schopenhauer1

BTW, I am more in support of what Galant and Benny Gantz is saying to Netanyahu.. It is immoral to go to war without an end in mind... And I have alwa...

But this is my point. This is why "ethics proper" would be a category error to apply to "governments". For example, how can one understand the "ethics...

But then how can anything be "projected" as if it proceeds from something. This is all language of the phenomenal which would be inappropriate as it i...

I just don't even know what "denial of the Will" even means in this context. There is no fit. This is why I said it is something akin to the Represent...

This all sounds like an attempt to square the circle here. Something I also struggle with in Schopenhauer. That is, how is the multiplicity the same a...

That is indeed a way to look at it, but I have problems with it... Whence the illusion? If you say that it is secondary, and not somehow, ONE AND THE ...

I think that is a great point, and I think it valid. I think the question is a legitimate one that stands.. And goes right back to a conversation I ha...

Not exactly, look at our conversation right above: https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/904945

I do rather like SEP's phrasing here: It sounds like something I'd say :smile: as a criticism. But it brings up a good point. And again, the question ...

So what do you think of this one?

This is getting very esoteric, but can it be argued that Schopenhauer's famous "denial of Will", is actually a sort of existence of unmediated existen...

1) Yes this is a more-or-less good summarization of the main premise of his theory. 2) As to why his line of philosophical history separates them, I w...

It's not based on individuals but actors on behalf of states. These individuals can be liable for acting poorly on the state, but war itself is consid...

That seems unethical. You are not allowed to defend yourself now if someone does you harm? I think that is a universally accepted notion... And again,...

Yeah, not a fan of this dismissive, condescending way of asking this seemingly innocuous question, but in GOOD FAITH I'll answer it: Jesus emphasis on...

So you have to remember that Schopenhauer believes that the world is Will AND Representation. It is NOT one or the other, but both. Thus Will is nothi...

That indeed does seem to be an outlier view of war. When a country gets attacked, like a sneak attack, (think something like Pearl Harbor), then gener...

I think this has a lot of influence for Schopenhauer, especially here in your chat: Some of my own notes here: 1) In Schopenhauer the Universal Ideas/...

Interesting! Thread?

That's a whole other consideration. What if we have two sides (A) and (B). A plays by international laws at the beginning but B does not, making A thi...

Hamas doesn't think like that. They want to cause harm. The point of a self-defense war like this is to take out the people doing the repeated harm to...

Thanks for replying to my actual point. I invite you to comment here as well: https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/904669

The part I am most interested in what the author said here: Whatever people's views of this conflict are, THIS seems to be the main justification for ...

If you're referring to the war of conquest thing, then that's not really a philosophical point as a chance to rehash the whole conflict which we have ...

But you realize that these folks were blessed with Schopenhauer's insights FIRST. And just because they came later, doesn't mean, as an axiom, they im...

So clearly we are not getting beyond this point. I think whatever your own Benkei ideas on it to suit your own argument, it is THE argument at hand an...

It’s a war of self-defense. They were attacked brutally and are responding to the group that did it. The question becomes how to handle collateral dam...

Before I answer I’ll let someone else try here. I’ll let this breathe. @"Wayfarer" any comments?

If you read my profile you will see I disagree with just about every sentiment you expressed, including the "pessimism bad because its sad.. nom nom n...

I was referring to the article I was quoting that relates ti the ethics of war. Clearly the debate is about collateral damage and the article gets to ...

This is extremely uncharitable... This is dismissive, trivializing, mocking, etc. all with admittedly not reading much of his ideas. This is a transpa...

I'm not sure the writer is completely commenting on law as much as ethics, which could be the basis of the laws or perhaps ways of applying them. It's...

This isn't addressing the author's position on duty to one's own citizens versus duty to the enemy's citizens, so I find this comment irrelevant.

I thought this the most salient passage because I think it the crux of the debate on the whole current conflict.

I found this... https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/author/3648 Might want to start with this essays, but his magnum opus that explains his whole philoso...

@"RogueAI" @"Tzeentch" @"Sir2u" @"BitconnectCarlos" @"Vera Mont" I think the points raised in this article might help ground this debate in some more ...

No no, he is not saying this is what we should do. It's not prescriptive, but descriptive. These are some ways we prevent ourselves from thinking abou...

It is the self-recognition (unlike other animals) of how everything is ultimately instrumental. The peace created by roughly those 6 categories are te...

No because "inner speech" or "self-talk" has evolved WITH being a homo sapien. You cannot extricate that which is inbuilt into our evolutionary cognit...

But again, I am having trouble what you envision this "being nature, pure and simple" is. And I am also perplexed how it is you think humans can ever ...

So I agree that humans have a running narrative of reasons and explanations and goals and emotional responses, etc. etc. that come from having a lingu...

What is "Reality" here? What is this "real" Real of the Body you mean? This again, just sounds like there is a "something" we can get back to with the...

There are probably parallels I can pull out of the Talmud, but I am not saying Jesus can never en toto NOT have his own sayings. I am simply pointing ...

But I see this idea of "already there" a kind of version of "mindfulness". "I am not this.." "My evaluation of the pain is not the pain".. Etc. etc. T...

For a guy who supposedly didn't like the fight between idealists and realists, he's really making an indirect realist case here.. @"RussellA" would sm...

This sounds like the fadd-ish distillation of Buddhist practices of "mindfulness". Would this be the sort of thing you are addressing? If so, that (al...

Philosophy raises the strictly pragmatic to that of aesthetic reflection... Even the philosophy of Pragmatism itself is an aesthetic view of things. I...

By the way, Outlander, I just wanted to say that was a really good reply to the OP. I didn't want that to go unnoticed.

Great quote from Schop!.. .This parallels what I was saying in the other thread:

Not a burden.. we are here to discuss! Schopenhauer wrote a whole essay on compassion being the basis for morality. It unfolds from his metaphysics.. ...