noble,
It's all a matter of degree, but in most developed countries today, they're not struggling for food and shelter, so survival is not their primary concern. There are still the majority on this planet who struggle to feed themselves and to find drinking water.

However, with the industrial revolution where many food stuffs are mass produced, and other creature comforts are available, humans are no longer at the stage we were at 10,000 years ago. I think it's been a very slow process until about 5,000 years ago, but the last two centuries were the most progressive period for humans.

spendius
 
  0  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2010 03:25 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Gee ci. That's stupendous!! OOOO'd a thowt it?
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2010 03:47 pm
@mark noble,
Dogma
0 Replies
 
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2010 05:00 pm
@kennethamy,
kennethamy wrote:

Fido wrote:

kennethamy wrote:

cicerone imposter wrote:

The inclusion of emotion into philosophy only complicates the subject.


Have you an example of including emotion into philosophy. I don't know what you mean by that.

As if Love were not essential to the pursuit....


But how would it follow from that, that emotion was included in philosophizing? How about an example?

It is its Raisen de Etre, love of knowledge that is love of the good which is good for all of humanity so that philosophy is not only about knowledge, but is itself philanthropy, love of people... Is it not obvious??? Look at how many have given their lives for it in one fashion or another... Do you think that even their humiliation, their devotion in the literal sense was without reward???
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2010 05:26 pm
@spendius,
spendi, You must be able to first understand the question, then relate it to the answer. If the answer is confusing for you, you can always ask for clarification than always being an ass with nonsensical comments.
kennethamy
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2010 06:31 pm
@Fido,
Fido wrote:

kennethamy wrote:

Fido wrote:

kennethamy wrote:

cicerone imposter wrote:

The inclusion of emotion into philosophy only complicates the subject.


Have you an example of including emotion into philosophy. I don't know what you mean by that.

As if Love were not essential to the pursuit....


But how would it follow from that, that emotion was included in philosophizing? How about an example?

It is its Raisen de Etre, love of knowledge that is love of the good which is good for all of humanity so that philosophy is not only about knowledge, but is itself philanthropy, love of people... Is it not obvious??? Look at how many have given their lives for it in one fashion or another... Do you think that even their humiliation, their devotion in the literal sense was without reward???


How is that an example of emotion included in philosophizing?
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2010 06:34 pm
@kennethamy,
I thought I answered this question.
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2010 07:12 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Does this astonish you? I was astonished when I heard that engineers, doctors and architect can also be suicide bombers.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2010 07:13 pm
@reasoning logic,
No, I'm not surprised. Level of education doesn't mean they have ethics or humanity.
kennethamy
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2010 07:46 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

I thought I answered this question.


If you did, I did not get it. Did you give an example of philosophizing emotionally?
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2010 08:00 pm
@kennethamy,
I believe I did, but I'll have to scroll back to see if I posted it.
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
morals and ethics, how are they different? - Question by existential potential
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
 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 05/21/2022 at 01:48:07