Welcome to The Philosophy Forum - an introduction thread

Hi, my name's Buxtebuddha, and I hate the moderators on this forum.

Additionally, I'm mostly interested in Christian mysticism and other topics relating to the experience of the divine >:) (Y)

Reply to ArguingWAristotleTiff And Tiff, you gotta introduce yourself, too, c'mon!

Reply to Buxtebuddha

Well, we don't hate you and wish you well in your quest for spiritual enlightenment. You no longer posting Star Trek gifs everywhere is a good first step, methinks. (Y)

Mae govannen, I am the Eagle of the Star, and I try not to hate, but I do find many of the moderators on this forum to be rather insufferable and hypocritical at times, not to mention immoderately prone to bitter sarcasm.

I much prefer the bitterness of Bierce and other philosophical and/or religious pessimists, like Schopenhauer, whose philosophy informs my thinking about most things. I spend most of my time here to kill it, though the success rate of this endeavor is not entirely clear to me. I also like to think being here sharpens my thinking on various topics and hones my verbal jousting ability, which I console myself in thinking might come in handy some day.

Welcome. Speak freely, speak frankly. Nothing here to be self-consciously humble about. Philosophy is an ancient, very badly planned and now dilapidated city in ruins with narrow, twisted avenues that end up nowhere; once elegant mansions occupied by the ghosts of long-dead questions. Remnants of the Humorless Society lurk about -- be careful. Mostly there are earnest people with nothing worse to do than poke around in the rubble hoping to find something new and interesting that nobody else has found in the last few thousand years.

Marx said, “The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it."

And welcome, again.

Quoting Buxtebuddha

Additionally, I'm mostly interested in Christian mysticism and other topics relating to the experience of the divine >:) (Y)

Why is an atheist interested in Christian mysticism and the experience of the divine? :P

If you’re

Quoting Buxtebuddha

mostly interested in Christian mysticism

Then why say

Quoting Buxtebuddha

I hate the moderators

?

Anyway, I too am interesting in mysticism, my orientation is, overall, small-t theosophical. However I’m also discovering an unexpected affinity with Platonism; which is one of those philosophies which allows you to say, that I sometimes feel I learned it in a previous existence, and now it’s starting to come back to me.

Quoting Bitter Crank

Marx said, “The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it."

Changing it requires getting a grip on the reigns of power, it's not as easy as being a philosopher :P

Hi, I'm NB, and I have no idea what I'm talking about!

My name is Michael, and I think that the moderators are just the best.

I'm TimeLine. I like roasted pumpkins.

@Buxtebuddha
I am a Spiritual Warrior. Honesty is important to me, almost to a fault. I try really hard to never give my word if I cannot uphold it. I am a protector of animals and their environment both domestic and wild and have been known to be a Momma Bear with her cubs. My faith lays within the idea of Karma, in that I need not even scores, for Karma will take care of it for me. I think of life having a Karmic Banking account and the more positive deposits I can make and the less negative with drawls I can make the better.

Reply to Baden Shut up, Dad.

Quoting Agustino

Why is an atheist interested in Christian mysticism and the experience of the divine?

Because that's what my poet's heart manifests its interest in when I read philosophy.

Quoting Wayfarer

?

What, what?

Quoting ArguingWAristotleTiff

I am a Spiritual Warrior. Honesty is important to me, almost to a fault. I try really hard to never give my word if I cannot uphold it. I am a protector of animals and their environment both domestic and wild and have been known to be a Momma Bear with her cubs. My faith lays within the idea of Karma, in that I need not even scores, for Karma will take care of it for me. I think of life having a Karmic Banking account and the more positive deposits I can make and the less negative with drawls I can make the better.

Mother Tiff the most real poster on this forum! :)

@Agustino
How about an introduction of who you are on this thread and leave the other 'stuff' for the shoutbox as there 'thwaps' are allowed. Here is where we are letting others know a bit about us.
Let me know if there is any confusion I can clear up for you.
Tiff

Reply to ArguingWAristotleTiff I was just joking lol, sorry O:)

Reply to Agustino No worries. 8-)
Now about who you are...

I'm just going to delete non-introductions from now on, folks. Too many Shout box type discussions around already.

I'm praxis. The details of my life are quite inconsequential... very well, where do I begin? My father was a relentlessly self-improving boulangerie owner from Belgium with low grade narcolepsy and a penchant for buggery. My mother was a fifteen year old French prostitute named Chloe with webbed feet. My father would womanize, he would drink. He would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark. Sometimes he would accuse chestnuts of being lazy. The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament. My childhood was typical. Summers in Rangoon, luge lessons. In the spring we'd make meat helmets. When I was insolent I was placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds- pretty standard really. At the age of twelve I received my first scribe. At the age of fourteen a Zoroastrian named Vilma ritualistically shaved my testicles. There really is nothing like a shorn scrotum... it's breathtaking- I highly suggest you try it.

I am Hanover. My childhood comes to me in bits and pieces. I recall as a youth a cobbler named Daniel crafting the finest of shoes, chatting with me for hours about the old country and the hamlet he was raised in. He described three horses, each with its own unique personality, and how he would be sure to bring an apple for each. That would be bring about the most uproarious laughter as you can imagine! That's where he met his sister who would some day become his bride. He would bed her down every night and rock himself to sleep inside her and he would have the most vivid of dreams. He told me of the dream he had of the sloth and the raccoon and would light up as he discussed the symbolism. I remember his pupilless eyes growing wider as he would talk. As fate would have it, he had the reigns to two of his horses (Kinship and Dirty Stairwell) and they pulled in opposite directions and most literally ripped him apart. He cried out on that day, "Jesus fucking Christ, I'm most literally being ripped apart." Those words rang so true.

So, that's my story.

Reply to ArguingWAristotleTiff No matter what one writes, it's auto-bio. Of course, some autobiographies are better than others.

Quoting Baden

I'm just going to delete non-introductions from now on, folks. Too many Shout box type discussions around already.

How about introducing yourself as: "Hello, I'm Baden, and I'm mean as shit."

Ok, ok, so I didn't say anything about myself. I am a very-small-town-midwesterner, which I regret in ever so many ways, but once conceived, it was too late to do anything about it. Small town life made me quite neurotic, a demolition derby of repressed homosexual libidinous urges over-seen by a typically repressive Methodist superego. I am sure I would have been happier with progressive Jewish parents in Manhattan.

Age has snowed white hair on my head, and my future is now much much shorter than my past, which is fine. I'm busy filling in the big gaps left over from college, 50 years ago. I sincerely hope there is no such thing as reincarnation. Once really is enough. I'm not very hot on the afterlife either. God, the very idea!

Hi everyone. I am Agustino, also known as the Great Agu (please don't forget Great, I am Great because I have more than double anyone's posts :D ).

I like practical philosophy and am interested largely in ethics and religion, though I am sometimes interested in some metaphysical issues too.

You need to know that if you start saying stuff that annoys me, I will go like this:


Oh, and I'm also known for sparring with @Bitter Crank, avoiding getting banned by @Baden for way longer than expected, and I like annoying @TimeLine (I see "moral consciousness" has now replaced authenticity somewhat >:) ) and @schopenhauer1, and overall being the most hated poster in the eyes of the moderators :D

Oh, and people often think that @Thorongil is actually me :s

Quoting Agustino

Why is an atheist interested in Christian mysticism and the experience of the divine?

There is a good article on Why Are Non-Believers Turning to Their Bibles? in Quillette which I recommend. Actually, i'm ordering you to read it. Students tend to ignore recommendations and pay more attention to orders, as in "Yes, it WILL be on the test."

Quillette is NOT a religious magazine.

Quoting Bitter Crank

There is a good article on Why Are Non-Believers Turning to Their Bibles? in Quillette which I recommend. Actually, i'm ordering you to read it. Students tend to ignore recommendations and pay more attention to orders, as in "Yes, it WILL be on the test."

I opened it, but I got scared because I saw one of Jordan Peterson's lectures in there >:O (joking I'm currently digesting it before returning shortly to making money [work])

Reply to Bitter Crank Okay finished it :P - not a bad read. Now time to go back to planting cabbage - the money garden ain't gonna tend for itself :D

Originally from the Midwest, living in NYC. Attempting a career as a musical artist and failing royally. Interested these days mostly in mysticism, religion, ethics, aesthetics...

Hi, I am an Uneducated Pleb. I used to think philosophy was garbage and dreamt up by and for folks who couldn't actually do anything useful. Then I found work in garbage and also found out I am not particularly useful. That's when I started reading about the philosophy of time...which was about 7 or so years ago and many philosophy books, lectures, and debates since. I have since flipped my views of and about philosophy and think there should be some more of it in the public consciousness and practice (definitely in the US) and not just for academics.

I also read the article in Quillette and found it to be mostly bland and without much engaging content. I particularly thought the ending of it, especially where it invokes a "religious instinct", as misconstrued and shallow. Only my opinion.

Quoting Hanover

How about introducing yourself as: "Hello, I'm Baden, and I'm mean as shit."

Just to prove you wrong, I'm going to leave all these dumb non-introductory comments here. Enjoy wallowing in the mud you bastards.

Edit: Hello, I'm Baden. In my spare time I knit and play with kittens. Don't fucking cross me.

I am the mighty Wosret. Indomitable, irrepressible, neon-enlightened Shaman from the east coast.

Riddled the mysteries
Found the lost histories
renowned in seven sisteries
Strangled all these family trees.

Deathless, most high
Light as the clouds in the sky
Pure as a tear from the eye
Sure as satisfaction's sigh

Undefeated, renowned
Hidden by every sound
Among your greatest fears, found
In a vulgar world, perpetually crowned.

Reply to Wosret
Great poem! Did you write it?

Reply to Jake Tarragon

Why yes, I call it, ode to moi.

Reply to Wosret
"Eau de Moi", if I was feeling unkind :)

Reply to Jake Tarragon

Bag your baguette and get.

Hi my name is Jake and I think Roger Scruton is the most boring philosopher and writer I have read.

Quoting Bitter Crank

Quillette is NOT a religious magazine.

It's a brand of razors for men. The best a man can get.

I be Sapientia. I is an owl.

I hate the moderators, despite being one of them, and I hate everyone else. But everyone loves me, along with my condescension and bitter sarcasm, which are my two finest features.

I enjoy nothing, nothing, and - on occasion - nothing.

My achievements include being crowned Prom Queen - [i]although my joy was cut short when a bucket of pigs blood was tipped over my head as the result of a cruel prank[/I] - and massacring an entire room full of people by using my telekinetic powers - [i]all save one, who got away, and who is haunted by nightmares[/I].

I am mostly deadly serious, sometimes seriously deadly, and always squiddly delirious.

Quoting Wosret

Bag your baguette and get.

You mean, "Bag your baguette and git. "Get" as in "get going" is too close to proper. "Git" has the eau d'outré you are looking for.

Just a suggestion. Here, let me run your life for you.

Reply to Bitter Crank

But it's bag, and get, like baguette? Hmm? Allow me some poetic licensing for such sorcery.

Reply to Wosret Ah, yes. Now I git it. Thank you for shining your ever-bright LED flame into my abyssal darkness.

Hello, I'm a fruit of an uncommon colouring. I attempt to speak real (UK) English but often find myself an unwilling victim of the consequences of exposure to Simplified (US) English.

I like to call myself inclusivist/pluralist christian, but I doubt other christian people or institutions would agree with me on that, the biggest reasons being that I'm agnostic when it comes to reincarnation, don't believe in the omni-everything of God, and believe my dog to be a divine messenger of God. Oh, and the whole inclusivism part.

Politically I'm green (and biocentrist vegetarian) and economically on the left, but then again politically I'm both right wing (topics like freedom, political correctness, etc.) and for equality and tolerance. For some weird reason I'm still against those who are against extreme left wing, even though I'm against them myself. You know, enemy of my enemy is still my enemy and stuff.

My worldview is based on consciousness with free will as independent from our physical reality, on which I also base my views of morality (utilitarianism based on flourishing of consciousness and well-being of the beings with it).

The funny part is, you'll rarely encounter me arguing for these points, because "oh my GOD mass murderers are EVIL who would've guessed" is not what I consider intelligent discussion suitable for these forum, so I play devil's advocate by arguing for more interesting opinions (cynicism and skepticism being common points of view for me to adopt) I don't consider my own, but always with arguments I believe to be logically correct.

Hello. My name is Banno, and I am a recovering philosopher...

Reply to Banno

Hi Banno.

Reply to TimeLine Hi, Time.

I'm a wannabe Stoic, but in reality a Cynic.

Oh, the drama!

Reply to Posty McPostface How did the court hearing go?

@Uneducated Pleb @Jake Tarragon @BlueBanana @ProbablyTrue
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Reply to Agustino

I'm still waiting for it to happen. In five hours I should know the result.

Can't sleep; but, not feeling too hot about it.

I'm unenlightened (hence the name), namer of names, pointer of fingers, self-appointed forum therapist, and resident anarchist gimp.

Ciceronianus, i.e. the Ciceronian; an admirer (for the most part) of Marcus Tullius Cicero and like him a lawyer with philosophical interests, and like Wallace Stevens a lawyer who admires poetry. Lawyers who manage to be more than lawyers interest me as I'm inclined to the view that lawyers are doomed to be lawyers, only and always.

St. Jerome's bad dream is my self-assessment--Ciceronianus sum, non Christianus. I'm an old Catholic, but am too fond of the pagan philosophy, culture and society of the ancient Mediterranean that Christianity, that great hodgepodge, assimilated to take it as anything more than an especially intolerant and oddly twisted derivation of what came before it. Not a pagan, myself, but more a Stoic who sees, like John Lachs, a connection between that ancient philosophical school and Deweyian pragmatism. Erstwhile sabre fencer, current clay shooter and chess player.

Quoting Ciceronianus the White

Not a pagan, myself, but more a Stoic who sees, like John Lachs, a connection between that ancient philosophical school and Deweyian pragmatism.

How so? An interesting point to make in general.

Quoting Banno

Hello. My name is Banno, and I am a recovering philosopher...

That is the second time in two days that I have heard the term "recovering philosopher". Very interesting.

Reply to Posty McPostface Any news? Dang it! I just read your update in the shoutbox
{{{{{PostyMcPostface}}}} <<<< online hugg

Quoting ArguingWAristotleTiff

?Posty McPostface Any news? Dang it! I just read your update in the shoutbox
{{{{{PostyMcPostface}}}} <<<< online hugg

Thanks, I got bummed over it today, but that was just the tip of the iceberg, now we're going to family court, see what comes up, and then onto the division of joint assets.

Shit will hit the fan for the family court.

Haven't felt so alive in a while.

Quoting Posty McPostface

How so? An interesting point to make in general.

They have their naturalism in common; both see human beings as parts of (and active participants in) nature rather than apart from it. Both consider nature to be all that is, or at least all that can be determined to be. Although the Stoics ascribed a divinity to it or to its Divine or Ruling Reason, that characteristic of the universe was thought by them to be a special kind of substance according to the limited physics of the time. Both eschew dualism. Both believe proper conduct is determined by an intelligent inquiry into nature (including human nature) rather than an appeal to transcendent ideals or beings. Both are devoted to addressing and resolving the "problems of men" rather than the problems of philosophy. Both emphasize the value of reason in life.

Quoting Posty McPostface

the division of joint assets. ... Haven't felt so alive in a while.

Nothing like a division of assets to get the juices flowing.

Hey everyone, I'm Krishnamurti.

I'm 99.9% atheist. My favourite philosophers are Krishnamurti, Buddha, Kant. I'm someone with a lot of questions. to which not many people give a damn about in real life.
I hope I will find some philosophy buffs here.

I hope to pen a masterpiece philosophical fiction one day.
Other than philosophy I also like Polity, history and meditating

K

@krishnamurti Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Did we ever learn why the new owners of the old forum purchased it only to abandon it?

Reply to Maw To declare it as a loss, my guess would be.

Reply to Maw I always thought it was a simple cock-up. They couldn’t maintain the code, which had been very heavily customised over many years, so when it broke and the site didn’t work any more, they couldn’t fix it, and tried then to sell it, but by then it was no longer an ongoing concern.

Reply to Wayfarer But they did not show any interest in Paul's offer to take a look at it and fix it free of charge. They didn't even reply. So I don't buy that they couldn't fix it. More like they didn't care to do so.

I also don't buy that it would no longer be an ongoing concern, after spending that amount of money on it, if they were ever genuinely interested in maintaining the website.

Quoting Wayfarer

They couldn’t maintain the code, which had been very heavily customised over many years,

That seems the likely story. But Porat is still listing it as part of his investment portolio. So all part of some grander clickbait marketing strategy?

http://mutually.com/trending/

Our investments include CringeChannel, BioArts, CyberDissidents, iBeatyou, Indiegiftbox, Loot app, Memegen, Occupywallstreet, Philosophyforums & Thedatingring

https://angel.co/innovate

Zombie PF lingers on in fine company!

There's already a discussion or three around about Borat and his evil deeds if anyone wants to revive one. Might be best to stick to intros here.

EDIT: e. g. https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/33/things-at-the-old-place-have-changed#Item_52

Hi, my name is @Wayfarer, and I am sometimes forgetful. ;)

Quoting Paul

Actually it has almost no custom code.

Quoting Wayfarer

Thanks Paul. I had guessed there was a lot of customisation due to all the tweaks you had made but you would know better!

I do ethics and phenomenology and screw around in metaphysics a bit.

Quoting ArguingWAristotleTiff

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Thanks Tiff!

Reply to Sapientia Oh yeah I do remember that exchange now you mention it. I had assumed all the little tweaks and features, like ‘internal replies’, would have meant customisation, but I’m not a programmer, so, maybe not.

Quoting Wayfarer

Oh yeah I do remember that exchange now you mention it. I had assumed all the little tweaks and features, like ‘internal replies’, would have meant customisation, but I’m not a programmer, so, maybe not.

The issues on that site had to do with how the connection between the user's actions and the database were laid out. I presume they were made in an antique early 2000s kind of way and never properly updated. So very easy for an error to creep up and screw everything. Paul coded the whole software from the ground up from what I remember.

Hi y'all know me as Janus; and I'm too far up my own Janus to play along with games like this. ;)

Quoting Janus

Hi y'all know me as Janus; and I'm too far up my own anus to play along with games like this. ;)

>:) I corrected it.

Reply to Agustino

Corrected what, little scorpion?

Quoting Janus

Corrected what, little scorpion?

It's now bolded. No, no, I'm not scorpion, I am this >:) :

Reply to Agustino

I wasn't referring to your Sun sign; I knew what that was from the Astrology thread. In any case it's Janus, anus, schmanus...and so on...ad nauseum...

Quoting Janus

I wasn't referring to your Sun sign; I knew what that was from the Astrology thread. In any case it's Janus, anus, schmanus...and so on...ad nauseum...

>:O

Reply to Agustino That constellation looks more like a flamingo than a lion. Pink, feathery, large beak, barely a leg to stand on. That sounds like a creature more representative of an Agustino than the king of the jungle.

Reply to Sapientia WTF have you been taking, man? "I'll have what he had"...not!

Quoting Janus

WTF have you been taking man? "I'll have what he had"...not!

Haha, I think he means the constellation behind, formed by the stars, not the lion pic :P

Reply to Agustino Indeed. It would be quite a surprise, to say the least, if I looked up into the night sky at that constellation and saw a coloured picture of a lion superimposed over it!

And my second sentence was just a description of a flamingo, not what I saw.

@Madman
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

@Aurora
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Reply to ArguingWAristotleTiff

Thank you :)

I'm Benkei, using an internet handle I've lifted from Japanese history. In real life I'm a lawyer specialised in international contract law and financial law. I might be an inventor too, if I get my patent approved. Father of a daughter who I love more than anything in the world and something else coming in March or April and husband to a wife who I love more than anything but for my daughter. Two cats that I love more than my grand piano except when they are doing things to my grand piano, in which case they are the scum of the earth.

Also, if I ever read a #metoo from my daughter because of you, I'm coming for you with blowtorch and plyers.

@Benkei
That is a WHOLE lot of LOVE in your description my friend and a beast on leash to protect the ladies you love. Respect, absolute Respect. Not that I ever expected anything less from you but impressive is impressive. Well done Benkei!

Congratulations on your upcoming Pisces! (L)

@ivans
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

@kepler
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Hello!

My name is John and I am student at the University of North Texas. I am Vice President of our Philosophy Club and I am looking forward to make more friends who share our common interest and discuss philosophy.

Hi folks !

The only thing I want out of this life is to see the Aurora Borealis just once ... Norway, Canada, Alaska, Minnesota, Sweden, Iceland, ... I don't care where, but the Lofoten Islands in Norway seem like a dream spot.

I want to lay down in the snow at night and see those colors ... that heavenly dance. I know that I will be the happiest person on Earth the moment I see it, and I will no longer need a reason to be. I will dance and frolic in the snow like a child and forget about yester and morrow.

I'm new here too (about a week). Looks like a fun place to be, although some threads can get a bit hot :D

(Didn't see this thread before, so I created my own intro thread.)

Thanks for having me here :)
Aurora

1. Everyone loves Oscar Meyer weiners
2. I will act in a way conducive to creating a life in which I am loved by all.
Therefor I will become an Oscar Meyer weiner.

Reply to Myttenar No metaphysics of value there, sausage.

Reply to Wayfarer
Intro with a Solid argument though :D

Hi. I'm believenothing. I try to be argumentative but I think I can only disagree with what I understand and that's not much just lately. I guess my main excuse for joining this forum is an attempt to learn something and not just kill more time.

Quoting Aurora

The only thing I want out of this life is to see the Aurora Borealis just once

I saw it like a week ago, though it was pretty dim. I was outside at night with co-workers, and they were looking at it, so I was all like "what dat? An at night rainbow?", and they were all like "no it's the northern lights".

You know there is also aurora australis, or southern lights as well?

Reply to believenothing

Welcome Believenothing! The forum is an excellent way to procrastinate while learning things, so long as you read up on what people say.

Reply to fdrake
Thanks, sounds like my cup of tea, I prefer coffee though.
:D

Quoting Wosret

I saw it like a week ago, though it was pretty dim. I was outside at night with co-workers, and they were looking at it, so I was all like "what dat? An at night rainbow?", and they were all like "no it's the northern lights".

You know there is also aurora australis, or southern lights as well?

Cool ! Lucky you. May I ask where you're located ?

Yes, I know about Aurora Australis :) I just don't know if I can make it to the Southern hemisphere, though >:O

Reply to John Reply to Myttenar Reply to Aurora Welcome to the forum, nerds.

Quoting Aurora

I just don't know if I can make it to the Southern hemisphere, though

Build a boat and start sailing!

Reply to Buxtebuddha

Thanks :) I would, but I'm afraid of sharks :D And I can't swim.

Quoting Aurora

Thanks :) I would, but I'm afraid of sharks :D And I can't swim.

Ah, now we're learning more about you! If you live in the states, you could theoretically walk all the way south to the tip of Argentina. Do the lights extend to Argentina?

Reply to Aurora

I once saw the lights in Northeast Ohio, in the states. Super rare...it was red. :-O

Reply to Noble Dust On the lake? :O

Reply to Buxtebuddha

No, about an hour south of Lake Erie. Was randomly smoking on my front porch or something and just looked up...

Reply to Noble Dust Interesting. Coolest atmospheric thing I've ever seen here is a sunset behind an approaching storm cloud, painted the cloud and sky red. Was freaky.

Reply to Aurora

never stop dreaming.

Quoting Buxtebuddha

Ah, now we're learning more about you! If you live in the states, you could theoretically walk all the way south to the tip of Argentina. Do the lights extend to Argentina?

:D

Yes, I could do that. The lights are visible close to either pole, so they'd be visible from roughly the Southernmost 1/3rd of Argentina. Now, all I need is some endurance.

Quoting Noble Dust

I once saw the lights in Northeast Ohio, in the states. Super rare...it was red.

That is friggin awesome. Yeah, red is rare.

Quoting Wosret

never stop dreaming.

:) (Y)

Reply to Aurora

Forgot to answer my location question, I'm in Alberta.

Quoting Wosret

Forgot to answer my location question, I'm in Alberta.

(Y)

Quoting Wosret

Forgot to answer my location question, I'm in Alberta.

And I'm stuck in an ugly place called California :'(

Quoting ArguingWAristotleTiff

I wanted to create a thread that folks who are new to The Philosophy Forum could stop in on and introduce themselves to the forum. And for all The Philosophy Forum members who would like to share a bit about who you are, please feel free to do so~

I studied human rights law focusing on children. I have lived in Denmark, Turkey and Israel and travelled the Middle East and Europe, but I really fell in love with Israel. I love my job as a specialist working with disadvantaged children.

My primary goal and what drives and motivates me is helping children and women. I am a foster carer and I hope to adopt sometime soon. But, as a youth worker, I experienced some pretty terrible young men that about a year ago made me realise that I was subjectively too sensitive and I would never be able to affect change until I got stronger.

I wholeheartedly appreciate fearless and deeply honest and honourable people rather than measure them based on any intellectual or professional strengths. I also think that humour is the key to happiness.

And I apologise in advance if I offend you. Unless you are @Agustino in which case you can sod off.

Quoting TimeLine

Unless you are Agustino in which case you can sod off.

:-d

Reply to Agustino You sleepy head, you.

Reply to TimeLine You might want to say something against my consent, it may wake me up >:O

Reply to Agustino I am just as sleepy after arriving back home from interstate travel for work, but you know what, let's do this! Trump is purple-people eater? Borat is not funny? Lathering melted swiss cheese all over your body is not the secret to youthful looking skin?

Quoting TimeLine

Trump is purple-people eater?

Why is he purple? I thought he was orange.

Quoting TimeLine

Borat is not funny?

So you agree with these ladies:


Quoting TimeLine

Lathering melted swiss cheese all over your body is not the secret to youthful looking skin?

I don't have secrets - except business ones :P

Quoting Agustino

Why is he purple? I thought he was orange.

If you wear too much fake tan, up close they almost look purple.

Quoting TimeLine

If you wear too much fake tan, up close they almost look purple.

Weed, or something stronger? >:)

Quoting Agustino

I don't have secrets - except business ones :P

Haven't you shared all of those on here by now?

I'm a little owl. I love @YourLeaderSapientia. And baby rats.

Reply to SapientiasLittleHelper

3 Rules:
a: there are no rules
b: please see rule a
c:suggestions are always welcome

@believenothing
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Reply to ArguingWAristotleTiff thanks. I appear to have tripped on my own ego thinking I was oh so clever, trying to run before I could walk on a thread about nothing. I expect it won't be the last time something like that happens. I'm trying to explore ideas, but with limited experience and inadequate aptitude I'm underestimating the amount of effort required of me. I just hope I can still learn and hope I might eventually communicate better. Catch you later ;)

@believenothing
I have faith that you, along with the rest of us, will keep learning and becoming better communicators all while in the pursuit of wisdom.

Reply to ArguingWAristotleTiff A good start I imagine, faith. I can't say much about faith yet. Good to know someone has it, maybe better not to introspect too much and instead start a concerted effort to understand others on my part. I've noticed a nasty habit I've got of starting most my sentences with I..

Quoting believenothing

I've noticed a nasty habit I've got of starting most my sentences with I..

Your first touchstone on your journey down the path of philosophy. 8-)

Reply to ArguingWAristotleTiff Faith eludes me but seems to benefit people half the time. Let's hope I can come baring gifts..

Hello. >:) I am Lone Wolf, and I can be slightly evil. In other words, I'm a student pilot, equestrian, attempt photography and play piano and violin. I have no existence nor character besides the things I do...

Reply to believenothing Faith the the death of reason, the cry of the ignorant and the hope of the desperate.

Hello,

I'm PossibleAaran. I was a member of PhilosophyForums two years ago. The site got new management around the time that I left. I went back to the old site today to find it completely broken. After digging around I found that the old guard had moved here.

I'm a PhD student in Philosophy and teach part time. I'm doing research on External World Realism and Skepticism. I'm also an amateur illustrator.

Nice to meet anyone I haven't met or doesn't remember me.

Reply to PossibleAaran Hiya Possible Aaran! Welcome to The Philosophy Forum! I am glad you were able to find us and look forward to reading you on the threads!

Reply to PossibleAaran Hello. Good luck, and welcome. I'm new here, bye for now.

Reply to Lone Wolf Hi. They say the devil makes work for idle hands. I'm lazy and so half-soaked it never occurred to me you were responding. I don't want to seem ignorant ;-)

Reply to believenothing :P Haha, pleased to met you!

Reply to Lone Wolf likewise, take it easy

@Bret
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

@AngleWyrm
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Quoting ArguingWAristotleTiff

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Thanks and hiya!

Reply to AngleWyrm

She's really been hittin the Bowflex, it appears.

Quoting Lone Wolf

I'm a student pilot

Cool ! What kind of aircraft ? What do you want to fly eventually ?

To the more experienced members here - are arguments / heated discussions quite commonplace here ? Are there cliques / warring factions of members ?

Quoting Aurora

Are there cliques /warring factions of members?

Just one, everyone against Agustino, or rather, Agustino against all.

Reply to Aurora I'm training on a C-172, which is pretty small. Right now, I'm just working towards a Private Pilot's license without any special ratings besides the 172. I might go for an instrument rating later on, and move up to a 182, but haven't decided yet. Do you fly? :)

Quoting Lone Wolf

Do you fly?

Very cool !

No, I'm just an aviation enthusiast ... I love aviation science and accident investigation (the show "Mayday" for example). And, I'm one of those passengers on the flight who sits far from the doors if possible, because I'm terrified of a possible decompression :D

Reply to Aurora :P Pleased to meet you! Perhaps we may discuss aviation matters in the future! :)

Quoting Lone Wolf

Pleased to meet you! Perhaps we may discuss aviation matters in the future!

Likewise, and yes, it would be nice to talk aviation sometime ! Happy flying, in the meantime :D

@sime
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

@bloodninja
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

@Galuchat
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Hi.

Greetings all,
I'm Joe and I'm new to not just this forum, but also philosophy in general. It is an exciting subject an I only wish that it was in the curriculum when I was at school. I hope that you will tear my arguments into tiny, easily refutable chunks so I can analysis your thought processes and better my understanding of the universe :D

@SnowyChainsaw
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum! We all started at different points on our Philosophy journey so feel free to relax and share. This is an amazing forum with a lot of awesome thinkers. Enjoy your stay ~
Tiff

Reply to SnowyChainsaw

(Y)

Hi everyone,
I'm Maravi Rasmussen , I speak English, German, and Spanish , student of computer science , and my interests are philosophy , logic, discrete mathematics,science, genetics.

@MaraviRasmussen
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
Enjoy your stay~

@antinatalautist
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

@Qurious
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

@Oliver Purvis
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

@MonfortS26
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Thanks AWATiff, good to be here

Quoting SnowyChainsaw

[...] and better my understanding of the universe

A noble cause shared by many. :)
Incidentally, my interest in philosophy was motivated by much the same.
I'll just add that philosophy isn't necessarily the most informative in this respect, rather there's a complex of philosophy, reasoning, science, and such involved.

Welcome to!

@simian1
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
We are glad you are here~
Enjoy your stay~
Tiff

@DPMartin
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
Enjoy your stay!

@David Solman
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
We are glad you are here!

I'm Ecce, I found my way here from Philosophy Forums where I had joined when I was in college. After a long hiatus from the word games during which military and travel took up most of my time, I've come back around to see what musings others have to offer. I recognize some of these names from PF, so that's good to see.

I lean more towards a Kantian bent when it comes to epistemology and metaphysical realism, though I do adore Schopenhauer; I view myself as a pragmatist above all else, somewhat oddly.

Anyway, there's no point in droning on.

Respectfully,
~Ecce.

@Ecce
Welcome Home (L)

@ConfusedFox
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
Enjoy your stay!

@Pacem
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
We are glad you are here~

I'm glad you too.

@Joshs
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
What keeps you in Chicago? My Hometown. (L)

In case you are new to The Philosophy Forum, we have a Facebook page that is awesome to follow. Check it out!

Quoting ArguingWAristotleTiff

In case you are new to The Philosophy Forum, we have a Facebook page that is awesome to follow. Check it out!

Of course, because Mark Zuckerberg is getting a bit strapped for cash, I hear he's having trouble gold-plating his fifth yaught, so let's all haul over there and bump his advertising revenue a bit.

Quoting Inter Alia

Of course, because Mark Zuckerberg is getting a bit strapped for cash, I hear he's having trouble gold-plating his fifth yaught, so let's all haul over there and bump his advertising revenue a bit.

I don't use FB anymore and haven't for quite a while :P

I was born in Germany, I grew up in Alaska, and now I'm in the Midwest. I hated the first philosophy class I took back in the late 80's (I was in my 20's). Now I kinda like it. I mostly just read whatever strikes my fancy. I've been known to get into really intense arguments (on other forums mostly), but lately I'm more interested in finding decent people with whom I can have a decent conversation.

I'm currently into Christian Existentialism and Phenomenology. And Hilary Putnam.

Quoting Inter Alia

Of course, because Mark Zuckerberg is getting a bit strapped for cash, I hear he's having trouble gold-plating his fifth yaught, so let's all haul over there and bump his advertising revenue a bit.

We are so glad you are here Inter Alia!

@gurugeorge
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
Enjoy your stay!

@Susu
Hiya Susu and welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Reply to ArguingWAristotleTiff Thanks. I used to haunt the Philosophy Forums quite a bit years ago, but this forum seems to have become the place for that old crowd to hang out, now that the other forum seems to be non-functional.

Reply to gurugeorge Then I guess it is "Welcome Home". (L)

@Pollywalls
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

@RepThatMerch22
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
It is good to read you on the threads~
Enjoy your stay~

@SonJnana
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Hi
I'm Purple Pond. I am usually a very reserved person with nothing to say. I have changed my name a lot since the last forum. I'm also known as Wisebbq, Character Assassin, brain in a vat, Professional Thinker, and Professional Knower. I want to change my name again, but I will resist the temptation! I like writing about philosophy (even though some people think what I write is silly), and I love when people respond to them. I'm never satisfied with my writing and I hope to improve. I'm always worried about people judging me that's why I'm quiet about my personal life (sorry guys).

All the best, Meir.

@Marty
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
Enjoy your stay~

@RepThatMerch22@ChrisH
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
We are glad you are here~

I am Bahman. I am a physicist. I love philosophy though. English is my second language. What else? Nothing.

Reply to bahman What's your first language (if you don't mind me asking)?

Reply to Purple Pond
Farsi/persian.

@Fumani
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Reply to ArguingWAristotleTiff

Thank you very much, I love everything to do with philosophy so I know its the right place.

Reply to Fumani You are quite welcome! Enjoy your stay!

@dog
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

@Ian
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

@Abdul
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

@JupiterJess
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

@Cynical Eye
Hiya and Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

@Pseudonym
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
Enjoy your stay~

Reply to ArguingWAristotleTiff aw thank you!!

A bit late to the party since I've been here for weeks already, but I just saw this thread so I figured I'd introduce myself:

I'm JustSomeGuy, like all of us are (girls are guys, too; don't be sexist).
I, too, am from a small town in the Midwest, which seems to be a pattern here. I suppose it makes sense that we would turn to philosophy--both to distract ourselves from the hellish winters, as well as to cope with the complete and utter lack of "things to do".
I love Stoicism and Taoism, though I'm a fairly new student of both.
I love arguing (in the philosophical sense) and try to do it as much as possible.
I also love learning, which is why I'm so passionate about philosophy.
If I say something that offends you, please don't take it personally, and know that it was not intentional (unless I made it explicit that it was intentional, in which case you deserved it).
In other words: don't mistake my bluntness for meanness.
I'm usually quite emotionless when discussing philosophy, which can come off as cold, but really I'm just trying my best to be as objective as possible.
I also have a very dry sense of humor, and this doesn't always translate well through text.
We can disagree about absolutely everything, but no matter how heated a debate might get I will harbor no ill will towards you unless you first express ill will towards myself or someone else.

Also, I love cake.

Quoting Bitter Crank

Small town life made me quite neurotic, a demolition derby of repressed homosexual libidinous urges

I can relate to the small-town neuroticism, though without the homosexual demolition derby (which should really be a thing, if it isn't already).

@Caldwell
It is soo good to see your name pop up as joining!
Welcome and I know you will see a lot of old friends happy to have you here!
Warmest wishes,
Tiff

Hello. Thank you.

@Tobias
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum! It is awesome to see you and you should know you walk among friends here.
Warmest wishes,
Tiffers

Thanks Tiff, really great to see you too! Nice to be here!

Welcome @Caldwell and @Tobias! Cool to have you both on board.

Hi Baden,

Thanks for the welcome. Good to be here! Good to see you guys.

Friends, glad to see you.

Banno, dear.
I'm happy to see you here.

@NobleDeep
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum

Thnx. I appreciate the resonding friendliness.

@Coldlight
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
It's good to have you aboard~

Reply to ArguingWAristotleTiff

Oh, thank you for such a nice welcome message X-)
I should put a cat as my profile picture. I tend to just stray away at times and then come back.

@WolvesAtMyDoor
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

@René Descartes
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
It's good to have you here~

[Delete] @Baden

[Delete] @Baden

Hello everyone,

I am an Italian physics student with a strong interest in philosophy. In particular I am fascinated by epistemology, metaphysics, philosophy of science, ethics, aesthetics and "spirituality".
I like also to write about philosophy (I also have some readers among my friends X-) ).

As a hobby, I also like fantasy (for a while I considered to write a novel but I realized that it is an impossible task for me), sci-fi ecc

@CuddlyHedgehog
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
Enjoy the ride~

@Phil
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
We are glad you are here~

@LostThomist
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
Enjoy the ride

Reply to ArguingWAristotleTiff Thanks. Its great to be here.

I am LostThomist. I studied philosophy and hold my Bachelors in Philosophy

@Paul E. Mokrzecki
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
Enjoy the ride~

@Marcus Smith
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
We are happy you are here~

@LD Saunders
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

ArguingWAristotleTiff: Thanks. I'm not really sure how to maneuver around here yet.

@LD Saunders I'm not really sure how to maneuver around here yet.

You're doing just fine!

@The Devils Disciple
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
Enjoy your stay~

@Coldlight
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
We are glad you are here~

I am Edward Tranter. I'm 18, British, and live in Cambridge. I will begin studying philosophy at Harvard in the autumn. I have recently opened a discussion in the questions section about logic.

Reply to Edward Tranter Have you been to Mr. Bartley's yet?

@emancipate
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
Enjoy your stay!

@Pippen
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
We are glad you are here!

@Londoner
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
Enjoy the ride~

Reply to Maw No I have never been to the U.S. before! :(

Reply to Edward Tranter Ah I misread your post, thought you had started Harvard last autumn. In that case, check out Mr. Bartley's Burgers in Harvard Square when you do go. There's also a great co-op bookstore there too.

@Pangloss
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
We are happy to have you~

Reply to ArguingWAristotleTiff Thank you, ArguingWAristotle Tiff. It is good to be here. I earned a B.A. in philosophy in the 1990s, but set most of that aside to focus on antebellum U.S. history for over a decade. In the past 18 months I have rekindled my interest in early modern Europe, especially the Enlightenment, and I see a lot of new work has been done since the 90s. So I am hoping I can get input into what is going on. This forum looks like an excellent place to get that input.

@Mr Phil O'Sophy
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
It's a pleasure to have you here~

@Issac Scoggins
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
Enjoy your stay!

I appreciate it!

@wayne kaye
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
We are happy you are here~

@frank
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
My first discussion was with Banno as well and 'fruitful' would be an understatement for me. I have learned so much via his style of philosophizing, you are in good company.
Enjoy your stay~

Reply to ArguingWAristotleTiff Thank you. Glad to be here.

@CanadianEden
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!'
Enjoy your stay!

@Sydasis
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
We are glad you are here~

@MTravers
Welcome to The Philosophy Foum!
Enjoy your stay~

@Nop
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
I already like your style!
Enjoy your stay~

@Count Radetzky von Radetz
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
We are glad you are here~

Reply to ArguingWAristotleTiff Glad to be here again.

Quoting Count Radetzky von Radetz

Glad to be here again.

Yay! Might we know you by another nickname? Count Radetzky" maybe?

Reply to ArguingWAristotleTiff Unfortuantely my email was not working for that account.

Quoting Count Radetzky von Radetz

Unfortuantely my email was not working for that account.

Gotcha! Enjoy~

@Vaskane
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
Enjoy your stay~

@Dawnstorm
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
We are glad you are here~

Thank you for the welcome. I'm mostly hanging back and reading: I'm a slow writer, and by the time I have something to say threads usually have moved on and someone else has said what I would have.

It's nice to have a forum where people talk to each other rather than at each other.

Quoting Dawnstorm

It's nice to have a forum where people talk to each other rather than at each other.

Yes it is. Thank you for your kind observation~

Reply to ArguingWAristotleTiff Quoting ArguingWAristotleTiff

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Thankyou. :hearts: I came back because I have an interest in philosophy again. :)

Quoting JupiterJess

Thankyou. :hearts: I came back because I have an interest in philosophy again. :)

You are quite welcome JupiterJess!
There seems to be a natural ebb and flow when it comes to "Interest in philosophy". Maybe it is our way of going out into the world to try the philosophy we gained till that point and we flow back to philosophy for more questions or more tools to help in discovering the answers.
I hope you truly enjoy your time here~

Reply to Maw Thankyou!

@Kenshin
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
We are glad you are here~

Reply to ArguingWAristotleTiff Thanks!

Hi everyone!

My name is Alen White. I am a writer and philosopher. I write and philosophise about the awe and wonder of the man made.
I look forward to speak and debate and explore my ideas with you, and grow in the process.
Can someone suggest the appropriate forum to put forth my ideas and spark conversation?
Thanks!

@Alen White
Hi and Welcome!
Enjoy your stay~

@Joe
Hiya Joe!
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Hello Everybody!

My name is Martin, I am 56, German, and I am living in Hamburg. My English isn't perfect of course, as I only had it in school and improved it a bit.

What's my relationship to philosophy? I think I am very sceptical regarding the philosophical project. The philosophy who is wished from the society is a philosophy good for the society, a smooth philosophy, a comfortable philosophy . The somehow wild philosopher isn't wanted. And my personal view is: Yes, philosophy is a dangerous thing but a philosophy who isn't dangerous isn't interesting at all.

@Titan
Hiya and Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
We are happy you are here~

@Alen White
Welcome to The Philosophy Forums!
Enjoy your stay!

@Thrifclyfe
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
We are glad you are here!

@steppo25
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
Enjoy your stay~

Thank you!
Kind regards from NRW, Germany!

@Pacem
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
We are glad you are here~

But i came here about 8 months ago. Even so, thanks, so kind. :)

@ThroughAGlassDarkly
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
Enjoy your stay~

@petrichor

Welcome to the forum, :up:

@Corvus
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
We are glad you are here~

@tEd
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
Enjoy your stay~

Reply to ArguingWAristotleTiff Reply to ArguingWAristotleTiff

Thank you. Kind regards :)

Reply to Buxtebuddha

Thank you! Good to be here!

@kilehetek
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
Enjoy your stay!

@Seastar
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
We are glad you are here~

@Plato'sView
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
Enjoy your view~

@ahmad bilal
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
We are happy you are here~

Reply to ArguingWAristotleTiff i'm happy too..
i never knew i could learn so much from a forum.

@tania
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
Enjoy your stay!

Good evening and greetings to all.

Reply to Klemens von Metternich Welcome, returned banned member Count Radetzky von Radetz.

Reply to Sapientia Who is this Count Radetzky? Or are all historical names banned from this forum?

Reply to Klemens von Metternich Don't worry, your secret is safe with me.

Oh wait, we're on loudspeaker.

@jkg20
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
We are pleased you are here and Thank you for helping a fellow member preparing for their Logic exam!
Enjoy your stay~

Reply to ArguingWAristotleTiff Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
Enjoy your stay!

Your response has been posted on a Facebook page. Congratulations and Thank you for your contribution!

I am putting myself to the Fullest Possible Use, which is all I think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do!

I have just picked up a Fault in the AE-35 unit!

I'm sorry, Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that!~

@Andrew4Handel
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum
Enjoy your stay~

@Kym

Kym:Howdy pardners (adjusts his white Stetson),

Welcome cowboy! Love a cowboy who wears a white hat~
Happy Trails to you~

Reply to ArguingWAristotleTiff

Hi guys!

I didn't think to look for a welcome thread. Too self-obsessed I guess. Anyway this is a really nice set up. And the people are surprisingly .... well ....nice ... so far. That can be tricky.

And make that a warm howdy doody from me to all other greenhorns!

Gee up now boy!

@Time
Hiya Time and welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
We have been waiting for you!

Hello, my mother named me after Alexander III of Macedon, then she preceded to leave me upstairs in my crib for 8-14hrs a day which resulted in strange patterns of dehydration. Once I started escaping and crawling downstairs to the fridge, she resorted to locking me in the basement. That's where I learned how to mix volatile chemical cocktails of gasoline, bleach, pine sol, etc. and pour them on insects until my father got home from working.

My half-sister taught me how to handle a woman from ages 3-8, then she left me for her boyfriends.

My father taught me about anything I ever showed curiosity in: locks, engines, motorcycles, ATV's aircraft, etc. And he always asked if I was hungry, thirsty, or bored.

I like to live a high energy lifestyle, and I value: free time, self-improvement, fitness, and health, more than money or social approval.

I take interest in many subjects, including: science, language, art, history, engineering, agriculture, anthropology, medicine, anatomy, molecular biology, weapons, technology, martial arts, fitness, health, and culture.


I never finished high-school, and I wish I had better grammar, and knew more languages.


I’m a nomadic cyclist. I’m not sure of my exact age, and like my mother, it is now clear that I suffer from a mental illness. I wish I didn't, but hopefully it pays off in some way, someday.

It's nice to see you all.

Reply to ArguingWAristotleTiff Thanks ArguingWArisotleTiff - I like logic, so it was a pleasure to try to help!

@XTG
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum and your introduction!
I think you will find a bit of a payoff for the struggles you have endured to make it this far when entertaining the discipline of philosophy. Some you will agree with and others will make your hair stand on end but eventually you will find your groove and fit right in. It sounds like you had a childhood that you can extract 'character' from and I look forward to reading you on the boards.
We are happy you are here~

@jm0
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
You are already posting Wiser words!
Enjoy your stay~

@ArguingWAristotleTiff
Thank you so much! I've been looking for a place like this my whole life essentially. Good to be here, will be posting a lot more in the coming future. Just probing the landscape a bit first, to pick up on the etiquette and chime in here and there :)

Reply to XTG

Welcome dude.

@Pine Recluse
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
Enjoy your stay~

@Eddie
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

@Johnny Public
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
What part of Chicago are you from?

South side

@ProcastinationTomorrow
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
Enjoy your stay ~

Thanks - I'm already learning and enjoying.

Sup. I’m just a nobody searching for decent conversation. I had a nice philosophy phase some years ago, studied a few hallmarks of the analytic school. It got too specialized for a hobbyist to follow, so I’m a tad superficial. Looking forward to some debate.

Maybe this attitude is typical of amateurs, but I think Quine’s legacy is underrated. I think PWS is a beautiful disaster. Whether race exists depends on how you define it. Successful science tells us how the world really is. I think a weak form of logicism is true. Searle has a solid account of linguistic meaning. Consciousness I really can’t understand. There’s too much emphasis on logic in the philosophy of time. Most the people I’ve heard criticize Rawls clearly didn’t read him carefully.

Meh, just some rambling before bed. Hello, everyone.

@Fool
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
We are glad you are here!

@Codger
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
Enjoy your stay~

@iolo
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Thanks ArguingWAristotleTiff.

@tiffany
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
We are glad you are here~

@MetaphysicsNow
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
Enjoy your stay~

Hi, I'm AlmostOutlier which isn't meant to somehow suggest I'm above average, just that I've never quite fit in. Moderately odd you could say. I won't say that the details of my life are inconsequential, considering they are part of what makes me, me. However they aren't very interesting, so I'll skip the whole, this is what happened and as a consequence this is who I believe I am thing. If I could tell you who and what I exactly am, life wouldn't be so problematic, would it? I joined this forum because I want somewhere to write down and express my thoughts and get feedback on them. Hopefully as a result, becoming a slightly better person. The truth is, other people are necessary, and I need them, as much as I loathe to admit it. So because human connection is necessary both for survival, psychological well being and growth. I have one more reason to join the forum. Anyhow, hi, again, attempting to write in a grammatically correct fashion is taxing, so I hope there's a chill spot on this forum I can go to. I can't stand always sounding like I have a stick irreversibly lodged in my ass. Am I allowed to swear? Wouldn't want to rob any middle aged men of their well cultivated innocence, now would I? Heaven forbid the kids hear, wouldn't want them throwing F-bombs while they watch people impaled on the television.

Quoting AlmostOutlier

Heaven forbid the kids hear, wouldn't want them throwing F-bombs while they watch people impaled on the television.

This is golden.

Welcome!

Quoting AlmostOutlier

Anyhow, hi, again, attempting to write in a grammatically correct fashion is taxing, so I hope there's a chill spot on this forum I can go to. I can't stand always sounding like I have a stick irreversibly lodged in my ass.

Hiya AlmostOutlier and welcome!
The chillest place is also the place where some of the best conversations take place and that is in the "Shoutbox" thread. Feel free to jump into the conversation! As far as swearing is concerned, as long as your posts are not laden with them for no real purpose, you should be okay.
Enjoy your stay~

@Rank Amateur
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
We are glad you are here.

@SherlockH
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
Enjoy your stay ~

@chatterbears
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
We are glad you are here~

Reply to ArguingWAristotleTiff Thank you!

Hello all. I'm Ron. Today's my birthday but gifts are not necessary.

I'm married to a wonderful lady who loves me in spite of my faults, which we won't go into here. I'm the father of three adults who are all married and successful and have their own children. My greatest success in life is as a father.

I consider myself a budding philosopher of science, although at my age it may be too late to bloom. I'm working on a new approach to epistemology that I call Livable Epistemology. It doesn't depend on presuppositions and so is not circular. If I ever get it into publishable shape, I will let you know.

My philosophical interests are epistemology, logic, philosophy of science, philosophy of life and a minor interest in political philosophy.

Some of my favorite philosophers are Aristotle (yes, his physics are terrible but he's right about many things), Augustine (quite impressive in a number of areas even though he read Plato), Thomas Aquinas (I tend to agree with him more often than not), Blaise Pascal, John Locke, Isaac Newton, Karl Popper, Thomas Kuhn and C.S. Lewis.

Philosophers I dislike include Plato (for thinking it's a good thing for government to take children from their parents), David Hume (for his attack on Newton's Law of Cause and Effect), George Hegel and Karl Marx (obvious reasons), Nietzsche (he's so depressing), Wittgenstein (he never explained why he couldn't find the hippopotamus in the room), and Jacques Derrida (pseudo-philosophy - I've never seen obit writers so overjoyed at someone's death).

I hope we can learn from each other!

Reply to Ron Cram

Thanks for the intro, Ron, and welcome! :smile:

Hello All.

I just joined this morning. Thought I should say hello.

So hello.

Reply to MrMerk
Hiya MrMerk!
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

@Gord
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
We are glad you are here!

Reply to ArguingWAristotleTiff Thank you, perhaps ill stay here awhile. :)

Reply to ArguingWAristotleTiff Thank you. I'll be digging and lurking for a while, in an attempt to not just BLEH out words.
Nice to find a place online though where the conversation is more than Yanny or Laurel.

Godspeed.

Hello, I like to write philosophical musings. I like to participate in debates but I'm currently going through a period where I like to write more than read.

I have questions about postings. Are there site resources for FAQ?

One post I made is too long and I had to upload it to medium. Not sure if I can start a thread and link to it. Also, I received some negative feedback on the post although I wrote in earnest. Hopefully that's not a problem.

@betsyforaer'
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
We are glad you are here~
Receiving negative feedback is not a problem. How you handle that negative feedback is what matters. Is it a fair opinion? Is it an idea that you didn't already entertain? Consider what the person is saying and respond or move on. Most importantly, don't take things personally unless they are said directly to you~

Nanu Nanu,

Greetings from an intractable cynic and habitual sceptic that can be found wringing hands and clenching teeth in The Antipodes....I do not apologise in advance to those that will invariably take umbrage at any of my ruminations, for it seems to be a basic human right to take offence, no? I have the right to be as offended as anybody else, and let it be noted that what i am offended by is as irrelevant as what anybody else might be offended by.

I have been raging against the machine for so long now it bores me *yawn*....

In no particular order i am a chronic underachiever, shameless procrastinator, husband, daydreamer, misfit, father, work shirker, and a sworn enemy of ennui. For the record i no longer do drugs, i have placed a lifetime alcohol ban on myself, and I have been emancipated from the yoke of nicotine addiction. If I was respectable i could almost be considered something of a Puritan...

The absurdities of life fascinate me. People generally bore or horrify me...anyway, that is enough for now.

Have I disclosed too much?

Allan Wallace.

Hi everybody, I've been scouring the internet looking for a fun, interesting place to park my keyboard. This place won.

Reply to ArguingWAristotleTiff

Thanks, I meant that I post it elsewhere and they said it didn't develop a proper thesis. They didn't offer any constructive criticism so I'm looking to see if I can post it here.

But it's longer than the allotted amount of character space the forums allows for.

@allan wallace
Nanu Nanu,
Now that we have both aged ourselves Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
You are not by chance a blogger from Australia are you?
Cheers

@Phamph
Welcome and Woo Hoo for us winning!
Enjoy the ride~

Reply to betsyforaer I understand. Maybe there is a way to offer up a brief snapshot of the thesis you have that would fit within the character limit?

Quoting ArguingWAristotleTiff

Nanu Nanu,
Now that we have both aged ourselves Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
You are not by chance a blogger from Australia are you?
Cheers

Nay Sir,

I'm too lazy and disorganised to be a 'blogger'. I'll confess to having never ever read a blog! I do live in Australia and I am a 51 year old that has made a career out of avoiding ever having a career! I have certainly served my penance in countless gulags being exploited in many different ways, and it grieveth my weary soul that I am expected to 'work' *sobs*.....I drive a taxi for a job. A despised occupation that enables me to dangle precariously near the bottom of the economic food chain.

Whilst ensconced in the confessional I'll get a few more dirty secrets off my chest...

*whispers warily* I have never been ambitious. I'd suggest that heretics from the Middle Ages would have endured less hostility than your correspondent on occasions when I've been unable to resist the temptation to infuriate a stentorian mob!

I have never comprehended rapacious materialism. I chose to reject all of that pointless striving and status seeking bullshit decades ago. Anything more than enough is too much, no?

I don't take anything too seriously, especially myself.

For a little while I studied ancient greek philosophy. I got bored. I went on a blitzkrieg through the nightclubs for a few years as I embraced hedonism and nihilism. That too became boring.

I ended up marrying an 'exotic dancer'. After 21 tumultuous years and 4 children we are still tenuously married.

I studied Religion and Philosophy for a couple of semesters before the boredom derailed me again....

I am a restless and mischievous child trapped in the expanding body of a 51 year old fool.

The more knowledge that i acquire the more i realise how little I know....

I hope that i haven't bored anybody into a coma....zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz :)

Quoting allan wallace

*whispers warily* I have never been ambitious. I'd suggest that heretics from the Middle Ages would have endured less hostility than your correspondent on occasions when I've been unable to resist the temptation to infuriate a stentorian mob!

Oh how can I relate. I don't know how much I've obsessed in the past over this great "shortcoming". All this talk about potential and stuff, makes the head explode.

Quoting allan wallace

penance in countless gulags being exploited in many different ways

I too was apparently destined or required to serve time in various air-conditioned brightly lit satanic mills of bureaucracy, wherein I was as unproductive as possible.

Quoting allan wallace

I have never been ambitious.

I have been transitorily ambitious on several occasions. Ambition is a drag. Or a drug? It must have been blind ambition because so few of my efforts payed off.

Quoting allan wallace

I went on a blitzkrieg through the nightclubs for a few years

I was more the occupying army. 1001 nights in a gay bar and what I saw there. (Some were standing, some were walking around. A minority were sitting down. Everyone was drinking; most people were smoking; some people weren't. Much longing and many unsatisfied desires. The odds? Good results 2.6 nights out of 7.

Reply to allan wallace As James Thurber concluded at the end of the very short story, The Very Persistent Blood Hound, "The paths of glory at least lead to the grave; the paths of duty don't lead anywhere at all."

Welcome to THE Philosophy Forum. 51! I vaguely remember being 51. Decades ago.

Quoting allan wallace

Have I disclosed too much?

I'm not embarrassed yet, so apparently not.

Quoting allan wallace

Nay Sir,

Ma'am :up:

@Sum Dude
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
We are so glad you found us! It appears you are making quite the splash!
Enjoy! :cool:

Reply to ArguingWAristotleTiff

I'll just rewrite the thesis with the same concept behind it and see if I can fit that in into the space allotted.

I've received some positive feedback since then so I'm more hopeful now.

Quoting betsyforaer

I'll just rewrite the thesis with the same concept behind it and see if I can fit that in into the space allotted.

I've received some positive feedback since then so I'm more hopeful now.

Excellent! Keep reaching for the stars!

@Uber
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
Enjoy your stay~

I am A.R. LaBaere.

I am an author whose main fascination lies within pessimistic nihilism and Cosmicism. Additionally, I am childfree. As I suffer from severe post-traumatic stress disorder, I seek to elucidate my horrors through fabrication into fiction.

Beyond and within the demesne of the literary, I adore intellectual giftedness. I prefer Machiavellianism as my method of conduct, and I make few moral scruples. Puissance and intelligence are my zenethic goals, and I put aside interpersonal interactions in my hajj.

I am quite proud of my first publication, Rene Descartes Does Not Exist. Fiction has offered to me both possibilities unjudged by historical accuracy, and a distortion of actual events. I immerse myself as fully in the surreal as I may, for realism and the actual holds ennui.

My literary influences include H.P. Lovecraft, Thomas Ligotti, Mark Z. Danielewski, and Jon Padgett. I keep a sacrosanct library idolatrized to the aforementioned authors, as well as to the finest horror fiction and nonfiction available. My library also houses The Oxford Guide to Philosophy, from whose pages I hope to gain a wider overview of positions.

I dedicate my efforts to the cultivation of every paracosm within reach, every possible reading, and every improvement of fluid intelligence. I practice The Method of Loci in order to arrange ideas, improve my working memory, and to cultivate a noetic phrontistery. The evolution of ’Pataphysics, as well as anti-consciousness and anti-logic, compose a good portion of my pieces and lucubration. I am also heavily invested into theoretical physics and abstract mathematics.

In the completion of The Abyss Laughs, I have discovered and cultivated an increased vocabulary, working memory, and recall. I am pleased to have grown increasingly aware of the English language, in its selection of phrases long desuete, literary phrases, and verbiage freshly coined. I hope to expand my array of proses into a separate dialect, or stylization, of literary allusions and wordplay.

My current philosophical aims include the refinement, and erudition, of ’Pataphysics, antilogic, antinatalism, and nihilistic pessimism. The works of Thomas Ligotti have been awing for my pessimistic studies. In particularity, The Conspiracy Against the Human Race has introduced me to an exemplary structuring of pessimistic concepts, as well as to pessimists such as E.M. Cioran and Georges Bataille.

As I have not yet mastered the precise definitions and variations of mode, I wish to gain a broader overview of metaphysics, epistemology, and ontology. Nothingness, paradoxes, and the unheimlichness of the human condition are key areas of obsession. I seek to combine absurdist fiction with new varieties of philosophy. I am not certain of the applications of fictional philosophies to existence, but I much prefer magical absurdity which is only sometimes bound by an arbitrary mode of laws.

I am quite eager to meet other vedists, and I wish to invite any willing parties to begin a correspondence.

Hello. I'm a bit young for a philosopher I'd say, but it's never too early I suppose.
I've held interest in philosophy for many years, but I've found it hard to discuss it with my peers or mentors I've had over the years. Maybe it's growing up in the american midwest, but no one seems to really care about the questions no one has answered around here. A pity I suppose, but they are happy, and I'm the one seeking out what I cannot find, so I suppose I may be the fool.

I enjoy applying philosophy to political ideals and my fever dream is to create a perfect government, though the process is full of potential hypocrisy at times and the road is very long. The young dream big I suppose

While I'm not particularly fluent in all of the vocabulary around here, I intend to lay low and learn a bit before I start applying my ideas. It's the least I can do for a forum based around the very ideals I hold close to my heart; logic, wisdom, discovery, freedom of discussion, and exploration of the unknown.

Hello. I just arrived here, and would like to learn all about this forum. I am 63, cis male, a retired firmware architect, an autist, a father, a husband, a lifelong music lover (almost anything except opera), a Gaian Daoist (i.e. a tree-hugging hippy), and a committed armchair philosopher.

It's particularly important to me to find a forum where a diverse array of topics can be discussed. I just left a forum after 12 pointless years, when I finally had to accept that topics that were not science-based were considered 'nonsense', and their discussion was actively opposed, by trolling, insults, and so on. [Being autistic, my perception is acute in some ways, and non-existent in others. That's why it took me 12 years....] So I like to discuss science, but I also like to discuss (say) metaphysics, or human-oriented socio-cultural stuff (from a philosophical point of view, of course ;) ).

Am I in the right place? :chin: :wink:

@TogetherTurtle
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
You are never too young, but if I may ask, what is considered too young these days?
Enjoy your stay~

@Pattern-chaser
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
I do hope you enjoy our forum~

Reply to ArguingWAristotleTiff 17. Most of the philosophers I know a lot about are dead, so I suppose in comparison that's young. I'm just glad people still talk about philosophy to be honest.

Got my major in Computer Engineering, but was just as proud, if not more proud, of my minor in philosophy.

Looking for a place to be exposed to different points of views and ideas, where the participants are more nuanced in their ability to discuss a topic. News message boards just do not fit the bill.

Reply to Kamikaze Butter Wow! I envy you! :smile: I would have loved to include Philosophy as a minor, versus the Electronics that was my major. It wasn't possible then (1975-78) in my university. Maybe it is now? :chin:

Reply to TogetherTurtle

...a forum based around the very ideals I hold close to my heart; logic, wisdom, discovery, freedom of discussion, and exploration of the unknown

Oh, I do hope so! You have the right aims, I think, and I hope this forum supports and nurtures them. I'm optimistic that it does. Time will tell, for both of us (I'm new here too).

Reply to Pattern-chaser The future is built upon the mistakes of the past, and the blueprint of philosophy. It's too bad that people ignore the latter nowadays. The future of humanity rests in our hands, and for that, I am optimistic as well. I'll see you around the forum, I'm sure!

Reply to Pattern-chaser I graduated in 99, so things seemed to have changed.

The head of the department had to approve it. He asked me why I wanted to do it, as it would not help me make money. I told him I was not worried about money, just the experience.

Looking back, it might have been a test.

Reply to Kamikaze Butter If it was a test, I think you passed! :up:

@Fool
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
Enjoy your stay~

@Kamikaze Butter
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
We are glad you are here~

I've just joined the Forum. I am 69 years old and have a scientific/engineering background.
My reason for joining is to establish contact with others who are interested in what I consider the most important question one can ask:
"How (and why) did human beings come to be able to know so much about how the Universe works?"
I appreciate that asking "why" presupposes that there has to be a reason, which implies a higher level of existence. About that, I don't know at all. When I read about progress in mathematics or physics, I find it so amazing that our knowledge of such subjects can be so deep and complex. I appreciate that evolution happens very slowly, but I don't see how knowing a quark from a boson can help make it any more likely that I will survive to produce more offspring.
I hope there are others out there who have pondered this same issue, and perhaps have thoughts about it that they can contribute. There may well be existing discussions going on in the Forum, but I haven't been able to find any.

17 days later: Now wondering why I haven't had any responses???? Have I posted in the wrong place???

Thanks

I am A.R. LaBaere.

I am an author whose main fascination lies within pessimistic nihilism and Cosmicism. Additionally, I am childfree. As I suffer from severe post-traumatic stress disorder, I seek to elucidate my horrors through fabrication into fiction.

Beyond and within the demesne of the literary, I adore intellectual giftedness. I prefer Machiavellianism as my method of conduct, and I make few moral scruples. Puissance and intelligence are my zenethic goals, and I put aside interpersonal interactions in my hajj.

I am quite proud of my first publication, Rene Descartes Does Not Exist. Fiction has offered to me both possibilities unjudged by historical accuracy, and a distortion of actual events. I immerse myself as fully in the surreal as I may, for realism and the actual holds ennui.

My literary influences include H.P. Lovecraft, Thomas Ligotti, Mark Z. Danielewski, and Jon Padgett. I keep a sacrosanct library idolatrized to the aforementioned authors, as well as to the finest horror fiction and nonfiction available. My library also houses The Oxford Guide to Philosophy, from whose pages I hope to gain a wider overview of positions.

I dedicate my efforts to the cultivation of every paracosm within reach, every possible reading, and every improvement of fluid intelligence. I practice The Method of Loci in order to arrange ideas, improve my working memory, and to cultivate a noetic phrontistery. The evolution of ’Pataphysics, as well as anti-consciousness and anti-logic, compose a good portion of my pieces and lucubration. I am also heavily invested into theoretical physics and abstract mathematics.

In the completion of The Abyss Laughs, I have discovered and cultivated an increased vocabulary, working memory, and recall. I am pleased to have grown increasingly aware of the English language, in its selection of phrases long desuete, literary phrases, and verbiage freshly coined. I hope to expand my array of proses into a separate dialect, or stylization, of literary allusions and wordplay.

My current philosophical aims include the refinement, and erudition, of ’Pataphysics, antilogic, antinatalism, and nihilistic pessimism. The works of Thomas Ligotti have been awing for my pessimistic studies. In particularity, The Conspiracy Against the Human Race has introduced me to an exemplary structuring of pessimistic concepts, as well as to pessimists such as E.M. Cioran and Georges Bataille.

As I have not yet mastered the precise definitions and variations of mode, I wish to gain a broader overview of metaphysics, epistemology, and ontology. Nothingness, paradoxes, and the unheimlichness of the human condition are key areas of obsession. I seek to combine absurdist fiction with new varieties of philosophy. I am not certain of the applications of fictional philosophies to existence, but I much prefer magical absurdity which is only sometimes bound by an arbitrary mode of laws.

I am quite eager to meet other vedists, and I wish to invite any willing parties to begin a correspondence.

@Belter
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
Enjoy your stay!

@SteveKlinko
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
We are glad you are here!

@raza
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
We are glad you are here~

@Arne
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
We are glad you are here.

@wellwisher
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
Enjoy your stay~

@answermebot
Hmm... Welcome to The Philosophy Forum ….. I think

@Jake
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

@BrianW
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
We are glad you are here

@ArguingWAristotleTiff and everyone at The Philosophy Forum:
Thank you very much.

@RainyDay
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
I, personally, have been waiting for you! :pray:

@All sight
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

People trying to find themselves. Everyone around us is constantly telling us, but they're all wrong, aren't they? The pain of objectification. The fear of discovery. Better to submerge ourselves in the depths, holding the breath until it leaves us completely, and we die down there, all alone.

Might I ask you how you found The Philosophy Forum?
And are there more of you where you came from?
One more question:
You don't happen to fight fires for a living do you?
:starstruck:

Reply to ArguingWAristotleTiff

I would prefer not to answer personal questions on the grounds of avoiding self incrimination.

I'm Dan. 24 year old interested in Martin Heidegger.

Reply to Dan123

Welcome Dan, and thanks for your postings so far. :up:

Quoting All sight

I would prefer not to answer personal questions on the grounds of avoiding self incrimination.

:cool: I totally understand.

@Evil
Good day Evil.

Reply to ArguingWAristotleTiff
Evil day Good.

Hi! I've already posted without introducing myself, but that's because I'm a barbarian. I think I'm not as academical as most members I've encountered here, but I can spell my name. I'm also non-religious and without a favorite color. Are there any other achromatists here?

Reply to HuggetZukker Ha, ha, watch out everybody, he's not as academical as our esteemed colleagues. Funny! Welcome you darn achromatist.

Reply to Evil :lol:

@DingoJones
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
We are glad you are here~

Thanks, seems like a lively place

Did not know about this thread.

Hi everyone, I'm Dan from near London. I have no formal experience in Philosophy, but I have been reading up on it over the last few months and find it very interesting particularly metaphysics. Seems like a very pleasant and interesting forum...

Dan.

My name's Rob, Just joined a few seconds ago. I once dabbled on a site called Debate.org but it was overrun by trolls and spam and is now pretty-much dead (I noticed somebody said they hate the moderators here and after seeing what happens without the mods I was actually glad to hear that! Moderate the hell out of this if you have to!). Plato and Kant are my main inspirations in philosophy, and in modern times I enjoy the ideas of Jordan Peterson (politics) and Peter Russell (metaphysics). I dislike utilitarianism/consequentialism, the war on drugs, and transhumanism.

Quoting Bitter Crank

Nothing here to be self-consciously humble about.

Humble about religion, assertive about metaphysics.

Michael Ossipoff

Hello all!:smile: I'm a uber critical scientist.

Quoting Bitter Crank

Marx said, “The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it."

...and that was in 1848. So where's the change? We can't change the world. Only the few people (the "1%") who own it can change it. Of course now they're in the process of speeding up their change a bit.

So, what can we do? Stay out of the rulers' way, and quietly live out our lives as well and as safely as possible.

A famous person once said, "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's".

Michael Ossipoff

Hello from Japan.
I'm strongly interested in philosophy of well-being.
I'm a hedonist, trying to sophisticate this oversimplified view.
I hope I can make friends with people with similar interests.

On Stoicism
Quoting Valentinus

I am not saying what is a proper response. That is your problem given only to you as it is given to me as my problem. We all have these peculiar assignments, given to each of us. Our attempts to sort these elements out either lead to some kind of policy for ourselves or not.

The courage part is accepting those conditions and not waiting for better ones.

@Valentinus Impressive reply.
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum~
Enjoy your stay ~

Reply to ArguingWAristotleTiff
Thank you for the warm welcome.

Quoting Michael Ossipoff

"Marx said, “The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it."
— Bitter Crank

...and that was in 1848. So where's the change? We can't change the world. Only the few people (the "1%") who own it can change it. Of course now they're in the process of speeding up their change a bit.

What if then, the point of philosophy, was to devise a way to change it?

Quoting leo

[i]"Marx said, “The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it."
— Bitter Crank

" ...and that was in 1848. So where's the change? We can't change the world. Only the few people (the "1%") who own it can change it. Of course now they're in the process of speeding up their change a bit. "— Michael Ossipoff[/i]


What if then, the point of philosophy, was to devise a way to change it?

What if there isn't a way to change it? I suggest that there isn't a way to change it.

But this is only one life in one of infinitely-many possibility-worlds.

What can we do then? Live out our lives as quietly and peacefully as possible while we're here, and be beneficial to others in some ways, to the extent feasible.

Life is for play ("Lila")

Michael Ossipoff

Quoting Michael Ossipoff

What if there isn't a way to change it? I suggest that there isn't a way to change it.

But what if there is a way to change it, and that to find it we first have to believe there is?

Quoting leo

But what if there is a way to change it, and that to find it we first have to believe there is?

People have believed in it for a long time, and what has all that belief and effort culminated in?

Michael Ossipoff

Quoting Michael Ossipoff

People have believed in it for a long time, and what has all that belief and effort culminated in?

It's easy to get discouraged when most people believe we can't change the world, and because of all the resistance you are faced with when you attempt to change it. But I believe that people are waking up more and more, and that thanks to the internet we can spread that belief to others and make it become a reality. It won't be easy, but I truly believe in a profound way that we can change it.

@leo Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
We are glad you are here~

@VMF
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
Love your nickname!

Maybe, but those things have been said for a very long time, and look where all that effort has culminated.

Michael Ossipoff

Reply to ArguingWAristotleTiff Thanks!

I want to change my name on the forum. How can i delete my account so I can create a new one with the same email address?

Reply to Murray Hollis PM a moderator and they may change it for you. (a one-time deal, so choose wisely)

Welcome to the forum!

Reply to Murray Hollis

Considering you've just made one post, you could probably ask to be deleted then make a new account. Summoning admins to see if this is possible @Baden @jamalrob

Reply to Murray Hollis

You can just PM me your preferred name and I'll change it.

Reply to Michael Ossipoff Those remarks were meant to be ironic, right? There have been colossal changes since Marx made that comment in 1848. There have been multiple successful revolutions inspired by Marx. Marx has almost without a doubt been one of the biggest influences in 20th century politics. There were successful revolutions in Russia, China, Cuba, Vietnam, there was the Vietnam War, the Cold War... Those changes weren't brought about by the 1%. These are strong real-world examples of what people are capable of. It's quite absurd to say that change isn't possible. Remember that capitalism is a very modern phenomenon and hasn't been around for anywhere near as long as political systems of the past. Ask yourself, how many of those political systems were eventually overthrown? Where is Feudalism now? Where are all of the absolute monarchies?

If history is anything to go by, there will likely be big changes ahead.

Reply to S

[i]“Marx said, “The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it." “— Bitter Crank
.
“...and that was in 1848. So where's the change? We can't change the world. Only the few people (the "1%") who own it can change it. Of course now they're in the process of speeding up their change a bit.”
.
Those remarks were meant to be ironic, right?

.
No.
Irony? There’s plenty of that in topics like this, but don’t get me started. :D
.

There have been colossal changes since Marx made that comment in 1848.

.
Yes science has bettered our lives in some ways. Explain that to the victims. As I said, after those colossal changes, where are we now? A runaway dystopia that’s rapidly getting worse.
.

There have been multiple successful revolutions inspired by Marx. Marx has almost without a doubt been one of the biggest influences in 20th century politics.

.
I didn’t say anything critical or disparaging about Marx. I don’t blame Marx for the current state of the societal world.
.

There were successful revolutions in Russia, China, Cuba, Vietnam, there was the Vietnam War, the Cold War...

.
The Cold War and the Vietnam war are hardly examples that show our societal world to be a good one.
.
Of course the same can be said for current events.
.

Those changes weren't brought about by the 1%. These are strong real-world examples of what people are capable of.

I’m not saying that the road has been completely unidirectional all the time, or that the 1% (more like .01% or less) who rule are responsible for every detail of what happens. They just own the eventual results.
.

It's quite absurd to say that change isn't possible.

.
Allow me to quote from the movie “Red Riding-Hood”, in which Father Solomon said:
.
“With no disrespect, you have no idea what you’re dealing with.”
.
Today’s technology makes it a whole ‘nother ball-game.
.

Remember that capitalism is a very modern phenomenon and hasn't been around for anywhere near as long as political systems of the past. Ask yourself, how many of those political systems were eventually overthrown? Where is Feudalism now? Where are all of the absolute monarchies?

.
At first the justification was that the ruler claimed to be divine. Then it was just that he and his were just better. Thien, as science and technology advanced, the story had to keep changing. Different stories, same scam.
.

If history is anything to go by, there will likely be big changes ahead.

.
That’s right. And those changes are rapidly happening, and have recently been accelerating hard.

My advice was good advice:
.

So, what can we do? Stay out of the rulers' way, and quietly live out our lives as well and as safely as possible.

.
A famous person once said, "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's".

Michael Ossipoff
.
2019 January 18th (Roman-Gregorian Calendar)
2019-W04-5 (South-Solstice WeekDate Calendar)
2019, Month 1, Week 4, Friday (South-Solstice Equal 28-Day Months Calendar)

Hi, CurlyHairedCobbler here. I'm a member of an interfaith family containing Orthodox, Conservative, and Reform Jews, Atheists, Agnostics, and Christians. Having been exposed to so many interesting and conflicting views, I've developed an interest in theology. I believe that reason is the best tool for answering questions about the being and the nature of the divine. I am a rationalist not only in the common language sense of believing in the power of reason to uncover truths, but also in the philosophical sense of believing that some truths can be known a priori, regardless of sense experience.

In college, I majored in psychology and minored in philosophy. I have always been very interested in both topics. My name is a reference to the section of the Republic, where Plato likens men and women fit to guard to bald and long-haired people fit to be cobblers: both are different in one sense, but alike in the sense relevant to their profession. I am a woman with curly hair, so I chose the name Curly Haired Cobbler for this site.

I pray that my reason lead me to the truth.

I'm surprised that having studied both psychology and philosophy you are using simplistic concepts like 'reason' and 'truth'.

Quoting CurlyHairedCobbler

Hi, CurlyHairedCobbler here. I'm a member of an interfaith family containing Orthodox, Conservative, and Reform Jews, Atheists, Agnostics, and Christians. Having been exposed to so many interesting and conflicting views, I've developed an interest in theology. I believe that reason is the best tool for answering questions about the being and the nature of the divine. I am a rationalist not only in the common language sense of believing in the power of reason to uncover truths, but also in the philosophical sense of believing that some truths can be known a priori, regardless of sense experience.

What do you mean by "the divine"? Does this phrase indicate anything different from the "theos" in "theology"?

On what grounds do you claim that "reason is the best tool for answering questions about the being and the nature of the divine"? Would you also say reason is the best tool for formulating questions about those same subjects, and for criticizing questions about those same subjects without answering the questions per se?

How can we tell when reason is the best tool for formulating, criticizing, and answering a range of questions on a given subject matter? When is reason not among the best tools for formulating, criticizing, and answering a range of questions on a given subject matter? Or is the point rather that in some cases we proceed in the light of reason as well as the senses, and in other cases we proceed in the light of reason alone, without any evidence whatsoever to inform our speeches?

By "questions about the being of the divine", do you mean questions about whether it makes sense to speak of something called "the deity" or "the divine" as a thing that "exists"? Do we likewise inquire about the being, which is to say the existence, of stones, and plants, and animals, and human animals, and the bombs and bread produced and consumed by human animals? And similarly we ask about number and magnitude, about justice and morality, about electrons and observable phenomena explainable in terms of electrons... asking ourselves and each other whether and in what sense it makes sense to say such things "exist" or "do not exist"?


What do you mean by "questions about the nature of the divine"? How do we inform our conceptions and resolve doubts and disputes concerning the "nature" of a thing? Would you agree the answer to this question may be approached at least in part by considering the "bases" on which we, who speak together here, are informed about the relevant objects?

It seems each of us, in acquiring knowledge of the empirical world, for instance, acquires conceptions of various sorts of object and conceptions of particular objects of various sorts; conceptions informed on the basis of sense-perception in various modes; and each of us refines these conceptions against the grindstone of his own experience as a participant in a cultural context inhabited and produced by human animals.

I would argue that some objective judgments -- for instance judgments of quantity, magnitude, and number, judgments of modality, judgments of existence, judgments of truth-value, judgments of similarity and difference; judgments of observational modality, judgments of phenomenal qualities such as color and pitch -- seem to entail generic conceptions that touch upon the very form of the experience of minds like ours, and likewise seem grounded in our being as animal organisms.

Are those fair examples of the sort of deep-rooted concept you call "a priori"? And would you claim that at least some of our conceptions of "the divine" and of "the deity" indicate deep-rooted concepts of this sort?

Quoting CurlyHairedCobbler

Hi, CurlyHairedCobbler here.

Hi, @CurlyHairedCobbler. @Galuchat, here.

Quoting fresco

I'm surprised that having studied both psychology and philosophy you are using simplistic concepts like 'reason' and 'truth'.

I'm surprised you would admit to having simplistic conceptions of 'reason' and 'truth'.

Reply to Cabbage Farmer
Maybe if you returned a greeting and brief introduction to @CurlyHairedCobbler, she may be more inclined to answer one of your 15 questions in a new thread.

Reply to Galuchat
I admitted nothing. On the contrary my implication was that the usage of those concepts was simplistic which an academic ought to have realised.

Quoting Galuchat

Maybe if you returned a greeting and brief introduction to CurlyHairedCobbler, she may be more inclined to answer one of your 15 questions in a new thread.

Do you mean to suggest this thread is a place reserved for introductions and brief salutations, and that here we should refrain from philosophical remarks prompted by otherwise relevant statements made in the course of such niceties?

If so, is this a generally accepted formality among us or a matter of personal taste? If the former, thanks for bringing it to my attention.

Reply to Cabbage Farmer CHC did start one other thread, on the topic of 'necessary being', where I think many of the questions you raise here might be suitably addressed. However I also note that she's only entered two posts.

Quoting Wayfarer

CHC did start one other thread, on the topic of 'necessary being', where I think many of the questions you raise here might be suitably addressed. However I also note that she's only entered two posts.

Thanks, Wayfarer. I noticed that post and have begun a reply to it along the same lines. I hope to find time for finishing it off.

Hello all. I'm new, but I detest all nonsensical wordplay. They're destructive, childish and polluting. Thank you.

Hello. I'm new to the forum, so I'll first introduce myself. I'm very interested in philosophy, especially political philosophy and ethics. I enjoy exploring different perspectives and schools of thought, some that seem to align more with my current worldview and others that challenge it. I also love to explore different cultures and how people in societies interact with one another. I look forward to having thought-provoking discussions and learning from you all!

My screen name comes from some Enid Blyton characters, in the variation proposed by one of the other characters.

My interests: mainly philosophy of science, also a bit of philosophy of mind, philosophy of history and philosophy of religion.

Reply to Fine Doubter

Welcome. Hope you enjoy the place.

Hi everyone. My name's Forrest and I'm looking for a place to discuss philosophical topics since my usual source for such discussion, the xkcd forums, have recently died. Also I'm getting close to finishing a diminished form of a philosophy project I've been working on since I finished my BA in philosophy just over a decade ago, and I'd like a place to get some input on it when it's done. (The work-in-progress is being posted online continually but I figure I probably shouldn't include a link in my first post).

ETA: Looking at some other introductions here I should probably say more about my philosophical views and interests.

My interests are broad and varied, ranging from language, the arts, logic and mathematics, through "core" philosophical topics like ontology, epistemology, and philosophy of mind, education, on to ethics, free will, political philosophy, and more Continental "meaning of life" stuff like existentialism.

My views I would broadly characterize as "objective criticism", meaning anti-fideism + anti-nihilism. More specific views include universal prescriptivism, mathematicism, empirical realism / physicalism / phenomenalism / neutral monism, a weird mix of both presentism and eternalism, modal realism, functionalism, panpsychism, critical rationalism / falsificationism, freethought, hedonistic altruism, compatibilism, deontology, libertarian socialism, philosophical anarchism, pragmatism, and something akin to absurdism.

Hello all. I have arrived here after discarding many forums. I see many interesting threads and I think this can be a good place to be.

I am an eternal student, mainly because of my inability to pass the exams of the degree of Philosophy, and that I have been trying intermittently for more than 20 years. I'm here more to read than to write, since English is not my language and I do not feel very comfortable expressing myself in it. The only thing that I have clear is that I only know that I know nothing, but in my case it's true, not like Mr.Socrates who said it by pose or to look cool.

:waves:

Hi. For some reason I used my real name. Surprisingly, the universe didn't implode. I live in Leicester, a small city in the UK midlands. I’m 71, semi-retired and half-educated (six GCE O levels, left A levels halfway through). I’ve so far lived a somewhat drifting life. I’m enrolled in the University of Life, of course, but keep missing the lectures.

I’ve got a small chip on my shoulder about not getting a (real) university education. In an adjacent parallel universe, I’m a semi-retired academic. In the next one, I’m a successful freelance journalist. In another one, I’m a homeless alcoholic junkie. And so it goes.

Not that I’d want to categorise myself, but (in this universe) I’m a cisgender, heterosexual, neurotypical, ex-omnivore semi-lapsed-vegan organic-buying vegetarian, left-liberal-Green, antireligious agnostic lapsed Christian with pantheistic, panpsychist and antitheistic tendencies.

On an even more personal note – why not? – I’m in respite from depression. Having tried most available treatments, with varying success, I now occasionally self-medicate with cannabis. I’m currently hanging on to my precious marriage. (Counselling has – kind of – helped.)

Reply to Chris Hughes

Hey, welcome along. :clap:

Reply to Chris Hughes

I feel the vibe.

Reply to Wallows
Feel it!

Reply to Baden
Thanks. Love your work!

Quoting Chris Hughes

I live in Leicester, a small city in the UK midlands.

Welcome. These are good years to be a football fan in Leicester :smile:

I'm a philosopher from Scotland, Hume 2.0 haha just kidding.

I come here to have deep discussions about what I feel are the best questions I come up with to help humanity grow. Or at least that is my goal. Will always be debatable whether or not they are good questions for the purpose.

My dream is to just be seen as someone who tried their hardest to fight for a better future by those who will call us history.

My more immediate goal is to try and convince as many people here to work on collections of books and essays to publish together as a community in partnership with public libraries on as large a scale as is possible with who is represented here. :)

The reason for public partnership with libraries is to make sure they are properly funded and potentially open up other avenues of investment for them; such as teaching degrees and other helpful certifications for librarians and offering up little to no cost growth based personal education to the public through online courses and in house at a public library.

So seriously everyone; if you write a book or an essay and it makes money, donate some or all (depending on if you're writing for a living or for other reasons) of it to your public library and give them a few free copies!

Reply to ZhouBoTong

football fan in Leicester

Yes - now we're safe in the Premiership I can go down the road to watch my favourite team, Man U. Not that I ever have :gasp:

Howdy, folks. I'm an old guy with opinions, some philosophical, all irrefutable.

I don't know how much I'll be contributing to the forum, as I try to confine myself to topics within my philosophical wheelhouse, by which I imply no expertise whatsoever. But between you and me, I'm pretty much an authority on every topic, so expect reams of wit and wisdom promptly.

Well, that was tiring. That's about as much thought as I'll probably put into any post, so bask in the quality that awaits you, folks. Thanks for having me.

Reply to fiveredapples Welcome!

Nice to hear from you again fiveredapples.

Greetings.

I've been looking for a suitable forum to share some of my own ideas on consciousness.
I've been thinking about it on and off since 2014 and developed a fairly detailed theory. But I approach it much more from an engineering perspective than the philosophical one, so I'm not totally sure whether this is going to be the right place.

I still haven't figured out the difference between a materialist and a physicalist, or if there is a difference. And I'm not sure about identity theorists, functionalists, and behaviourists, and whether there is some other 'ist that I could relate better to. But my philosophy probably falls somewhere in the space of a skeptic physicalist.

I don't address people I just start speaking. I'm seeking a change in thought process of priority. The universe is limited and I believe if there's anything to be done we must start now because they universe won't force us to fix it. I seek perfection & permanence. True purpose.

@TheLeviathanKing
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum.
Enjoy your stay :flower:

Quoting TheLeviathanKing

True purpose.

You might embrace:

'Beauty is truth, truth beauty,' - that is all ye know on earth, and all ye need to know--John Keats

Welcome!!

Quoting Malcolm Lett

But my philosophy probably falls somewhere in the space of a skeptic physicalist.

Careful of that Phi function. It's a doozy to compute! Welcome. :cool:

Reply to jgill Hiya jgill! Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
Enjoy the ride! :halo:

Quoting Malcolm Lett

I still haven't figured out the difference between a materialist and a physicalist, or if there is a difference. And I'm not sure about identity theorists, functionalists, and behaviourists

Sometimes materialist and physicalist mean the same thing. When they differ, it’s either just to explicitly expand the set of things believed in to physical stuff besides matter (like other forms of energy, spacetime, quantum fields, strings and branes, etc), or to affirm that general kind of stuff while denying the existence of “material substances” as in something above and beyond the empirically observable properties of things, some kind of transcendental stuff that those properties inhere in.

Behaviorists think that there is nothing more to mind than behavior; to be in a mental state just is to behave some way. Functionalists are very similar, except that they take mind to be a function, a map from input to output, where the output is behavior, and input is sense experience; to be in a mental state is more like to be disposed to behave a certain way in response to certain experiences. Both of these differ from any kind of identity theory because they imply multiple realizability: anything that does the same behavior or function is in the same mental state, no matter what kind of underlying stuff is instantiating that behavior or functionality (brains, circuits, vacuum tubes, etc), whereas identity theories say that a mental state is (either a type or a token of) a brain state specifically.

Quoting Pfhorrest

Behaviorists think that there is nothing more to mind than behavior; to be in a mental state just is to behave some way.

I'd argue a behaviorist admits there is a mind separate from behavior, but its inner workings are unknowable. The mind is not just behavior, but the behavior is the only thing that you can measure. In order to advance psychology into a scientific discipline, as opposed to the speculative theories of Freud, Skinner limited the relevant data to that which could objectively be observed and measured. So, I don't think you can say that behaviorism states that the mind is behavior, but it's more that the mind is a black box with inner workings that cannot be known, therefore making only the behavior relevant for analysis.

Hello there. I'm not well versed in the study of philosophy, but I was looking for a forum that satisfies my thirst for intellectual discussion, and it seems I've come to the right place.

I'm only a lurker now, but that will hopefully change in the near future.

Reply to Ecliptic Welcome to the forum @Ecliptic

Reply to Hanover What then is the difference between behaviorism and functionalism? Since functionalism also looks only at behavior for data.

Maybe this conversation should be split into another thread so we don’t crowd this introduction thread.

Good evening!

I'm currently studying history and mathematics to complete my general diploma. Have been working for some time now towards becoming eligible for admission into the university here where I live. I'll be applying for philosophical studies once I'm able to, as I'm interested in the meaning of learning, in the nature of thought, and in the search for reality. Although, to my surprise, I've found a great deal of joy in studying history and mathematics as well. Not always due to the content but, rather, to the act of studying and finding out. Other than that I'm generally interested in most things - sometimes to such a degree that I can be amazed by seemingly simple things, like a pen on the table, a rock down by the shoreline, or the noise of a stone under the tire of my car. Other times, nothing at all.

Any way, looking forward to explore the forum some more. :)

Cheers!

Reply to Lutz

Welcome to the forum Lutz :smile:

Quoting Lutz

the search for reality

Try and remember where you last saw it.

Quoting jamalrob

Try and remember where you last saw it.

:grin:

Quoting jamalrob

Try and remember where you last saw it.

Not at a Trump presser for sure.

Hello everybody:)

Reply to Elegans

Welcome!

Reply to Elegans Hello. Where have you been all our lives?

hello

Hello,

I´m interested philosophy in general, but especially about ethics.

Reply to Antinatalist

Welcome!

Reply to fdrake

Thank you!

Reply to Antinatalist

Hi,

How did you discover antinatalism?

I was a teenager in early nineties. I thought about existence, being and non-being. Coming to life and
exit from life (to non-existence). I thought lots life and non-life and in 1995 I wrote short text of the subject.
I discover the term "antinatalism" in 2015.

Reply to Antinatalist Welcome. I recommend you look for the threads and posts from @schopenhauer1. He is a good source for arguments in favor of antinatalism.

Reply to T Clark Thank you for the recommendation. :)

Hi. My name's John27. I'm just some dude. I try to be the best I can be, even if sometimes its a lot harder than it seems. Thanks for having me.

Reply to john27 Welcome John27, it's good to have you here.

Reply to jamalrob

Thanks. :up:

Quoting john27

Hi. My name's John27. I'm just some dude. I try to be the best I can be, even if sometimes its a lot harder than it seems. Thanks for having me.

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
Enjoy your ride and we are happy to have you :flower:
Though this does feel a little dejavu like :razz:

Quoting ArguingWAristotleTiff

Though this does feel a little dejavu like :razz:

I was trying to think of a witty remark to make about dejavu, but nothing came to mind.

Nevertheless, pleased to make your acquaintance. :party:

:heart:

Reply to Agent Smith
:heart:

Hello everyone,

as this seemed the correct place to introduce myself, here goes. I decided just to post my 'application' to become a member here - with some small edits.

Firstly a short introduction, then why I want to join the forum and then about my interests.

I'm in my mid-thirties, from Norway (the country) and in a long-term relationship. My formal experience with philosophy is from the mandatory course we go through in University, where I studied German language. I have also (almost) finished a bachelor in Social Work, which is more focused on the intersection between psychology, physical health and social problems.

Why I'd like to join is a bit similar to what Wayfarer writes in this post.
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/14024/meta-philosophy-types-and-orientations

My perspective on it would be to find others that want to harmonize not only different perspectives and insights, but also experiences, moral and everyday life as well. In that sense, my objective aligns with the concept of Intentional Community, but I am more focused on finding people that have a meta-vision with regards to their life, and have a longing for co-creating with others as well.

To go into this more would become very long, so I will try and shorten it to two outcomes I'd like.

1. I join this forum, and through thoughtful and honest interactions, sharing my perspectives and inner life, and interacting with the posts I find interesting, find someone that wants to co-create something similar to what me and my partner want.

2. The second outcome would be that I do not find someone, but have intelligent and caring interactions, which are also important to me. And I can take what I read and learn and choose to apply it to my goals and aspirations, and maybe something new comes out of it.

Hm, what I am interested in.. The way I understand myself I am not very attached to any 'interests'. Even though my personality lets me get interested quickly, self-understanding has shown me it all ties back to a much bigger jigsaw of meaning. So, meaning is the horse, and interest is the cart, so to actually answer, I would have to explain what is meaningful to me. So let me try.

Meaning is to create something 'satisfactory' at the highest complexity level I, together with others, am/are able to achieve. And meaning is to achieve higher integration between the different types of being, both internally and externally.

Something refers to abstract thoughts, as well as abstract goals, visions and feelings. Furthermore it refers to everyday life and living, relationships and health, including also the metaphysical as well as the practical.

Satisfactory means that which aligns the best with how well we are able to mesh things together with the different resources, life-situations and so forth we have available, and balancing that with our different limitations and weaknesses.

With regards to the site guidelines, I feel totally confident with regards to tone, and if I should miss something with regards to context matters, I will quickly fix it. With regards to English, it is my second language, and even though I believe I have a decent grasp on the language, it should be relatively apparent in these kinds of high-level conversations that I am a non-native speaker. I am good at form and structure, but not excellent. And to write this as well I used a simple spelling program to fix the glaringly obvious mistakes. But it is of course not a cure all.

Are there follow up questions as well, or is this application good enough to get a grasp of if I should be let loose on the innocent lambs in The philosophy forum or not?

I am actually grateful you have this sort of criterion, and it seems the forum has benefitted from it as well. I agree with the sentiment, even if it means I would not be accepted. *Big puppy eyes - Yes, I am a good person, please believe me* <-This worked btw, protip.

Thanks for having me, and you'll see me around answering some posts, to grow and get a feel for what is here. When I feel comfortable, I might start my own posts, but as of now I am more into just having a discourse with a set topic.

All the best,
Caerulea-Lawrence

Reply to Caerulea-Lawrence

Hello, and welcome to our little community. Thank you for your fulsome introduction. I feel we might be friends, but I am old and bound for recycling in the near future, so my contribution to anyone's creation can only be very small. Never mind, you are young and can do more. Dive in, say some stuff, and see what happens!

Reply to Caerulea-Lawrence

Welcome to the forum.

Quoting Caerulea-Lawrence

With regards to English, it is my second language, and even though I believe I have a decent grasp on the language, it should be relatively apparent in these kinds of high-level conversations that I am a non-native speaker.

The only way we might be able to tell you aren't a native English speaker is that your vocabulary, grammar, spelling, and clarity are all better than 90% of the members.

Quoting Caerulea-Lawrence

Why I'd like to join is a bit similar to what Wayfarer writes in this post.
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/14024/meta-philosophy-types-and-orientations

Yes, @Wayfarer is great, keeping in mind he is one of only seven pleasant people here on the forum. No, I am not one of those seven. This is what we in English call a "joke." Which isn't the same as saying it isn't true.

Quoting Caerulea-Lawrence

My perspective on it would be to find others that want to harmonize not only different perspectives and insights, but also experiences, moral and everyday life as well. In that sense, my objective aligns with the concept of Intentional Community, but I am more focused on finding people that have a meta-vision with regards to their life, and have a longing for co-creating with others as well.

I see philosophy not as a subject, but as a practice, much like meditation. For me, the goal of that practice is to become more self-aware of how my intellect works. I'm especially interested in ontology and epistemology and I will try to force you to talk about them. The philosophers who mean the most to me are Lao Tzu, Emerson, and Collingwood.

I look forward to talking with you.

Reply to Caerulea-Lawrence Hello! Welcome to the forum. :up:

Reply to Caerulea-Lawrence thanks for the very thoughtful introduction! I hope the community lives up to the rather exalted standards you have laid out, and welcome.

Reply to T Clark aww shucks :yikes:

Quoting Caerulea-Lawrence

My perspective on it would be to find others that want to harmonize not only different perspectives and insights, but also experiences, moral and everyday life as well.

Welcome aboard Reply to Caerulea-Lawrence . It would be interesting if members would speak more about their life experiences as they argue philosophical points. Sometimes they do.

Quoting Caerulea-Lawrence

Are there follow up questions as well, or is this application good enough to get a grasp of if I should be let loose on the innocent lambs in The philosophy forum or not?

The application suggests that the forum should not be let loose on someone so hungry for meaning, actually. You will not find it here.

Quoting praxis

The application suggests that the forum should not be let loose on someone so hungry for meaning, actually. You will not find it here.

Thanks praxis. Obelix had it rough from the get-go, but even he managed to eat his fill in the unlikeliest of situations, so no worries, I'll fill my belly here as well.

Quoting jgill

Welcome aboard ?Caerulea-Lawrence
It would be interesting if members would speak more about their life experiences as they argue philosophical points. Sometimes they do.

Hi jgill,
I would like that. To me that is an essential source of knowledge and understanding, and a deep heart-to-heart/mind-to-mind can in many cases solve an issue lightning quick compared to lengthy discussions.

Still, with regards to this kind of openness, there still needs to be precision and accuracy for it to work, so I see parallels worthy of exploration as well.

Quoting Wayfarer

?Caerulea-Lawrence
thanks for the very thoughtful introduction! I hope the community lives up to the rather exalted standards you have laid out, and welcome.

Thank you. Lets see how it goes, and whatever option prevails, I hope me and you all get something useful, knowledgable and heartwarming out of it.

Quoting javi2541997

?Caerulea-Lawrence
Hello! Welcome to the forum. :up:

Thank you for the thumbs up.

Quoting T Clark

The only way we might be able to tell you aren't a native English speaker is that your vocabulary, grammar, spelling, and clarity are all better than 90% of the members.

The downfall of the Commonwealth is nigh... Sad times Clark, sad times indeed.

Quoting T Clark

Yes, Wayfarer is great, keeping in mind he is one of only seven pleasant people here on the forum. No, I am not one of those seven. This is what we in English call a "joke." Which isn't the same as saying it isn't true.

Quoting T Clark

I see philosophy not as a subject, but as a practice, much like meditation. For me, the goal of that practice is to become more self-aware of how my intellect works. I'm especially interested in ontology and epistemology and I will try to force you to talk about them. The philosophers who mean the most to me are Lao Tzu, Emerson, and Collingwood.

I look forward to talking with you.

*Oh snap, I can't write this out loud:" I'm sorry Clark, I do not believe in the magic properties of "the holy THREE" or "The magical SEVEN". I was expecting a bit more from a philosophy forum... Even giving codenames to three of the four HORSEMEN, that is really not what I was expecting. So, Clark I AM NOT INTERESTED IN BEING CONVERTED TO THE ANGLICAN CHURCH, I AM SORRY!"*

Thank you Clark, you are such a cheesecake!! I would love to know more about your view on philosophy!!

PS: I warn you though, I'm a stubborn cat, so gotta feed me those good pieces first if you want my attention. If I'm happy you can pursue your goal of reviving the Commonwealth one member at a time. And just so you don't forget, the good pieces Yeah?.
https://imgur.com/EO4BU

And this Clark, is good ol' trolling. Which isn't to say it isn't true, kappa. (I never knew my passive knowledge of that word would ever come to use, I am truly Grateful Clark. I feel like I have learned so much about ontology and epistemology already! You are the BEST!) :wink:


Quoting unenlightened

Hello, and welcome to our little community. Thank you for your fulsome introduction. I feel we might be friends, but I am old and bound for recycling in the near future, so my contribution to anyone's creation can only be very small. Never mind, you are young and can do more. Dive in, say some stuff, and see what happens!

Thank you, I will do that. And I appreciate the recognition. Sure, let's see what happens indeed.

Quoting Caerulea-Lawrence

Which isn't to say it isn't true, kappa.

I wasn't sure about this reference so I looked it up. Are you using "kappa" as a Japanese troll? You should know that @javi2541997 is our resident Japanophile. He will be excited.

Also - if you haven't found it yet, I suggest you take a look at The Shoutbox at the top of the first page. It's where we get to talk about anything we want. A lot of times that's food but sometimes it's politics, movies, or even philosophy if we're too lazy to start a full discussion. It's a good place to get to know people's personalities and idiosyncrasies.

Currently Reading is also a good place to look to see what philosophy and non-philosophy books and papers people are reading now.

Reply to Caerulea-Lawrence

Welcome!

Hope you have fun here, it's a great place to deepen one's knowledge on many topics in the field.

Don't be afraid to express your opinions, because, ultimately all of us may be wrong. :cool:

Thank you, I will have a look. :) Kappa is from japanese, but it is an expression from Twitch I believe, and in use in the westernly digital hemisphere For a better description, you can check it out on the Urban Dictionary. I assosciate it with people in their teens and early twenties.

Quoting Caerulea-Lawrence

I assosciate it with people in their teens and early twenties.

Alas, I am 50 years out from my early 20s.

Reply to Caerulea-Lawrence

Quoting T Clark

Are you using "kappa" as a Japanese troll? You should know that javi2541997 is our resident Japanophile. He will be excited.

I am not going to lie: Kappa is a word that excites me. It is a troll from Japanese mythology, yes. But this is also used by Ry?nosuke Akutagawa in the title of one of his books. The story is about a mentally ill person who joins the world of Kappa and lives together. Akutagawa is considered one of the most relevant Japanese writers, and his second name is the label of a literature prize in Japan. Kenzaburo Oe won one of the contests.

Kappa means "child of river" because it is made of the kanjis: kawa (?), river; and tar? (??), child. Kappa is like the diminutive of the word.

:flower:

Quoting Caerulea-Lawrence

Thanks praxis. Obelix had it rough from the get-go, but even he managed to eat his fill in the unlikeliest of situations, so no worries, I'll fill my belly here as well.

There’s abundant food for the ego in places like this. Meaning, on the other hand, is found in purpose and losing oneself in places and peoples larger than oneself. But don’t take my word for it, you’ll see for yourself soon enough.

Quoting praxis

There’s abundant food for the ego in places like this. Meaning, on the other hand, is found in purpose and losing oneself in places and peoples larger than oneself. But don’t take my word for it, you’ll see for yourself soon enough.

Yes.

Quoting Manuel

Welcome!

Hope you have fun here, it's a great place to deepen one's knowledge on many topics in the field.

Don't be afraid to express your opinions, because, ultimately all of us may be wrong. :cool:

Thank you, Manuel. I'll see what I can unearth as time goes by. I also have my own theories, but as of now I find it more helpful to practice rigorousness and to discernment. So no worries, I do not doubt myself or am afraid to express my opinion, I am however conscious about being truthful to my inner standards.

Quoting T Clark

Alas, I am 50 years out from my early 20s.

;) Yes, statistically that would make a lot of sense then, that it isn't a word you are very familiar with. Moreover, there are a lot of similar expression I have no idea the meaning of either, so no worries.

Quoting javi2541997

I am not going to lie: Kappa is a word that excites me. It is a troll from Japanese mythology, yes. But this is also used by Ry?nosuke Akutagawa in the title of one of his books. The story is about a mentally ill person who joins the world of Kappa and lives together. Akutagawa is considered one of the most relevant Japanese writers, and his second name is the label of a literature prize in Japan. Kenzaburo Oe won one of the contests.

Kappa means "child of river" because it is made of the kanjis: kawa (?), river; and tar? (??), child. Kappa is like the diminutive of the word.

Then it is only fair that Kappa gets some attention.

Quoting Caerulea-Lawrence

Then it is only fair that Kappa gets some attention.

See, I've already started using it.

Quoting T Clark

What I don’t get is the hatred for sock puppets.
— 0 thru 9

Yeah, me either. I'm actually a sock puppet for @Baden. As a moderator I don't want to overwhelm people with my wisdom, sophistication, and wit, so I created T Clark to represent my better self. [Edit] Kappa.

Hello, my name is Leontiskos, after the ancient Greek wrestler. It made a great deal of sense to me when I learned that wrestling and philosophy went hand in hand in Plato's Academy!

I am from the United States and am moderately conservative. I am a Christian of the Catholic/Orthodox variety. I most enjoy Aristotle and Plato. I also like Thomas Aquinas, especially because his concision is useful when space is limited. I studied philosophy as an undergraduate and have attempted to maintain the practice over the years.

'Glad to be here. It seems like a nice place with a strong community. Kudos to those who have sown the seeds to make it so. :smile:

Reply to Leontiskos Welcome!

What do you think of Trump?

Quoting Leontiskos

Thomas Aquinas

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum, the leading philosophy web site available in Fly Over Land.

I heard that Tom thought that everything he had written was 'straw'. That was probably after a Dominican cook accidentally slipped some LSD into his soup.

Quoting Leontiskos

I am from the United States and am moderately conservative. I am a Christian of the Catholic/Orthodox variety.

Hey, you didn’t tell me that when you were asking for an invitation! :angry:

Only kidding. Welcome aboard.

Quoting Leontiskos

I am a Christian of the Catholic/Orthodox variety.

Welcome. What does this mean? My understand of Greek orthodox Christianity is it considers the Catholic Church to be anathema. Or did you mean an orthodox Catholic?

Reply to Jamal I had to make it through the door first! :sweat:

Reply to Tom Storm I don't really know what it means either. I suppose it means that I am a contradiction. :naughty: More specifically, I am torn between the two.

Reply to Leontiskos Ok. Maybe this place will help you think through this. I can't help you, I am an atheist. :wink:

Okay, so this is my first learning moment. BC quoted me without mentioning me, and I did not receive a notification. This presumably means that quotes do not trigger notifications, and that I should mention people whenever I quote them?

---

Quoting BC

I heard that Tom thought that everything he had written was 'straw'. That was probably after a Dominican cook accidentally slipped some LSD into his soup.

That he did, and that could be! He passed away soon thereafter.

---

Reply to RogueAI I am hoping he forsakes his political aspirations.

Quoting Leontiskos

Okay, so this is my first learning moment. BC quoted me without mentioning me, and I did not receive a notification. This presumably means that quotes do not trigger notifications, and that I should mention people whenever I quote them?

Mentioning somebody with the format @name (@ " name " -- but with no spaces)
replying to somebody with the little left-pointing arrow, and quoting someone (using a highlight and then clicking on the "QUOTE" should all trigger a notification.

Not getting notifications? It might be that your membership activity is still too low (I don't know, just guessing or it might be that something is wrong with the software at PlushForums (more guessing). IF you don't get notifications PDQ, contact a moderator or Jamal.

Reply to BC Thanks! It is working fine now. I probably made a reading mistake when I received a barrage of notifications.

Reply to Leontiskos Welcome Leontiskos. I too am interested in the Platonist tradition and Christian philosophy. I'm inclined towards idealism with an interest in the classical traditions of philosophy. By the way, don't overlook the Help articles which provide useful tips and pointers to use of the Forum software.

Reply to Tom Storm Perhaps! But I don't delve into religion too often on philosophy forums. I only gave my religious leanings so that others may better understand what sort of animal they are dealing with. :smile:

---

Reply to Wayfarer Very good. Christianity seems to be one of the primary inheritors of the Platonist tradition. And thanks, I will give those articles a read.

Quoting Leontiskos

I only gave my religious leanings so that others may better understand what sort of animal they are dealing with. :smile:

Probably for somewhere else on this site but I don't think a person's religious leanings help us understand anything about them. For the simple problem that no two people (even within a single faith) seem to beleive in the same kind of god or hold the same account of religion and morality. When someone says they are a Christian, for instance, they might be misogynist, homophobes, or inclusive flag waivers for LGBTQ rights.

Quoting Tom Storm

Probably for somewhere else on this site but I don't think a person's religious leanings help us understand anything about them.

Whereas I would say that insofar as one understands a religion one will be capable of understanding many things about adherents of that religion, and that this holds for groups generally. But yes - for somewhere else!

Reply to ttonkytonk It belongs to some random guy who runs it for his own entertainment and sponges off his friends to pay for it. Probably not for you, if you need official seals of legitimacy.

I have flagged your post so a moderator will notice it, and hopefully sort you out.

Reply to unenlightened User deleted. :up:

Being a member of this forum for 3 years, I think I should outline what I am philosophically interested in. I mainly concern myself with theology and the philosophy of religion being influenced primarily by Kierkegaard, Bonhoeffer, Russian religious thought (Nikolai Berdyaev, Alexander Men, Vladimir Lossky), and the Greek Fathers (I also enjoy Buber's "philosophy of dialogue" as well and the work of Giovanni Pico who used Jewish mystical work to develop an argument for Christianity).

Moral philosophy too, is a primary concern of mine, coming from a virtue ethics background; Lublin Thomism (specifically its focus on personalism), Greek thought (Platonism, Aristotelianism, Stoicism), Confucianism (sometimes I think of myself as a "Western" Confucian), and Daoism all contribute to my views on ethics and religion as well. I also enjoy seeing the interplay between the religious and ethical spheres, being an avid reader of the Kyoto School (Nishida, Tanabe, Nishitani), that seeks to understand the similarities between western and eastern traditions.

History of ideas also interest me; Specifically the Reformation, Renaissance, Enlightenment, Romanticism, and nihilism.

Quoting Dermot Griffin

mainly concern myself with theology and the philosophy of religion being influenced primarily by Kierkegaard, Bonhoeffer, Russian religious thought (Nikolai Berdyaev, Alexander Men, Vladimir Lossky), and the Greek Fathers (I also enjoy Buber's "philosophy of dialogue" as well and the work of Giovanni Pico who used Jewish mystical work to develop an argument for Christianity).

Fascinating. Could you give a short "blurb", 3 sentences or so, of the most important ideas in this sphere of thought to you? Concepts, normative rules you've derived, etc - whatever you think is most central and most important to you.

Reply to flannel jesus

Mainly Kierkegaard's idea of the three stages of life that human beings go through (the aesthetic life, the ethical life, the religious life), Bonhoeffer's theology of "costly grace" as outlined in his magnum opus The Cost of Discipleship, and the Russian thinkers attempt to argue that Orthodox Christianity is something original and not artificial. I also must add that I think the traditions of Asia, namely Confucianism, Buddhism and Daoism, provide something complementary for the western social and religious consciousness.

I am Deaki, been think much of AI and how it is a natural reaction to lost memory as connected to a very lost weekend. Although Kerouac says “I accept lostness forever’ and also was said (sad?) to say that we ARE living in Golden Eternity but do not , or can not know it singularly, until said prophetic singularity, where that may be singularly OR interpreted otherwise.

Hello everyone, my name is JuanZu.

I am a lover of philosophy, I have some academic studies in philosophy but incomplete.

My interests mainly cover metaphysics, ontology and epistemology.

You can say that I am materialist. But I have adopted materialism from the Platonic symploke. That is, a materialism that respects the irreducibility of what exists through categories. Materialism of "parts extra parts." I am not a materialist of the physicalist type. I have adopted a Materialism without substance, which can be presented through the types of structures that exist in the world. My interest is to discover how otherness and difference (materialism) occurs in the most intimate part of identity and being.

My main references:

Plato
Immanuel Kant
Edmund Husserl
Gustavo Bueno
G.W Hegel
Martin Heidegger
Quentin Meillassoux
Jacques Derrida

Yes, I am an apprentice of the continental tradition. And it is very interesting for me to compare perspectives with the Analytical and English-speaking tradition. I hope to live up to it and contribute good things to the forum.

Greetings.

Quoting JuanZu

I hope to live up to it and contribute good things to the forum.

I'm sure you will. Welcome to TPF, mate.

Welcome, Reply to JuanZu. :smile:

Totally missed this thread!

A lot of you already know me and my ankle-biting ways because of that, so apologies.

My name is Amadeus Diamond
I'm Irish; living in New Zealand
33; married; 2 kids (blended family)
Legal professional full time; back in school (conjoint LLB (law) and BA in Philosophy undergrad).

Most intensely interested in the question of personal identity over time both "whether" and "if it matters".
More minor (but still, very much preoccupying) interest in both trying to justify my feeling that morals can be objective, while conceding i have never seen a good argument for it; and understanding why so many philosophers appear totally detached from the real world, while trying to avoid that myself.

Outside of philosophy and law i practice brazillian jiu jitsu competitively and play many instruments.

Looking to make some type of philosophy friends too; hence extraneous information above.

Glad to be here!

Quoting AmadeusD

Legal professional full time

Another legal professional mate around here! Nice to meet you, Amadeus. New Zealand seems to be an interesting place to live.

Reply to JuanZu Greetings, JuanZu, and thanks for the intro.

Reply to AmadeusD And to you also :pray:

Quoting AmadeusD

Legal professional full time; back in school (conjoint LLB (law) and BA in Philosophy undergrad).

You poor fellow. Exactly my background.

Quoting RogueAI

?Leontiskos Welcome!

What do you think of Trump?

What do you think of Jeffrey Epstein.

Hi, interested in phliosophy, and have used philosophy forums before; they are fun, though I will probably shy away from bothering with political discussion: I'm "one of the most left wing people on the planet"!! Especially interested in existentialism, aesthetics and science, though I know little about any of them. Cheers,
clemon

Hey guys, my name is Kris.

I have been studying theology, philosophy and English literature for nine years at university (primary focus being philosophy for the past five years). I've always been driven by questions revolving around understanding. What does it mean to understand? Is this a term only to be used when "success" is evident - to understand is to understand correctly or there is no understanding at all - or is there such a thing as "wrong understanding"? Can we ever not understand something and if yes, what does that look like? What does it mean to understand a thought, a concept, an object, a series of events? What does it mean to understand another person? Can we ever understand an other (correctly, at all)? Should we even strive to? What does it mean to understand myself? How does my understanding of myself shape the possibilities I have of relating to an other? Why is it that our ability to relate to one another, the nature of any given relationship seems to hinge on understanding, its quality or the lack thereof? And what is there to learn in thinking about these questions in a philosophical way? Is there headway to be made? How do our answers to these questions influence the choices we're confronted with daily when in contact with others - war or peace, indifference or love, to understand or to leave be, freedom or commitment, communication? And are any of these admittely hopelessly naive and painfully insufficient questions even somewhat able to open up a line of inquiry that isn't doomed to eternal mediocrity or - even worse - a traditional academic career?

At least these questions have led me down various paths, including French and German existentalism, phenomenology, hermeneutics, philosophy of language and American pragmatism. I am currently working on papers involving Jean-Francois Lyotard, Martin Heidegger and Karl Jaspers. The last few years were mainly spent with these characters along with Emmanuel Levinas, Samuel Beckett, and some lesser known figures like Josiah Royce or Francois Laruelle (sometimes you just gotta get a little weird). Truth be told, it is difficult to find people interested in these authors, so I hope to find some companionship in this forum.

Apart from these things, my life is pretty boring. I spend my days mainly working in an administrative job to pay the bills, not get trapped in an ivory tower, and because I do not find any value in working for professors whose only concern in life is the furtherance of objective truth accompanied by a crusade against people who are of the opinion that "wrong understanding" is a thing and that weird Kant interpretations are usually far more interesting than Kant himself. My nights I spend at a bar, smoking and drinking way too much, hunched over some book, being asocial, surrounded by good people who are used to it, like me anyway, and for the most part have no fucking idea why the heck I'm doing all of this. Maybe some of you can sympathize a little more. ;)

Quoting KrisGl

Is this a term only to be used when "success" is evident - to understand is to understand correctly or there is no understanding at all - or is there such a thing as "wrong understanding"?

Wrong understanding is usually called misunderstanding. It's a tricky concept to grasp, because to the person who has the misunderstanding, it is not distinguishable from understanding. So in any situation where a person believes oneself to understand, it may actually be misunderstanding which the person has, but it is impossible for that person to actually know whether it is misunderstanding, or understanding.

This implies that there is a third person perspective required; an observer is necessary to make the distinction between understanding and misunderstanding. Or, a person may act as the observer oneself, at a later time in retrospection, through introspection. The observer either corroborates the understanding/ misunderstanding, which strengthens the belief that it is understanding, or else provides a distinct understanding, indicating that one, the other, or both, are misunderstanding. Then we might seek another observer, and so on, to the point where we might ask if it is ever possible to know for sure whether an apparent understanding is not really a misunderstanding. I believe, this is commonly known as the infinite regress of justification, and it's an issue looked at by Wittgenstein in his critique of skepticism.

Quoting KrisGl

My nights I spend at a bar, smoking and drinking way too much, hunched over some book, being asocial, surrounded by good people who are used to it, like me anyway, and for the most part have no fucking idea why the heck I'm doing all of this. Maybe some of you can sympathize a little more. ;)

Ha! I spent a good 20 years drinking in bars (many of them smoking too). But mainly getting to know and appreciate complete strangers. Conversation is a minor hobby.

Quoting KrisGl

What does it mean to understand? Is this a term only to be used when "success" is evident - to understand is to understand correctly or there is no understanding at all - or is there such a thing as "wrong understanding"?

Interesting. I have always assumed we don't really understand each other, we just make sense of others the best we can. A primary interest of mine is the ideas people believe and why.

Quoting KrisGl

Truth be told, it is difficult to find people interested in these authors, so I hope to find some companionship in this forum.

This site has many actively engaged readers of esoterica, so you should find some people to talk to. Royce doesn't come up all that often, his absolute idealism could be interesting to hear more about. Welcome.

Quoting KrisGl

At least these questions have led me down various paths, including French and German existentalism, phenomenology, hermeneutics, philosophy of language and American pragmatism. I am currently working on papers involving Jean-Francois Lyotard, Martin Heidegger and Karl Jaspers. The last few years were mainly spent with these characters along with Emmanuel Levinas, Samuel Beckett, and some lesser known figures like Josiah Royce or Francois Laruelle (sometimes you just gotta get a little weird). Truth be told, it is difficult to find people interested in these authors, so I hope to find some companionship in this forum.

Interesting but intimidating! There’s always so much to read and only so much time. But it sounds to me as if you have a multi-faceted and rich perspective so I think you’ll be a great contributor. Welcome!

@Metaphysician Undercover
Yes, you are right. Misunderstanding it is. ;)
And yes, the infinite regress of justification is a sucker. What pragmatic solution would you propose?

@Wayfarer
:) Yeah, I get intimidated by it, too. Imposter syndrome is a real thing, sometimes I feel like a dilettante at best. Thank you for the warm welcome.

@Tom Storm
Mhm, conversation is a minor hobby of mine, too! It is really quite something how quickly this appreciation for each other can form, given all the adverse circumstances. Sometimes it needs little more than the reluctant companionship of strangers being kind of a mess in the same dingy place.

Royce is underappreciated. Have you ever heard of his notion of loyalty to loyalty? I find it moving. Very hopeful and kind in its nature without drifting into the reckless and profane.

Quoting Tom Storm

I have always assumed we don't really understand each other, we just make sense of others the best we can.

Interesting. Why have you always assumed that?

Quoting KrisGl

Interesting. Why have you always assumed that?

Intuition and experience. How could we truly understand each other, except through approximations? Many of us are strangers to ourselves, let alone to others...

Quoting KrisGl

Have you ever heard of his notion of loyalty to loyalty? I find it moving.

I know very little about it but I have to agree with Royce's basic thrust, as I understand it, that ethics is social and relational.

Quoting Tom Storm

I know very little about it but I have to agree with Royce's basic thrust, as I understand it, that ethics is social and relational.

Mhm, maybe we should start a thread about it. I could do so later if you'd like and talk a bit about it. It's quite near to my heart these days.

Quoting Tom Storm

Intuition and experience. How could we truly understand each other, except through approximations? Many of us are strangers to ourselves, let alone to others...

Yeah, I get the intuition. These approximations are interesting though. It is what we do at a ... let's call it phenomenological level in everyday life, right? We do somehow, sort of understand each other. Probably never to a "full extent", but somehow we do try. To follow the notion that others are simply not our's to understand, to be radical about that would indeed lead to chaos. It is not practical. And maybe it also isn't even true. Maybe we can fashion approximations of understanding of each other.

What right do these approximations have though, when we look at them through the lense of thoughts from someone like Emmanuel Levinas who very stricktly and convincingly I'd say makes the point that the Other is never our's to "have" to grasp with our greedy little imperialistic fingers of understanding, trying to make them fit a certain picture, a certain form we've only conjured up in our heads?

Quoting KrisGl

let's call it phenomenological level in everyday life, right? We do somehow, sort of understand each other. Probably never to a "full extent", but somehow we do try.

Yep - kind of what I meant when I said - Quoting Tom Storm

we just make sense of others the best we can.

Quoting KrisGl

To follow the notion that others are simply not our's to understand, to be radical about that would indeed lead to chaos.

Well, chaos is pretty big right now and seems to come down to people not understanding, hence the culture wars and tribalism that are at the heart of our conflicts. Richard Rohr, an interesting and radical Franciscan priest (I'm an atheist), says dualistic think is the limiting mindset which divides the world into binary categories like "us vs. them," "right vs. wrong," or "sacred vs. secular" - which generate internecine conflicts and violence. Anyway, see you on the threads.

Quoting KrisGl

What pragmatic solution would you propose?

The obvious, I think, is that we proceed in our activities without certitude. We can apply the traditional principle of Aristotle's doctrine of the mean. The two extremes are considered vises, and virtue lies somewhere in between. Proceeding into action with too little certitude is rashness, or carelessness. Requiring too much certitude produces a lack of confidence, which is fear or cowardice.

This implies that we always proceed with some degree of misunderstanding. Because we see this within ourselves, through introspection, when we adopt the 'observe myself' position, we avoid the infinite regress of justification by accepting the fact that we proceed without certitude. When certitude is not requested the infinite regress does not appear.

Further, recognizing that we always proceed with some degree of misunderstanding conditions us to be prepared, always, for the appearance of the unknown. That in itself is a higher level of understanding. This could be known as a 'meta' level cautiousness, which is neither cowardice nor rashness. In the Hegelian dialectic of Being, instead of taking the middle path between the two extremes, as Aristotle proposed, the two extremes are rolled together into one, annihilating each other, and producing a new position, which instead of being the mean between the two, is an assimilation of the two, and this is that higher understanding.

Reply to Metaphysician Undercover

Quoting KrisGl

I do not find any value in working for professors whose only concern in life is the furtherance of objective truth accompanied by a crusade against people who are of the opinion that "wrong understanding" is a thing

Well, in me you have a kindred spirit, but you will be hard-pressed to find more than a tiny handful of contributors to this forum who endorse anything other than some variant of realism.

Hey there, chubby smoked salmon, great piece of human existence.

My name is Javier. I am 27 years old. I was born in a shed, near a fjord. My childhood was basically based on two main distractions: painting my mother, father, sister, dog, and mice of my house on canvas, and fishing herrings to eat them with lemon later on. What sparked my interest in reading philosophy? Well, this is quite embarrassing, but everything started when I was coming from my school, and then I saw my father tearing and throwing tiles off the roof :rofl: . I felt scared, and I questioned myself whether that was determined by fate or not. Cool and ropey people, my family. I left them some years ago, and I flew out to Wabash (U.S.A.), where I work as a fishmonger, selling scampi but not herrings. I miss the herrings of my cosy fjord! :sweat:
Nice to meet you all. I hope we could have interactions in the future.

Here is additional basic information if you want to contact me and buy some scampi:

[email protected]
Mercado municipal de Puente de Vallecas.
Calle De Martínez De La Riva, 4, Madrid, ES 28053.

Quoting Joshs

Well, in me you have a kindred spirit, but you will be hard-pressed to find more than a tiny handful of contributors to this forum who endorse anything other than some variant of realism.

More than I had hoped for. Thank you.

Quoting Joshs

Well, in me you have a kindred spirit, but you will be hard-pressed to find more than a tiny handful of contributors to this forum who endorse anything other than some variant of realism.

The internet is a double edged sword. It lets a tiny handful of kindred spirits who are seeking to better their understanding (misunderstanding) of reality, like us, unite and work together toward this end. On the other hand, it lets tiny handfuls of freakish evil-doers unite and be empowered by each other, in their quest to destroy all that humanity has worked so hard to develop.

@Metaphysician Undercover

It is a nice way to think of this. These two extremes - rashness and cowardice - often have a way of playing themselves out. When one is overexercised and lead to absurdity, it is often substituted by the other extreme. If this back and forth movement has been going on for a while, one tends to get suspicious of both and this process seems to sometimes play itself out, resulting at some point in this higher understandig you mentioned, where differences between extremes loose standing and the need for certitude is put in its rightful place. Sometimes. Sometimes, and maybe more often, we land at the Aristotelian mean.

I am interested in this process. Reaching that higher level of understanding seems to me to not be a necessary outcome of accepting the fact that neither rashness nor cowardice are worth pursuing. Or maybe it is, if there's only enough time to also let the doctrine of the mean play itself out?

What would you think of the idea that concern for certitude, for knowing and doing "the right thing" has its rightful place in some realms of acivity/communication, but not in others?

And do you think that once a state of higher understanding is achieved it is stable? Or can we backslide?

Quoting KrisGl

Reaching that higher level of understanding seems to me to not be a necessary outcome of accepting the fact that neither rashness nor cowardice are worth pursuing.

Well, do not place too high of a standard on "higher level of understanding" then. If you learn something new everyday, then aren't you reaching a higher level of understanding every day?

Quoting KrisGl

What would you think of the idea that concern for certitude, for knowing and doing "the right thing" has its rightful place in some realms of acivity/communication, but not in others?

This is another issue covered in Aristotle's Nichomacean Ethics. There are different levels of certitude which are proper to different subjects of study. I agree with this principle, and we can see it clearly in comparing the consequences of failure in different activities. When the consequences of failure are very significant, then a higher level of certainty is required before proceeding, in comparison with when the consequences of failure are less significant. There is an entire field of study called "risk management", which deals with these principles.

Quoting KrisGl

And do you think that once a state of higher understanding is achieved it is stable? Or can we backslide?

I don't think backsliding is likely, in general, except when our minds get feeble, like in old age. So, in that sense backsliding is also inevitable. But the significance of it is avoided by passing the responsibility to the next generation, therefore gains are maintained.

However, since absolute certainty is never achieved, the "higher understanding" is never stable. As in my reply above, about learning something new everyday, the horizon, beyond which lies the higher understanding, turns out to be a false boundary, merely the appearance of a boundary, created artificially by the 'hinge propositions' we assign certainty to, as the canvas to our representations. So in some sense the skeptic is always crossing that boundary, but in another sense, the horizon always maintains its appearance in front of us, being simply reformulated, so that we discover (create) new horizons as we travel the journey.

Quoting Metaphysician Undercover

Well, do not place too high of a standard on "higher level of understanding" then.

A certain kind of readiness, state of anticipation or maybe just the openness to the mere possibility of the appearance of the unknown does seem to me like a higher level of understanding, a "meta" level cautiousness, if you will. A place where maybe the whole "spectrum of certainty" with rashness or carelessness as its extremes loses meaning. I did not mean to draw into question that such a way of being exists. I just wonder how one gets there. And then I can't help but notice that "getting there" does not seem to be a necessary outcome of accepting that either end of the spectrum isn't working for, but rather against us. How do we take the step from the doctrine of the mean to a sort of Hegelian higher understanding?

Quoting Metaphysician Undercover

There are different levels of certitude which are proper to different subjects of study. I agree with this principle, and we can see it clearly in comparing the consequences of failure in different activities. When the consequences of failure are very significant, then a higher level of certainty is required before proceeding, in comparison with when the consequences of failure are less significant.

I see. I was thinking more along the lines of ... are there activities, like for example inquiries into mathematical issues, which require a certain kind or level of certiude, and others, for example social interactions where sometimes (only sometimes, not always) requiring certitude for the "next step" is driven ad absurdum by the unavailability of knowledge of the other's actions, or inner workings if you will before they occur, are shown to us? One might call it contact with absolute and not just relative otherness. It seems to me like the higher understanding you talked about might very well be situated here.

And then again the question: How is it that when communicating with an other we evolve from simply accepting that there is always a level of uncertainty involved, making compromises, assuming we have played through some scenarios of how things might unfold, factoring in that the other might always yet surprise us and landing at a level of certainty that seems good enough for now to act upon, trying to be neither rash nor cowardly, but somewhere in the middle. How is it that sometimes this way of risk management thinking is reinterpreted, "aufgehoben" to use Hegel's term? And why is it that every explanation of how we might shift our thinking here seems to be inadequate to explain exactly how it happens? At least no explanation comes to my mind which would lead necessarily to this new way of thinking or maybe being.

Reply to Buxtebuddha
What an excellent name!!!

Quoting Metaphysician Undercover

Well, do not place too high of a standard on "higher level of understanding" then. If you learn something new everyday, then aren't you reaching a higher level of understanding every day?

Not necessarily. I might learn a brand of shirts, X, is manufactured in country 1. Next day I learn brand Y is manufactured in country 2. Next day I learn Z is country 3. Is my understanding increasing?

If I learn [I]how[/I] brand X is manufactured, maybe I've reached a higher level. If I learn how Y is manufactured, and it's a different method than X, maybe I've reached a higher level. If I learn the different manufacturing methods are due to historical, cultural, or geographic differences, I'm in all kinds of levels!

Quoting KrisGl

How do we take the step from the doctrine of the mean to a sort of Hegelian higher understanding?

I don't think it's a matter of taking a step from one to the other, rather accepting that both are different ways of looking at the same thing. The path toward higher understanding must be a sort of skepticism, because it must be based in the belief that one's current understanding is somewhat deficient. So the current understanding must be questioned in order to produce the higher understanding. The "higher understanding" is simply a matter of bringing the unknown into the known. That is a matter of producing consistency.

Aristotle showed that if we hold fast to the three principle laws of logic, identity, non-contradiction, excluded middle, then sophists such as Zeno can prove absurdities. Simply put, there are aspects of reality which were known as "becoming", activity, change, which appear to defy these fundamental laws. What he determined was that the reality of becoming, motion, activity, and change, requires the reality of possibility. And, he designated possibility, "potential", as a fundamental violation of the law of excluded middle, that which may or may not be.

Hegel's position on this dialectical problem, is that the law of identity is unnecessary. From this perspective, the aspects of reality which defy understanding, do so because they have no identity. Because of this, they have no formal properties, therefore not even the law of non-contradiction can be applied. The opposing properties of being and not-being, roll together in the activity of becoming.

The "higher understanding" which I am alluding to, is simply recognition that these two perspectives are just different ways of looking at the same thing, "the unknown". Aristotle looked at the three fundamental laws and determined that the existence of "the unknown" is due to faults in those laws, specifically the third law, excluded middle. Allowing exceptions to that law produces modal logic, and all sorts of what i would call "designer logic", designed to deal with things which appear to violate the fundamental laws. The Hegelian approach places the deficiency the "fault" you might say, as inherent within the nature of reality. From this perspective, it doesn't matter how we manipulate the laws of logic, there are things which simply have no identity, therefore cannot be understood by us. To bring these aspects of the unknown into the known would require a logic which treats them as something other than things with identity. Either that, or we just accept that these are unknowns which simply cannot be known.

Quoting KrisGl

How is it that sometimes this way of risk management thinking is reinterpreted, "aufgehoben" to use Hegel's term? And why is it that every explanation of how we might shift our thinking here seems to be inadequate to explain exactly how it happens? At least no explanation comes to my mind which would lead necessarily to this new way of thinking or maybe being.

This is exactly the problem. There are always aspects of change which evade our understanding. We can never explain "exactly how it happens". The philosopher's desire to know drives one to request that explanation, but it cannot be provided. At first glance, we attribute these issue to being a problem with our language. The language isn't really designed for a complete and full understanding, it has evolved to be efficient for practical purposes. Then when the philosopher tries to apply it in a way to produce an accurate understanding problems appear. So we blame deficiencies in the language. Then we reshape the language (designer logic), and find that similar problems still emerge. Therefore we are faced with the possibility that maybe the problem goes beyond just an issue with language, maybe there is a problem within reality itself, which makes it impossible for us to understand.

Quoting Patterner

Is my understanding increasing?

Yes, I would say that learning something new like that is an increase to your understanding.

Quoting Metaphysician Undercover

Yes, I would say that learning something new like that is an increase to your understanding.

I wouldn't. Trivia =/= understanding

Reply to flannel jesus
Understanding trivial matters is still understanding.

Reply to Metaphysician Undercover I guess I consider 'understanding' to be different from just raw information. Knowing information doesn't seem like understanding to me. I can know, for example, the sentence "King Charles I of England was executed on January 30, 1649" without understanding what a king is, what England is, what executed means, why he was executed, etc. If someone asks me it on a quiz, I can give the correct answer without understanding a single thing about why it's the correct answer or what it means for that to be correct.

edit. When I google "is knowing information the same as understanding?" google tells me:

No, knowing information is not the same as understanding:
Knowing
Is the awareness of facts or details about a subject. It's static and refers to discrete facts.
Understanding
Is the ability to analyze facts and put them in context to form a big picture. It's active and involves connecting information.

That loosely matches my intuitions about why understanding isn't the same as just knowing pieces of information.

Reply to flannel jesus
That's how I see it, also. I don't think it makes sense to say we understand single facts. I can know many facts, but not understand how they are related. This spherical thing is a baseball. This long, thin, tapering thing is a bat. That mound of dirt is called the pitcher's mound. That's three facts that have no obvious connection. Many more facts can be added without any obvious connections.

But I understand the game of baseball.

Quoting Patterner

I don't think it makes sense to say we understand single facts.

I don't think it makes sense to say that we know single facts. Knowing requires understanding. So there is always some type of understanding which underlies any instance of knowing.

Your example is context dependent. Look what happens when I change the context. To know the game of baseball requires that you understand that the spherical thing is a baseball, the long thing is the bat, and the mound is the pitcher's mound.

Understanding provides the connections required for knowing. So, your supposed single facts, are really made possible by underlying connections (understanding). There is a relation between the spherical thing, and the name "baseball". Likewise with the names "bat", and "pitcher's mound". These are all instances of understanding, when you understand the meaning of a word. Then each of those words having meaning which goes beyond the simple relation between name and object, given by the context of the game, baseball.

Reply to Patterner

That's how I see it, also. I don't think it makes sense to say we understand single facts. I can know many facts, but not understand how they are related. This spherical thing is a baseball. This long, thin, tapering thing is a bat. That mound of dirt is called the pitcher's mound. That's three facts that have no obvious connection. Many more facts can be added without any obvious connections.

This seems to fits with the intuition that things are also not fully intelligible in themselves (partially yes, else we would need to understand everything to understand anything). As far as I know, this idea really starts to come into focus in the (Neo)Platonic, Aristotlean, Stoic synthesis of the Patristic philosophers, with the idea of all finite things or concepts only being intelligible as part of whole (for them Christian Logos/Christ), e.g. St. Maximus, but also some guys before him. Even "two" is not intelligible without a concept of number, the other numbers, magnitude/multitude, etc. (and for the Artistotle-influenced Patristics it also only exists where contingently instantiated or the subsistent unity of the Logos).

Hegel would he someone who pushes this idea particularly far, which is interesting because he lived in a period where atomism had been somewhat ascendent (although maybe more in Britain).

What I find interesting is how this idea seems pretty strong for the medievals but then sort of gets lost. I suppose a similar idea is that things are (in part) defined by their relations and so we can't have a metaphysics where things are [I]just[/I] their building block parts.

But to roll this forward to the present day, I think this would be largely consistent with information theoretic conceptions (or at least some of them).

Reply to Metaphysician Undercover

I took a class on the philosophy of AI not that long ago and it revolved almost entirely on the processes you could use to structure atomic propositions relative to some agent, with desires just represented at a certain sort of atomic belief that needs to be made true (with action being determined by other atomic beliefs about how to make the desire proposition true).

It was interesting, but I couldn't help thinking that this seemed to be structuring the model of intelligence around what is easy to model and not how thought actually works.

Quoting Count Timothy von Icarus

I took a class on the philosophy of AI not that long ago and it revolved almost entirely on the processes you could use to structure atomic propositions relative to some agent, with desires just represented at a certain sort of atomic belief that needs to be made true (with action being determined by other atomic beliefs about how to make the desire proposition true).

It was interesting, but I couldn't help thinking that this seemed to be structuring the model of intelligence around what is easy to model and not how thought actually works.

It's not how thought actually works, because it's far to simplistic. A computer is far faster than a human mind, in doing the things that it does, but those are always simple tasks. Then, since it's so fast at doing simple tasks, we can assign it a whole bunch of simple problems, and when it solves them all very quickly that creates the illusion that it is doing complex problems, when it really is not.

The issue of "understanding" mentioned by Patterner, is the way that parts fit within a whole. That is a complexity. From the Aristotelian perspective, and what you mention, when you remove the part from the context of its whole, you cannot get a complete understanding because you cannot observe the thing's function. The thing's function is what it is doing, so it's an activity, and this is a concept of relations to others. That leaves two ways of looking at the thing, one is to describe the thing, what it is, and the other, what it does. So by Patterner's example, "the bat" names the thing described as the "long, thin, tapering thing". But within the context of the game, it is what one hits the ball with. Meaning can be developed in these two distinct directions.

Quoting Metaphysician Undercover

I don't think it makes sense to say that we know single facts. Knowing requires understanding. So there is always some type of understanding which underlies any instance of knowing.

That's true. But I don't always learn any amount of any type of understanding underlying anything each time I learn a new fact. I know what metal is. I know what a penny is. I know who Lincoln was. I know about the calendar. Learning that a particular penny in my pocket was minted in 2003 does not give me any new understanding of anything.

Quoting Patterner

That's true. But I don't always learn any amount of any type of understanding underlying anything each time I learn a new fact. I know what metal is. I know what a penny is. I know who Lincoln was. I know about the calendar. Learning that a particular penny in my pocket was minted in 2003 does not give me any new understanding of anything.

I think the difficulty here is with your assumption that understanding must be of something. Consider understanding to be the relationships which create the whole from the parts. As such, it is an unobserved part of the whole, which is determined through retrospect and logical analysis. Context is of the essence here, because a so-called "fact" which is learned as a fact at one time, will be at a later time, integral to an understanding.

This is why there is the appearance of infinite regress, each "fact" is composed of smaller facts united by understanding. But those smaller facts must be also composed of even smaller facts, so some would propose fundamental elements, similar to atoms, elements of knowledge.

Now, consider that you can learn about a relationship between two things, yet be completely unfamiliar with the whole, which would put the learned relationship into a larger context. Faulty speculations, and assumptions about the larger context is what leads to a lot of misunderstanding.

What I am saying, is that knowing is what produces closure to the understanding, making a whole "thing" out of the underlying understandings (or misunderstandings). And knowing is fallible because it may consist of misunderstandings. This is where mistake is common, in producing closure, judgement, which creates an object of knowledge, a supposed fact, when there is misunderstanding inherent within that object.

So your example, "that a particular penny in my pocket was minted in 2003" is an object of knowledge, a particular "thing", a supposed fact. However, I assume that it consists of an understanding of the relation between the penny and the numbers printed on it. That's how you learned this fact, by looking at the numbers. But this fact requires an understanding of the relation between the numbers printed, and the actual time of printing. We can call that "the meaning" of the printed numbers. But there is always the possibility of misunderstanding here. Suppose the company doing the minting used the same mold for a number of years, producing coins with the same numbers for numerous years, or their timing for updating molds did not correspond with calendar dates. Then you would have misunderstanding of the meaning of the printed numbers, producing the possibility of a false "fact".

So all your examples, ("I know what metal is. I know what a penny is. I know who Lincoln was. I know about the calendar."), are individual objects of knowledge, which rely on underlying understanding. To facilitate discussion, we often will simply call the underlying understandings "meaning". So those objects of knowledge imply that you understand the meaning of "metal", "penny", Lincoln", "calendar". To look at these understandings is to look inward into existing conceptual structures, objects of knowledge, with the use of logic, to understand "meaning". Though the simple term "meaning" facilitates discussion, "meaning" is actually very difficult to understand. To look outward, is to utilize the internal understanding to create an object, a larger whole, such as your example 'this penny was minted in 2003'.

Some of this probably seems very counter-intuitive, and confusing, because the 'moving outward', creating the larger whole, is actually moving from the more general toward the more specific, or in your example, even the particular coin in your pocket. Therefore the larger whole is actually the more precise, specific individual. But this is based in Aristotelian logic, in which the more general inheres within the more specific. So for example, "human being" inheres with "Socrates", as a defining feature essential to an understanding of "Socrates". And, "animal" inheres within the definition of "human being", as an essential feature, required for an understanding of "human being". And so on. In this way, we can understand context as having the more general inside the more specific. Then the whole, being the object of knowledge is the most specific, and ultimately the individual, the particular.

I have often posted that I am entirely lacking in knowledge of most things discussed here. So I don't know when someone is saying things that are easy, commonly discussed things, and I just don't know the lingo. I can't get out of your first paragraph.

Quoting Metaphysician Undercover

I think the difficulty here is with your assumption that understanding must be of something.

I don't know how there can be understanding if there is nothing to understand


Quoting Metaphysician Undercover

Consider understanding to be the relationships which create the whole from the parts.

That's exactly my point.


Quoting Metaphysician Undercover

As such, it is an unobserved part of the whole, which is determined through retrospect and logical analysis.

I assume, by 'unobserved', you mean with eyes, or whichever sense.


Quoting Metaphysician Undercover

Context is of the essence here, because a so-called "fact" which is learned as a fact at one time, will be at a later time, integral to an understanding.

Entirely likely. But it [I]is[/I], as you just said, s fact that is learned, And if it 'will be integral to an understanding at a later time,' then it is not when learned. It is just a fact.

Quoting Patterner

I don't know how there can be understanding if there is nothing to understand

Understanding, is of meaning, and meaning does not consist of things. This is how we can avoid the infinite regress. If a thing, in this case an object of knowledge, consists of parts in specific relations to each other, and each part is itself a thing, then an infinite regress is implied. But if we allow that understanding is prior to knowing, then the object of knowledge, the fact, can consist solely of meaning without any things, and the infinite regress is avoided.

Quoting Patterner

Entirely likely. But it is, as you just said, s fact that is learned, And if it 'will be integral to an understanding at a later time,' then it is not when learned. It is just a fact.

But "the fact" which is learned, is produced, created, by understanding. The fact is a judgement, let's say a judgement that X is true (this penny was minted in 2003). The judgement depends on, is supported by, or is created by, a specialized understanding which is specific to the knowing of that particular "fact'. The understanding may consist of other objects of knowledge, "facts", in relation to each other, but as described above, this is not necessary. And any time that there is a new fact in your mind, this new fact is supported by a new understanding.

@Leontiskis.
I studied some orthodox Christian doctrines. And as compared to catholic or more mainstream Christianity,I was quite impressed with the orthodox doctrine of "man becoming divine". Theotokis I think.

I also appreciate the more traditional approach to morality of Russian orthodox Christianity,and the mystical approach.

Dostoevsky was a part of my education on the Russian orthodox church and it's doctrines.

Hi, I've updated my profile. Check me out!