a new understanding of today, time and space.

This is the main board for discussing philosophy - formal, informal and in between.

Re: a new understanding of today, time and space.

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Wed May 06, 2020 1:56 am

But Kropotkin, how can you deny the superiority of people?

You see one person's superiority over another all the time....

and on which superiority should we deem as the "most" superior?

Intelligence or strength or wit or money or speed or ability to lift weights?

to claim the intelligent man is the "superior" man is to highlight something
that is as random as any other feature we might have....

is looks the "superior" feature we should proclaim as the "superior"
feature?

how would one be able to judge which feature is the superior one?

I for one, am unable to make some judgement as to which feature, looks, intelligence,
strength, eyesight, wit or money is the "superior" one.....

to proclaim one man superior over another requires some judgement as to what
is "superior".... is the "ubermensch" really a superior person? depends on
which criteria one uses......

it makes more sense to see every human being as equal, then try to interpose
some utterly random feature which can be defined as "superior"......

this is true of an individual and is true collectively.....

the Nazi's proclaimed themselves "superior" based on claims that
cannot be proven....the Greeks felt themselves "superior" to others....
their word for non-Greek was "Barbarian" an uncivilized and brutal person.
another definition is unsophisticated or uncivilized....foreign or rude....

From what basis did IQ45 proclaim those from Mexico as "Subhuman".....
and immigrant gangs as "animals"......when we can, from another standpoint,
call IQ45 a "barbarian" an uncivilized or brutal, unsophisticated person......

one can compare IQ45 to Obama and then we can clearly call IQ45 a
"Barbarian".....

comparing and contrasting depends on who we are comparing and contrasting....
and what criteria we use......

the question of equality comes from the fact that we have no way to
understand what is "superior" based on evolution because evolution
is random and chaotic.....it doesn't have a goal....it just is.....

and we are, because of evolution, social creatures that must engage
with others because we are unable to deal with our needs and desires
by ourselves..... we need others to fill our needs and desires....

the entire question of social, political, economic and philosophical is
one of, how do we fulfill our needs and desires?

and if our needs and desires are equal, then the process to
achieve our needs and desires also need to be equal....

hence a democracy is best for us.... it is a means best suited to
reach our goal of meeting our needs and desires equally....

that is politically, economically however, capitalism is not the best
method to reach equality for us, economically......

communism or socialism is clearly better for us to reach
our needs equally.....without giving preference to any one group
or person.....

and that is the key... to avoid giving preference to one or many...
justice is another word for equality....

we must practice the art of meeting our needs with equality and justice.....

Kropotkin
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security
wind up with neither."
"Ben Franklin"
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7835
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: a new understanding of today, time and space.

Postby iambiguous » Wed May 06, 2020 5:44 pm

Peter Kropotkin wrote: The problem I see with your philosophy is
The inability to connect the individuals philosophy
with any type of collective philosophy. If everyone was as fractured as you, we couldn't even be
able to hold any type of collective discourse.

People would be so caught up in their own
individual "existential contraption" that collective
discourse would become impossible. Your
philosophy is a roadmap to solipsism.
And as much fun as that sounds, uh no.


On the contrary, down through the ages any particular "I" has been "connected" to any number of historical, cultural and experiential "collective philosophies." Including assessments of what life means, religious beliefs, moral narratives, political agendas. Customs, folkways, mores.

And we can sustain a discussion like this because there are any number of variables embedded in human interactions that unfold in the either/or world. Even in regard to conflicting moral and political goods there are facts that can be ascertained. Facts that, for example, defend and sustain keeping social distancing policies. Facts that defend and sustain opening up the economy. Facts used to support the unborn babies right to life. Facts used to support the pregnant woman's right to choose. Facts for and against a citizens right to bear arms. And on and on and on.

My distinction here is between the moral objectivists and the moral nihilists. Given a particulat context relating to particular behaviors in conflict. Given the manner in which I construe this as the embodiment of dasein. Instead, in my view, you almost always avoid that. At least with me.

This sort of thing...

Peter Kropotkin wrote: The human question we face is as much a
individual one as a collective one. Whatever individual answer we find, must fit
Into the overall, collective answer we seek.

It is not about me, but about we. And in to
get to some collective understanding about who
we are, we have to sort out our individual
Questions.

I am a man, a liberal, philosopher, married,
American, heterosexual, Californian, atheist.

Each of these "labels" have an individual aspect
And a collective aspect.

And each to make sense, must have a collective
aspect along with the individual aspect.


Yes, and others, in completely different sets of circumstances, supporting completely different political prejudices, can basically say the same thing. That's the part I attribute to dasein. The part that revolves around this:

If I am always of the opinion that 1] my own values are rooted in dasein and 2] that there are no objective values "I" can reach, then every time I make one particular moral/political leap, I am admitting that I might have gone in the other direction...or that I might just as well have gone in the other direction. Then "I" begins to fracture and fragment to the point there is nothing able to actually keep it all together. At least not with respect to choosing sides morally and politically.

What I then do [over and over and over again] in exchanges of this sort is to ask others how this is not applicable to them...in regard to their own value judgments.

Given a particular context.

And, in regard to "a man in the midst of mankind", the points I raise on this thread: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529

Again, how is this not applicable to the "I" of others given a particular social, political or economic "situation" likely to be familiar to most of us here.

Peter Kropotkin wrote: This is why philosophies like Stirner failed.
As human beings, we are, for better or worse,
connected to each other. We cannot dismiss
a million years of biology and evolution to
turn away from each other. All philosophy at
some point must come to grasp with both
our individual self IN connection to
our collective self. What is your collective
answer to the human condition?


What would be of most interest to me here is if someone who embraced Stirner's philosophy would engage in a discussion with you in regard to actual human interactions that precipitated opposing political agendas.

Any takers?
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 35750
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: a new understanding of today, time and space.

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Wed May 06, 2020 6:07 pm

The role of government is twofold, the first
is to oversee how our needs are met and
the second is arbitrate between two conflicting
needs. To arbitrate is to set limits in regards
to our needs and desires and urges.

We cannot allow needs and desires and urges
of one, some, few or many to disrupt or
endanger the balance of our systems, be it
political, social or economic. Excessive pursuit
of our needs, desires, urges throws the
system out of balance.

As I have noted before, the desire of the right
wing/ prolife movement is "ad hoc" because
it isn't followed consistently. Pro-lifers hold
contradicting beliefs in regard to life.

They favor such anti-life propositions as the
Death penalty, allowing the police to use
fatal/ excessive force to defend themselves,
to abandon the child's right to exist by
denying such programs as WIC and SNAP.
To force children to be born and then deny
the parents the means to feed children. That
is not pro-life. Another anti-life belief is
the notion that guns and violence is an answer
to what threatens you. If you own a gun,
you are advocating violence and the threat of
violence as an solution to some problem....

Let us be clear, violence and the threat of violence,
is not pro-life. But you might say, I "need"
a gun to protect my life and my family's life.
This fear and paranoia doesn't change the fact
that the odds of some violence occurring to you
or your family is extremely low. Our age is by far,
the safest age in world history. Our times has
less personal violence then at any other
time in world history.

Anyway, back at the ranch, it is not only
in seeking our needs and desires that
government exists but in limiting those
needs and desires that government exists.

So how are we to hold to the balancing
Act of allowing some needs and desires and
limiting others?

This is in part, a personal understanding of
values and collective understanding of values.

We can seek an understanding of values, needs,
And desires with an honest evaluation of
who we are. To follow Socrates in "knowing thyself"
and examining our life, can lead us to a true
evaluation of our needs, desires and urges.
which can lead us to an better understanding
of the role that government can play in
allowing or limiting our needs, desires and urges.

How do we reach our goal of meeting our
needs, desires and urges, individually and
collectively?

Kropotkin
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security
wind up with neither."
"Ben Franklin"
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7835
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: a new understanding of today, time and space.

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Wed May 06, 2020 7:35 pm

IAM, just read your post. Let me think about
it.

We have morality and we have "legal".
As I have noted before, the two are not
synonymous. You can have legal and not moral.
For example slavery was legal, Jim Crow laws
were legal, the Holocaust was legal,
the denial of rights of one, few, some or all
of an race, religion, color, sex orientation,
political beliefs or nationality, can be legal
but not necessarily moral.

The miser who evicts the old woman
from her home might be legal, but it isn't moral...

How do we understand the difference?

A defining definition of a human being can
be made in terms of needs, desires and urges.

A human being needs, must have to survive,
food, water, shelter, air, education, Health care,
to some basic needs.... We also have psychology
needs of love, safety/security, belonging,
esteem to name a few psychology needs.

Now why is evicting an old woman "immoral"?
Legal but immoral?

If we are deprived of our basic needs by actions
of others, deprived of food, water, shelter,
Health care or an education, then that is immoral.

To be deprived of the basic essentials of existence,
is what it means to be immoral. Morality
revolves around the acquisition of needs
And we must engage in the acquisition of needs
in order to survive. And preventing that
acquisition of bodily needs is immoral.

We send people to prison for crimes committed
and yet we still give them basic bodily needs like
food, water, education and health care. Why do we
give those needs to those in prison and deny it
outside of prison?

People are in prison for either trying to meet
their needs or to fulfill their desires. To throw
someone into jail for trying to meet their
bodily needs is immoral. Which leaves us the
problem of desires and urges....

We can see how our response to desires and urges
change over time... At one time, recently,
homosexuals were denied their desires and urges
as being immoral and illegal...recently, to
meet one's desires/urges to smoke weed was illegal.

We have adapted our legal system to adapt to
needs and desires. To seek love is a need, to seek
belonging is a need...and we denied those basic
needs of homosexuals by denying them the
right I enjoy of marriage...that is immoral...
To deny rights to some and allow to others
based on artificial dogma or unproven edict.

For here lies the concept of justice/equality...
To deny to some which we allow to others is
injustice, inequality..and immoral.

The equation must be maintained....

If we forbid, then that act is forbidden to all,
and if we allow to some, then that act is allowed to
all.

Morality is tied into justice and equality....

To deny basic bodily needs, on any grounds,
is immoral. To deny justice/equality, on
any grounds, is immoral.

If we allow some to vote, then we must allow
all to vote or we are being immoral/unjust.

Much of our confusion will go away if we clearly
define and understand our needs, desires and urges,
and we then build our laws around meeting
our basic bodily needs and limit desires and
urges that upset the equation that keeps our
Society and lives in balance....

Laws are not about right or wrong, but about
needs, desires, urges and maintaining the
balance in both our individual lives and within
Society....

What is justice?

Meeting our basic bodily needs...

Kropotkin
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security
wind up with neither."
"Ben Franklin"
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7835
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: a new understanding of today, time and space.

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Wed May 06, 2020 9:41 pm

We have needs, desires, urges which leads us
to take some action or another to fulfill
those needs, desires, urges.....

Now let us take, for example, my desires as
an test case.

Do I desire or have an urge for material goods
or money? No, not at all. I have argued against
them as damaging to both the soul and nature
of what it means to be human. So, what is my
desire? I wish to gain understanding or knowledge
of what it means to human, both individually
and collectively. So how do I strive to reach my
goal? I read books, I think about it, I write,
as in these posts...does this striving
have anything to do with needs? No,
my bodily needs are well met... I will,
this month and next month and the month after,
shall have sufficient food, water, shelter, health
care.. And my psychological needs will also
be taken care of, I have love and safety,
belonging, esteem....my bodily and psychological
needs are easily met....

I want to gain intellectual knowledge and
understanding....

So in my pursuit of "the truth" I am not
in any, way, shape or form, interfering with
your pursuit of bodily needs or psychological
needs. Another way to think of this is, I am
being moral... And legal....

Let us say, my desires/ urges lead me to hurt
people... As some desires/urges do lead one to....

I am being both immoral and illegal.

And society has a right to protect itself/others
from my illegal and immoral actions.

So far, so good.....

Let us say I want to vote and society, for whatever
reason denies me my right to vote....

As others have the right to vote, to deny me my
right to vote is not only immoral but illegal.

We cannot extend to some and deny to others...
based on any bias, prejudice, superstition
or bigotry, my right to vote. Justice to be
justice, must be equal...to all....

As we live in a democracy, equality must, must
Exists as an right for all or it isn't a democracy...

Our engagement with our political system, must
be inclusive or it isn't a democracy.

Democracy by its very name means rule of the
majority...rights and freedoms must be for all,
or they are for none.

What all this is saying is simple, either we take
our rights, obligations, responsibilities, needs,
desires, urges seriously or we admit that we
are half assing it. We need to reengage with
what it means to be human in a democracy.

The battle is not only to be human individually,
But collectively....

We simply assume that we know, really know,
what it means to be an American or to be
Patriotic or to be human or to what our needs,
desires, urges actually means.....

We are mistaken about so much because we
assume so much.....individually and collectively....

We assume that it is good to make as our engagement of being human, the pursuit of
happiness is the pursuit of wealth or
material goods. It is just an assumption, nothing
more.

What are your needs, values, goals, desires and
urges? It is only by "knowing thyself" or
An examination of values or an examination of
who you are, will you know what it means to be human....

Kropotkin
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security
wind up with neither."
"Ben Franklin"
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7835
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: a new understanding of today, time and space.

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Wed May 06, 2020 10:30 pm

I am a materialist who reject materialism
as a means of discovering who we are....

But given the understanding of the equation,
Matter/mass = energy.....

I am energy trying to understand upon what
we should be spending our energy on?

The Kantain questions of, what am I to do?
What am I to hope for? What can I know?
Are not questions of matter or materialism,
But are questions of energy....what should
we expend my/ our energy upon? The question
of existence is a question of energy, not a question
of matter/mass....

And the answer of energy is convertible into
matter/mass....

So, the proper question is, is the pursuit of
materialism/goods/ wealth, worth our energy?

And the answer is no... We can get a better
rate of return from seeking truth or knowledge
Or wisdom or the meaning of existence then
from the pursuit of wealth or the pursuit of
wealth.... The pursuit of material goods isn't
worth the effort we put into it because all we get
out of the pursuit of wealth is nothing more
then material goods or wealth.... There is no
wisdom or knowledge or truth or understanding
from the pursuit of wealth/ materials....

The pursuit of wealth leads one to only
wealth/ material goods, nothing else....

It becomes an endless cycle that has no
Other purpose then the accumulation of more
wealth/ material goods....what is a very good
description of modern society? Hamsters going
endlessly around and around and around, the
the hamster wheel.... Why? Because that is all
that be accomplished in a world dictated
by the pursuit of wealth...wealth has no other
purpose then to gain more wealth....

The pursuit of wealth cannot lead us anywhere
else besides the pursuit of wealth....how does one
one find meaning or purpose in the ongoing
pursuit of wealth?

What should we spend our energy upon?

That is the question, or one of them anyway....

Kropotkin
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security
wind up with neither."
"Ben Franklin"
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7835
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: a new understanding of today, time and space.

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Wed May 06, 2020 11:52 pm

The basic Marxian question lies around
the question of the ownership and distribution
of goods... The capitalist vs the workers....

Who owns the means of production, for example...

But the real starting point is needs, desires and
urges....

How do we fulfill our needs, desires and urges...

Of which capitalism and communism, are but
two possible answers....what economic
system we should have, comes AFTER we know
or understand what our needs, desires and urges
are!

If we start with what we know to be true, then,
perhaps we can work out an economic system we
should have....

We are social beings... We cannot succeed
without each other...to have my needs, desires and
urges fulfilled, I need others...and to fulfill
your needs, desires and urges met, you also need
others, including me...

That the starting point of existence is fulfilling
our needs, desires and urges.

That is the initial starting point, not the
distribution and ownership of goods, as postulated
by Marx and Engles. What economic system comes
after we learn what our goals, needs, desires and
urges are.....

So the true question of capitalism is this,
does it fulfill our goals, needs, desires and urges?

And secondly, is the cost of capitalism worth
the effort we put into it to obtain our stated
goals, needs, desires and urges? The answer
seem to me at least, is no, capitalism isn't
worth the effort to achieve our goals, needs,
desires and urges.

We put more energy into the system
then we receive back in terms of material and
money....

And that is a waste of our time, money
and effort.

I have put in 43 years of effort/ energy into
the capitalistic system and I haven't received
any type of return on my time/effort investment...

A serious search into the energy/ effort
we receive from capitalism tells us, it isn't
worth the energy/ effort we put into it.....

So the question becomes, what economic system
is worth our investment of energy/effort?

Kropotkin
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security
wind up with neither."
"Ben Franklin"
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7835
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: a new understanding of today, time and space.

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Fri May 08, 2020 6:04 pm

In our day and age, there is much talk about
"platforms". To get out the message via various platforms....
be it TV, radio, internet, media, movies.......

what is left unsaid, is the content of that message.....

what message are we sending over our various platforms?

Now platforms can mean something else....

for example, upon what platform are we going to build our
identity upon? How are we going to become who we are?
are we going to become or identify with the platform
of religion or nationalism or sports or conservatism?

when I want to become who I am, do I do that from
the platform of experience or ideology or some third basis?

How do I identify myself and begin my search for being human?

let us begin with one such ideology, nationalism....

the idea that we can find our true meaning in becoming part of
national identity? I am American, thus I would seek out who I am
in terms of being American.....my individual and collective role
of being human would be through the ism of nationalism.....

who am I? what am I to do? what should I hope for?

under the ism of nationalism, I would answer those questions
in regards to my identity of being an American....

Who am I? an American.
what am I to do? MAGA.
what should I hope for? a great America.

the profound questions of existence is woven into the accident of my
being born an American....

let us try again with religion.....

who am I? what am I to do? what should I hope for?

who am I? I am a Christian waiting to be saved....
what am I to do? I am trying to reach heaven...
what should I hope for? to be save, redeemed.....

your self identification, can reveal to us your platform of
how you see yourself.....

now I have rejected nationalism as a platform in which to
identify ourselves and I have rejected religion as a platform
to see ourselves and I have rejected conservatism as a platform......

I have used liberalism as one such platform....

what am I to do? to engage with tolerance and equality and justice in
my dealing with other people....

who am I? someone who believes that we should treat all people
with dignity and justice and tolerance.....

what should I hope for? that we become enlightened enough to
rise to the level of tolerance and decency and dignity in treating all people....

we answer the questions of existence, the Kantian/Kropotkin questions in
light of the self chosen platform that we see ourselves in......

but I don't see liberalism as being the end all, be all of platforms in which
we engage with who we are and what are we to become......

as I have noted before, any choice of the platform of say nationalism,
means I have said, us vs them.... if you are not us, you are them.....

if I am an American you are not American , you are them....
if I am Christian, and you are not, you are them.....
and if I choose liberalism and you are not, you are them.....

the platform determines who can join our little club, be it
nationalism or religion or ideology......

I have expressly rejected the US vs THEM, understanding of the world......

there is no US vs THEM.... there is only us....

so we come to the understanding that, as of right now,
our platforms are to limited, that our current platforms
do not engage enough people to be able to say, there is no them,
there is only us.....

so what platform will allow me the space to include everyone?

what ideology is large enough to include everyone, regardless
of race, creed, color, nationality, sexual orientation?

a look at history can give us answer.....

we began, in the beginning of time, as a small unit called
the family, quickly because it was both safer and more efficient,
to become a tribe, the a city, then a region or state then
a country...

our own self identification has grown from few, to more few, to
some to many and we include all (within our defined set of nationality or ism)
and we can then learn to increase our set, to remove subsets of men or women
or Christian or liberals within that platform.. it is no longer a platform of
men or women or gays or whites or Christian, the platform include all who
exists within that platform.... if I say, America, then everyone who is
an American regardless of the individual accidental traits of birth,
being born a man or a women or white or black or handicap, is included
within that platform.....

if I say American, then everyone who is an American is included into
my platform....we have grown from a single family of 5 to a nation
of 330 million people in terms of identifying as part of our platform.....

again, it is not large enough.... we must be able to say, I am a human being,
and that will then include everyone who is human into my platform of identity....

I now identify with everyone who is human regardless of their accidental traits of birth,
of being born white or black or short or tall or handicap or man or woman...

there is no more US vs THEM in regards to human beings because
because we have erased the lines of demarcations between US vs THEM....

there is only us......

that is the goal.... we can be Americans or religious or gay or woman,
it doesn't matter what platform we self identify with individually,
we are still us.....

and that is the goal.......to make a platform large enough to
include all of us......

Kropotkin
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security
wind up with neither."
"Ben Franklin"
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7835
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: a new understanding of today, time and space.

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Fri May 08, 2020 11:24 pm

a couple of random thoughts.....

if one looks at the history of philosophy... we can see, for a lack of
a better term, dead periods... periods where philosophy isn't
a strength... take for instance, the time period between the death of
Hegel, 1831 and the bulk of the books by Nietzsche, say 1880....roughly 50 years...

we don't have many philosophers during that period..... Marx, Kierkegaard,
John Stuart Mill, very short list after that....and we can call both Marx and Mill's
political philosophers, and Kierkegaard a theologian...I would consider that a dead
age....from 1780 to 1830, was rich in both philosophy and philosophers....
we can name by the dozens, philosophers who were active during those years....

and then once again, starting roughly 1880, we can begin to name a lot of
philosophers.....

so to narrow it down, we might think about strictly American philosophers...

who we might consider American philosophers...

Emerson, Thoreau, Charles Sanders Peirce, Dewey, William James, Quine..

Not a big list....think about the years they worked....

Emerson, Thoreau, Peirce, James were basically during the 19 century...
Dewey and Quine were roughly after 1900....without looking, who would be
prominent from 1910 to the second world war?

not a big list there... and that is the point.... another dark, empty
dead zone during those years....

let us look at my second thought.....

Hegel wrote:

Philosophy, as the thought of the world, does not appear until reality
has completed its formative process, and made itself ready. History thus
corroborates the teaching of the conception that only in maturity of reality
does the ideal appear as counterpart to the real, apprehends the real world
in its substance, and shapes it into an intellectual kingdom.
When philosophy paints it grey in grey, one form of life has become old,
and by means of grey it cannot be rejuvenated, but only known.
The owl of Minerva takes flight only when the shades of night are gathering."

in other words, philosophy cannot take flight until the twilight occurs
within a civilization, a state, a culture....

think about the timing of the Greeks.... the height of their
civilization was from 480 BC to 400 BC... think of the years
when Socrates and Plato and Aristotle lived....Socrates lived from
470 BC to 399 BC... Plato toward the end of Greek height, from
428 BC to 348 BC and Aristotle was born after Socrates died,
384 BC to 322 BC... philosophy cannot take flight until the twilight
of that society begins to fall.....

the why isn't important at this point....

but what does this mean?

it would suggest that American philosophy is about to begin to rise
to the heights of greatness as the darkness begins to fall upon
the American state, civilization and culture....

the rise of American philosophy may occur at any point in time in the next
30 years... it maybe that the new philosophers have already been born or
are about to be born.... and it gives me something to look forward to
as I go gently into that good night.....

Kropotkin
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security
wind up with neither."
"Ben Franklin"
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7835
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: a new understanding of today, time and space.

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Fri May 08, 2020 11:45 pm

I wonder:

Wer, wenn ich schriee, horte mich denn aus der
Engel Ordnungen?

Kropotkin
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security
wind up with neither."
"Ben Franklin"
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7835
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: a new understanding of today, time and space.

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Sat May 09, 2020 2:25 am

it was really ugly hot today around here....86 at 6:00 pm....
and it is suppose to be hotter tomorrow....

that is my reality today....

given what I have written earlier, how can I find out who I am, given
the parameters of American ideology...how can find out what am I supposed
to do given the values of what it means to be an "American"?

nationalism is suppose to be one of the premier isms/ideologies of our day..
and it has been since the Germans discovered nationalism as one of the means
of a platform for people to exist within.....

instead of being Prussian or Bavarian or lower Saxony or perhaps
Catholic as in Bavaria or Protestant in Prussia, you could unite the various
people into being "German".....to discover nationalism in Germany meant
you could unite the people under a banner that didn't create an US vs THEM....

and given the time period that this was first shown by Fichte, around 1800,
the idea of nationalism has grown in every country because it is a useful tool
to unite people under..... another step along the path from one to a family to a tribe
to many to all......a platform to unite people under....

but to my eyes anyway, the call to nationalism has played out....and
one of the reasons is the very deliberate attempt to mark out citizenship
by various means to be very exclusive.... only whites are accepted in this
new version of nationalism, blacks and minorities, are not accepted into this
idea of nationalism.... but nationalism to be effective, must include everyone,
regardless of race, creed, color, sexual orientation or it is not truly nationalism....

you are part of America unless you are black or a minority or a women or
gay....this attempt to make nationalism very specific and a very limited
attempt to keep America for one group only....

an attempt to create a platform must include everyone....

the Catholic church calls itself catholic because the word
"catholic" means universal....it was for everyone who accepted
the word of Jesus....if you accepted, you were included into
the platform regardless of whatever other identity you might hold....
it didn't matter to the church if you were a slave or a women or
gay or a Barbarian.... that was irrelevant to the main question of
the Catholic church... Do you believe?

where the church began to go wrong was when it decided to
separate out aspects of the church..... only men could be priest
and men who weren't married.... by such exclusions, the church lost
it's universal appeal....universal means everyone... but not if you exclude
some for being a women or men for being married...

once you begin to exclude, you begin to lose your foundation of
a platform.....and once again, we see the value of inclusion...
and see the harm in exclusion..... intolerance is the opponent of
a universal platform.....

a platform that limits like a white only platform cannot succeed because
of its exclusions...the way forward, the path into the future must
be toward a universal, a catholic platform...as we have traveled as
human beings toward a more universal platform for all human beings......

from one to a few to many to all....

and this journey is not only a political and social and
and economic and social, but it is also true of platforms.....

Karl Marx wrote about socialism... at first it was a few who were socialist,
then more and more people became socialists....the journey of one, to few,
to many and then to all, still holds true....

Christianty journey is also another journey of one, to few, to many to all.....

every single platform we call ism or ideology is an platform which goes from
one to few to many to all......

that is the journey we too must take if we are to become who we are......

we too must follow the path that we have followed as human beings since
the beginning of being human.....

the human journey is not an individual one, but a collective one...
and until we understand that, we won't be able to get anywhere....

but the question revolves around not only our individual path but how we
as individuals, become part of and work with the collective......

we can no longer be indifferent to alienation and discontentment....

because being alienated and discontentment is not only bad for
the individual but it is bad for the society, state, culture and community....

the path forward for us as human beings and as a state, culture, society
and community is inclusion, acceptance of everyone regardless of
what platform they might be part of or believe in......

we cannot reach the next goal of human development until we
begin to hold to inclusion and universality and faith in
all, all human beings.. regardless if they hold to our beliefs in
god, state, morality or history......

one family, one tribe, one country, one society, one world....

that is the path of what it means to be human.....


Kropotkin
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security
wind up with neither."
"Ben Franklin"
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7835
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: a new understanding of today, time and space.

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Sun May 10, 2020 6:28 pm

Perhaps we have look at this all wrong......

we have failed to properly understood what it means to be human....

how we should see life is a journey, an Odyssey....
both individually and collectively....

let us look at the original Odyssey.. Odysseus or Ulysses made
the gods angry and in there anger, they decided to punish Odysseus
with an additional 10 year of journey after the Trojan war.....

the entire goal of the Odyssey is to reach home....

how do we reach home? that is the question isn't it?

some have said, home is god or heaven or piece of mind or salvation or perhaps death.....
the Buddha said that salvation is found once you have reach nirvana...which is the
negation of all desire, wants, needs.....every single religious leader has made such
suggestions of getting home, from Jesus to Mohammed to Confucius......

have you found salvation? or have you found home?

we see Odysseus face a series of challenges on his journey home.....

can we adapt the Odyssey to our own journey home?

as human beings, we face a two fold seeking of home,
personal and collective.......

let us see what possible journey's home we have found?

we see in modern ism's and ideologies, the pursuit of wealth
and the pursuit of titles and material goods and fame.....

how do these pursuits allow us to reach home?

the journey we have made collectively has been from animal
to animal/human and the journey we are attempting is to
become human, fully human....

what can free us from this Odyssey, this journey?

Odysseus finally reached home....

for him, it was a physical place... but is the journey, our
collective Odyssey really to reach a place? I don't think so.....

to me, it seems to be a collective viewpoint that allows us peace of mind....

I have had real epiphanies over the years and once the realization was made,
I viewed the world differently and I was sated, satisfied, at peace....

until I grew unhappy with that answer and needed to find another....

we discover new antinomies, which drives our search for some clarity on the matter....

our journey's aren't just physical journey's... they are mental, emotional,
psychological and philosophical.....

we can be at "home" and still have a mental or emotional journey we must take....

our Odyssey isn't over once we reach some peak of wealth or titles or fame.....

the human journey is not only from animal to animal/human to becoming fully human.....

the human journey can also be the journey we take in fulfilling our needs, going from
meeting our need for food, water, shelter, education, health care to meeting our
need of security/safety and the love/belonging and esteem....

we take many types of journey's in our life....I grew from baby to toddler to child to
teen to adult to middle ages and now to old age... that is one such journey we take.....

If we fall to understand that life is an journey, both an individual and a collective journey,
we fail to see what life is......

the question of existence is a question of a journey that we make....

in whose footsteps should we follow in our journey?

is a journey to fill our material needs, to be wealthy and own 3 houses
and 17 cars really a journey that will fill us with home? the journey to
possessions is the journey of every more material goods, with no end in sight.....
in our search for wealth and material goods, there can never be enough....
we always must have the newest, latest thing... there is no end in our
materialistic journey..... it doesn't have an ending place.....

let us look at the people we put up statues to.....

what sort of journey do they deem as best?

the internal journey.... not of body, but of soul, of spirit,
of becoming within......

Jesus, the Buddha, Confucius, MLK..... they didn't preach the journey
of the body, they preached the journey of the soul, of the spirit....

the question becomes, what is home and how do we reach it?

Kropotkin
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security
wind up with neither."
"Ben Franklin"
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7835
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: a new understanding of today, time and space.

Postby iambiguous » Sun May 10, 2020 7:05 pm

Peter Kropotkin wrote: IAM, just read your post. Let me think about
it.

We have morality and we have "legal".
As I have noted before, the two are not
synonymous. You can have legal and not moral.
For example slavery was legal, Jim Crow laws
were legal, the Holocaust was legal,
the denial of rights of one, few, some or all
of an race, religion, color, sex orientation,
political beliefs or nationality, can be legal
but not necessarily moral.

The miser who evicts the old woman
from her home might be legal, but it isn't moral...


Okay, then how would the philosopher/ethicist demonstrate that these things are necessarily immoral? In a No God world. From my frame of mind, your frame of mind has acquired a set of political prejudices that divides the world up into "moral" and "immoral". But this is something that I have come to believe that you have come to believe -- re dasein -- are basically existential contraptions. Subjective/subjunctive leaps of faith.

In other words, how are behaviors shown to be inherently good or evil? Where's the argument for that? And where's the demonstration of this argument such that all men and women who wish to be thought of as rational, are obligated to agree?

Where's the argument that makes the amoral personal agenda of the nihilist, narcissist and sociopath go away?

After all, down through the ages there have been those who not only embraced your "evil" acts as legal, but rationalized the laws themselves as reflecting moral behavior. Some even included a God, the God, their God in defending them.

Peter Kropotkin wrote: How do we understand the difference?

A defining definition of a human being can
be made in terms of needs, desires and urges.

A human being needs, must have to survive,
food, water, shelter, air, education, Health care,
to some basic needs.... We also have psychology
needs of love, safety/security, belonging,
esteem to name a few psychology needs.

Now why is evicting an old woman "immoral"?
Legal but immoral?

If we are deprived of our basic needs by actions
of others, deprived of food, water, shelter,
Health care or an education, then that is immoral.


In other words, basically, others are obligated to "define" a "human being" as you do. Then if they choose behaviors that can't be squeezed into your own definition, they are being immoral.

As though the conservatives and those who act out your own "evil" behaviors can't come up with their own assumptions regarding what it means to be a human being.

As though philosophers and ethicists are then able to come up with an airtight ontological and teleological assessment of the "human condition" wholly in sync with your own political prejudices.

Okay, sans God, what is that argument?

Instead, in my view, you iterate your own political prejudices. Prejudices that I have thought myself into believing are less the components of philosophy and more the components of the points I raise in my signature threads.

To wit:

Peter Kropotkin wrote: To be deprived of the basic essentials of existence,
is what it means to be immoral. Morality
revolves around the acquisition of needs
And we must engage in the acquisition of needs
in order to survive. And preventing that
acquisition of bodily needs is immoral.

We send people to prison for crimes committed
and yet we still give them basic bodily needs like
food, water, education and health care. Why do we
give those needs to those in prison and deny it
outside of prison?

People are in prison for either trying to meet
their needs or to fulfill their desires. To throw
someone into jail for trying to meet their
bodily needs is immoral. Which leaves us the
problem of desires and urges....

We can see how our response to desires and urges
change over time... At one time, recently,
homosexuals were denied their desires and urges
as being immoral and illegal...recently, to
meet one's desires/urges to smoke weed was illegal.

We have adapted our legal system to adapt to
needs and desires. To seek love is a need, to seek
belonging is a need...and we denied those basic
needs of homosexuals by denying them the
right I enjoy of marriage...that is immoral...
To deny rights to some and allow to others
based on artificial dogma or unproven edict.

For here lies the concept of justice/equality...
To deny to some which we allow to others is
injustice, inequality..and immoral.


And, by definition [yours], the conservatives have absolutely no defense against these assumptions. Meaning that their own set of assumptions are ipso facto wrong.

And on and on. Only this time [in my view] all the more abstractly:

Peter Kropotkin wrote: The equation must be maintained....

If we forbid, then that act is forbidden to all,
and if we allow to some, then that act is allowed to
all.

Morality is tied into justice and equality....

To deny basic bodily needs, on any grounds,
is immoral. To deny justice/equality, on
any grounds, is immoral.

If we allow some to vote, then we must allow
all to vote or we are being immoral/unjust.

Much of our confusion will go away if we clearly
define and understand our needs, desires and urges,
and we then build our laws around meeting
our basic bodily needs and limit desires and
urges that upset the equation that keeps our
Society and lives in balance....

Laws are not about right or wrong, but about
needs, desires, urges and maintaining the
balance in both our individual lives and within
Society....

What is justice?

Meeting our basic bodily needs...

Kropotkin



This all "clicks" in your head, when, in turn, in your head, you zero in on any particular context. But from my frame of mind this sort of "intellectual scaffolding" is no less available to those who find your own assessment of "good" and "evil" behavior as appalling to them as you find theirs.

But, but, but: Unlike "me", you both are able to embody the gratification of knowing that at least you are right and they are wrong.

What neither of you grasp then is what it might be like to be someone like me. Better even to be proven wrong about "good" and "evil" than to conclude that both are basically just social, political and economic constructs rooted in an unimaginably complex and convoluted intertwining of genes and memes embedded in historical, cultural and experiential contexts ever and always evolving and changing over the centuries.

At least you're not that.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 35750
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: a new understanding of today, time and space.

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Sun May 10, 2020 8:34 pm

as usual, thanks for your thoughts and I shall answer when I have
given them some thought....returning to work after 2 weeks off,
so I hopefully will have an answer by Wednesday or Thursday....

Kropotkin
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security
wind up with neither."
"Ben Franklin"
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7835
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: a new understanding of today, time and space.

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Sun May 10, 2020 9:12 pm

these questions of existence are all tied up into each other....

the journey or Odyssey of us human beings can be seen
as an type of seeking...what are you seeking?

the Kantian/Kropotkin questions are some of our "seekings"
Who am I? what am I to do? what should I/we hope for?

the journey home, be it a physical home or far more likely,
a spiritual home.....a place where I am not, not disconnected or
alienated.....I have always in some fashion or another felt disconnected
or alienated from people or some ism or America.......

I have a home... with a wife who loves and I love... a daughter who loves me, most of the time,
and who I love.....

so my search for home isn't a physical one, it is a search for home in a mental,
emotional, psychological or philosophical...

using the tools of either religion or philosophy or science or thinking to find my home,
my spiritual and emotional and political and philosophical and psychological
home......

I am disconnected, alienated from people because of my hearing loss.....
I may not ever be able to connect to people in this fashion until my hearing
gets better, not possible, or people learn to deal with hearing impaired or deaf people....

am I a "unified" person? no, and that may also be a disconnect for others....

is home being a "unified" person?

perhaps.... perhaps.....

we human beings are on a journey of sorts, we have questions that allow us
to understand what we seek, and we have tools to help us engage in
this process of existence.......life is a process....

with certain idea's about what it mean to be human within that process....

what we know to be true is that we human beings are social creatures
and we cannot survive without others..... to be disconnected, alienated
from people is one of the harshest conditions we face as human beings....

and one of the tools we have to connect with people is our ideologies
and ism's.......

the ism of communism is simply an ism that connects people into some format
that allows them to engage in the pursuit of our needs and desires.....

Marxism is an materialistic ism, dealing with needs and desires....

but Marxism doesn't answer the needs of our inner self, the emotional
and psychological, mental needs of existence... that is why Marxism has failed, so far.....

does Marxism ask about love or belonging or esteem or security/safety needs?

no.

capitalism deals with material needs, couches and money and cars and houses...
but does capitalism deal with love or belonging or esteem or safety/security needs?

no.

does a religion like Catholicism deal with material needs like food, water, shelter, education?

no.

and that is why religions like Catholicism failed....

we are applying half answers that might solve the physical needs or answer
our emotional or psychological needs, but not answer both needs at the same time....

we are dealing with incomplete isms and ideologies that only answer part of the
human condition.. either our inner or our outer condition.....

how can we feel at home if we only answer part of our requirements, either
our mental/emotional needs or our physical needs.....

home is where our needs and desires and urges are met....
both our inner needs of emotional and psychological needs
and our outer physical needs of food and water and shelter.

and our desires which aren't our needs, are also met......

by what tools and process do we have that can answer our
questions that we seek answers to.......

who am I? what tools or processes we have can answer that question?

I also have my physical needs that need to be met and so we have a lot going on
as human beings.... we are on a journey in which our physical and emotional
and psychological needs and desires must be met and our need for home found.....

how do I answer these often conflicting and sometimes damaging needs and desires that make
finding home, impossible.....

Kropotkin
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security
wind up with neither."
"Ben Franklin"
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7835
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: a new understanding of today, time and space.

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Wed May 13, 2020 6:24 pm

having modem problems, lets see if this makes it....

this question of, who we are?

and this question has been answered in a variety of ways....

religious, political, scientific, philosophical...…

take the scientific for example, the question of, who are we,
was answered by science as, we are machines... and that was
taken from what science reported... man as machine...
following the idea of the universe as machine....

think of the solar system... that is, to one's eyes, a machine like....
think of the clockwork way in which the solar system worked....

and clockwork was the operative idea.... one cannot
underestimate the importance that clocks held for over 400 years...

man as a clock was the fundamental idea of what a human was.....

this idea was challenged by the Romantic era...

then we reach one of the fundamental ways man saw man...

with Darwin....

with Darwin, man suddenly was face with man being a biological
being....no longer was the idea that man was a clock.. but human
beings are biological beings that live, die, breath, eat, shit, fuck
and all the things that biological beings do...

how special can human beings be if they are biological beings?

no different then cats or dogs or bunny rabbits...

we still haven't come to grips with man being a biological being....


the old idea that human beings were not just biological beings,
but we were spiritual beings...in Star Wars, Yoda talks to Luke
about this saying,

"not this crude matter are you, but luminous are you".

or something like that, it has been a while since I've seen Star Wars...

the bottom line is that we are crude matter....we are physical beings....

that is the lesson of Darwin....and now that is how we see human beings
as physical beings...we are animal in form.. but as noted,
we are something else inside of us.....

are we spiritual beings?

Kropotkin
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security
wind up with neither."
"Ben Franklin"
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7835
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: a new understanding of today, time and space.

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Wed May 13, 2020 6:57 pm

the next issue becomes Freud...

what Darwin did for the body, Freud did for the mind....

Mentally, we become what we became physically,
the mental equivalent our bodies...

mentally, we eat and drink and shit and fuck, just
like we do physically....

there is no difference between the human mind and the human
body.....it is animal, just as our bodies are animal...….

and we still haven't come to grips with that.....

so we have possibilities....

one is we are animal... mentally and physically...

the other possibility is that we are animal, in body anyway...
but we don't allow the body to control who we are...

we rise above being just a physical creature.. like a dog or a cat....

and we discover what it means to be human, both physically
and mentally.....

we don't need to be animal and allow our needs and/or desires to
rule us... we can overrule our needs and desires.. and by doing so,
we become human.....we must still eat and drink and have shelter
and need education... but those needs aren't what drive us.....
and we have mental and emotional needs and desires, sex and power
and lust and the need for safety/security......and all the other emotional
needs we have... but we don't have to allow them to control us...

I am human and I am in control of my needs and desires and wants....

the needs and desires and wants, they don't control me....

if I have the bodily need of sex, I don't have to allow it to control me....
I control it and I decide the manner of sex I will get.....

sex is a biological need.. and so we must answer... but we can be
in control of that need, it doesn't control us....

and we must be become aware of that..... if we control our needs
and desires and wants, then we are being human, not just animal/human....

and so we meet Freud... he made us aware of our mental and emotional
needs and desires and wants.....and they are no different then our
physical needs...

we can fall in love and we can meet our emotional and physical needs
that love brings us....

no longer do we need to be passive in our reaction to emotional events....

we can go out in front of our emotional and mental needs.....

everyone desires, needs love.. that is both emotionally and physically....
but we can understand that need and desire.. we can be out in front of
that need and desire... we can.....

I too was once, passionately, wildly crazy in love...
and I was, on more then one occasion, out of control....
so I understand the intensity, the emotional grip of
love...it is a hard thing to be in love and not have
it reciprocated.. been there, done that.....

but I would have been better served had I been able
control the whirlwind...…

I was not always the in control person I seem to be....

it took years of training and practice to achieve some
emotional balance..

and that is the key, once again, keeping things in balance...

emotionally, mentally, physically, psychologically.....

balance is the key.....

Freud and Darwin showed us the underside of being human....

now we need to overcome that dark underside and learn
to hold ourselves in balance.... to become human, fully human

requires us to rise above being just animal.. or even being
animal/human.....

the next step requires we become more balance to achieve
our next goal, not our final destination, but the next goal of
becoming human, all too human....

Kropotkin
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security
wind up with neither."
"Ben Franklin"
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7835
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: a new understanding of today, time and space.

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Fri May 15, 2020 5:02 pm

let us take this understanding of a journey,
as Odysseus took his journey....

His goal was to reach home, Ithaca. Let us see what goal
can we reach. In other words, given our ism's and ideologies,
what goals are we striving for?

Capitalism: the make money.... the journey is to make money.
but what the final goal? the only possibility in capitalism is to make
money and then more money....there is no final goal in capitalism....
either you are making money or you are losing money.... that's it....

people who have made a lot of money, they don't seem to
retire... they go on making money... Warren buffet is still at it,
at 89 as is the remaining Kock brother...at 84....

the only wealthy person who seems to have retired is gates....
all the others seem to keep at it... long after us common people will have
retired.....Henry ford was still president of ford motor company at the time of
his death at 83.....

so if there is no goal in capitalism, how do we know what we are working for?

money? if there is a more piss poor reason to keep on working beside money,
I haven't seen it...to spend one life working for money, colored pieces of paper?

is that really the journey of the human race?

the journey for money doesn't have any interest in the values
of being human, money has no interest in love or peace or honor
or justice or even the negative values of lust or hate or greed or anger....

the values which make living worth living, have no meaning in a universe
that is money driven, or said another way, the pursuit of money isn't
the point of our existence....

not sure about that? let me ask you, given a choice between
love and money, what would you pick? most people would pick love
and the choice isn't that hard to make... and love is the right answer...

for what has more value, money or love?

so at the end of the day, love has more value then money....
and love makes life worth the effort... you might say, but making love
the answer still doesn't have a goal...you get love all your life and that
doesn't change.. there is no final goal......just like money....

no, no that is wrong..... love is a connection between two people...
it isn't a material object, it doesn't have anything to measure...
you can't weigh it or measure it or time it or put a price upon it....

so what other journeys might we make that is worth the effort?

the religious journey..... to be saved, to reach heaven....
that journey has a goal, one that can be worked on our whole life...
isn't that a journey worth taking?

the goal there is a mystical one. Maybe there is a god or there is heaven,
maybe not... one cannot ever know....you must assume that there is a god,
there is a heaven....you are guessing that there is a goal, a god, a heaven....

for some, that is enough, to hope, to have faith that there is a god,
that there is a heaven..... faith, to have hope in god or in a heaven
isn't enough for me.... I must see something tangible to reach....

I hold for wisdom, knowledge.... I seek wisdom... to spend my life
seeking what it means to be wise.... to understand the values that
are important and what values aren't worth the effort....

but Kropotkin, there aren't any goals listed there....you simply seek
all your life....but what am I seeking?

not something material, or of short term, but something that is lasting
and can be taught to others.. if they are willing to listen...

if you are to spend your life in pursuit of something, what would
that something be?

if life is a journey, then what are you journey to?

what is the goal? what is the purpose of our journey?

Kropotkin
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security
wind up with neither."
"Ben Franklin"
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7835
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: a new understanding of today, time and space.

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Fri May 15, 2020 5:35 pm

I came across in my reading the other day, this thought....

there is no such thing as individual ethics, ethics can only
exists within the confines of a group, city, polis, family,
state or civilization...….

if there is morality, it must exists within the confines of a larger
group of people, of which you are just one person.....

we don't think of ethics as being a collective matter, but it is....

but think of all the other things that are collective in nature....

society is collective in nature, ethics, our collective goals,
our safety and security, meeting our needs... food, water, shelter...

so the question becomes, how does the individual, me, fit into
the collective, society...….

and what is the exact nature of our relationship between the collective
and the individual?

think of political theories.... they are seeking to understand
the relationship between the individual and the collective,
politically.....think of Hobbes or Locke....

think of economic theories, they are seeking to understand
the relationship between the individual and the collective,
economically...think of Marx or Adam Smith....

how do you fit into society?

if you are feeling alienated or disconnected, from society, what is
the reason, and what is the solution?

think of that alienation or disconnection as being a sickness, an illness,
how would a doctor go about treating it? what is the cure for being
alienated or disconnected from society?

think of how the industrial revolution alienated, disconnected
people from society...… think of how the political revolutions
from the American revolution to the French to the Russian revolution,
alienated and disconnected people from their... what? are people alienated
because they are outside of the norm or are they alienated/disconnected
because they feel they have no place or home within the
current political or economic institutions?

don't discount this alienation/disconnection from society....

think of those who have created art, science, political thought,
philosophical or religious thought because they were alienated
or disconnected from their society...….

we must have a certain amount of alienation/ disconnection from society
so that the artist and philosophers and scientist and thinkers have
room to become who they are...… Jesus is Jesus because he was
alienated/disconnected from his current society....

every great thinker and artist and writer, has been alienated from
or disconnected from society..... think of Da Vinci or Spinoza
or the Buddha.... all alienated and disconnected from society....
Nietzsche or Kierkegaard wrote what they wrote because they
were alienated and disconnected from their society.....

so we can not prevent alienation and disconnection from society
and I'm not we would want to given the great thinkers who
have created because they were alienated and disconnected....

so, once again, we are face with a problem..... so how much control
does society have over the individual?

too much and we stifle creativity and genius,
too little we unleash chaos and disorder.....

and once again, we reach the point where the answer is
the middle, the equation..... too much on either side is
bad for both the individual and for the society...…

so what ails our society and what is the cure?

Kropotkin
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security
wind up with neither."
"Ben Franklin"
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7835
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: a new understanding of today, time and space.

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Fri May 15, 2020 8:47 pm

from Hegel through Marx:

"Hegel standpoint is that of modern political economy.
He grasps labor is the essence of Man-as Man's essence in the act
of producing itself; he sees only the positive, not the negative side
of labor."

"That labor is the essence of Man"

any causal reader of mine will know that I disagree with that
statement...for if labor is the essence of man, that leaves out
possibilities like love, justice, hope, peace among others....

we don't find out who we are in our means of production...

we find ourselves in the values that we promote and follow....

our economic self is certainly an important aspect of human existence,
that cannot be in doubt, but the "essence"?

that discounts the religious, the political, the social aspects of
human existence...…

and once again, I point to the equation as being primary.....

we can have our economic self, but we must also have
our political and social and religious self to maintain
our balance.....we cannot focus upon one aspect of being
human and call that primary or the "essence" of Man.....

we are, social beings, if there was an "essence" to human beings,
that would be it, far more then any individual aspect like the economic
or political or social or philosophical.....

nature via evolution has created within people, our need to be
social before all other aspects... the economic and political
and religious and philosophical, are all aspects of the social
nature of human beings...

we cannot engage in the economic or political or religious
or philosophical without some social aspect....

take religion for example, it isn't enough for human beings
to believe in god... we must engage socially with that...
hence we have people going to church, synagogues, places of
worship... even though religion proper is one person's engagement
with god..... we turn a private matter of engagement with god into
a social event.....that is the nature of our being social...…..
we take private matters and make them social....

our engagement with values isn't a private one...
it requires a collective understanding of values.....

as pointed out before, we don't have individual ethics,
we have collective, social ethics, we have morality that
is social and collective... morality isn't about one person's
morality, but about one person morality within a group,
society, tribe, nation, or state....

morality is a social endeavor... the collective working out
of what is ethics and morality...…..

those who protest our current stay at home orders are actually
saying that their individual values are more important then
our collective values and they are completely wrong....

ethics and value and rights must be seen in regards to
the collective rights and values and morality of everyone,
the collective...…

the working out of individual values and rights and morality
cannot be an individual engagement.. it must, must
be done within the context of the group, society, the state,
and the civilization.....

but we can work out our individual values that we hold and then,
then apply them to our collective nature...….. I hold to love
and peace... so what I am working out is that relationship
I have with the state in regards to my own values of love and peace.....

I believe and I believe I have shown that love and peace are
values that promote order.... whereas violence and anger
and hate give rise to disorder... violence and anger and hate,
brings about an increase in entropy in society.....

if we want society to succeed and progress, we must
have order and within that order, we can meet our
needs and desires and wants....

within disorder and chaos, we cannot be able to meet our
needs and desires and wants..... it is too chaotic
and disorderly to be able to meet our needs

and we tie into the need to be social with our
human needs and desires and wants.....

we cannot achieve those needs and want and desires
without a cohesive and functional society, state,
and collective...……

I cannot get fed without everyone working together and
you can't get feed or have your needs met without a functional
society....

within a chaotic and disorderly society/state, the basic
needs, wants and desires of people fall to the wayside because
we are so focused on the bottom bracket of just meeting our
needs, food, water, shelter, education, health care.....

those basic needs demands a working, functional society to
be achieved.....

to state that the "essence of man is labor" is to dismiss
the basic needs and desires and wants of human beings....
but it isn't enough to reach those basic goals....

we have to rise above reaching the basic's and try for
the higher emotional needs of love, belonging, safety/security,
and esteem....

Freud and Darwin have shown us that we are animals,
and we must reach our biological needs, but we have
to meet our emotional needs, desires and wants...…

Darwin spoke to the physical side of man,
Freud spoke to the emotional side of man....

and just acting upon the economic side of our nature will not
answer both our physical and emotional needs...…

just being labor isn't enough to meet our physical or emotional
needs.....

I labor every single day, it doesn't meet my emotional needs in any,
way, shape or form.... I work to put food on my table... that is all
labor does for me.... it doesn't answer my emotional needs,
desires or wants.... it doesn't even reach my need/desire to retire....
I have worked for over 40 years and I am unable to retire.....

meanwhile my soul, my body is being destroyed because
I only serve the basic goal of profits and money....
that has nothing to do with my needs, desires, hopes,
or wants.... I am a tool to make profit.. nothing more...…

and that dehumanizes me.. negates me into being a thing,
not having any value as being human.....

that is the final point of being labor.. it dehumanizes one into
being a thing without having our own personal needs or wants or
desires being met.....

being labor alone means I am not only being negated but
I am being alienated and disconnected from society, the state
and myself...….

to say, that man is an economic being is to deny the other,
more important aspects of being human...….it denies
love and justice and peace and hope and charity.....

and those values must be connected to our social, collective
being..... it is all connected... our individual needs and wants
and desires along with our collective needs and wants
and desires...…

the one individual need demands, demands a collective
response.....

we exists as our individual self, but we must also
fit into and be part of the overall society, collective
aspect of being human... we are social beings who
must work our individual self into a collective
setting....

Kropotkin
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security
wind up with neither."
"Ben Franklin"
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7835
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: a new understanding of today, time and space.

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Sun May 17, 2020 5:29 pm

This act of attempting too fit our own viewpoints,
our own ideologies, our own idea's into what the society/state
believes is of fundamental importance....

Now what this means in practical terms is this:

I am born and then I am indoctrinated/educated with the values,
prejudices, superstitions, biases, habits, bigotry and a mindset of
what the society/state believes to be important.....

when I reach a certain age, I begin to doubt those indoctrinations....
quite often around high school or for some, a little earlier and for some,
a little later, collage perhaps....

I may reject some indoctrinations, I was indoctrinated with the judgement
that there is a god.... because of my understanding of the universe,
I come to reject that indoctrination... I believe that there is no god....

a revaluation of values that occurs to most people.... but I hold that
some indoctrinations are so imbedded, that we miss them in our
initial revaluation of values.... we might miss the martial nature of
the American society/state.... we still hold to martial values of America.....
exhibited for example, when we see ads or commercial celebrating
American "hero's" which are always soldiers and seaman of the armed forces....

America is great because of its military prowess.... and we have this
unseen ideology that permeates our society,, infecting people into thinking
that greatness is achieved by force of arms... it is not.....

greatness is not an act of war, it is a state of mind.....

"we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal"

that is greatness.....how we view ourselves and how we view others is
a sign of greatness....

I hold to values of peace and love and charity.. my society, my state holds
to a viewpoint of martial values..... how do I fit my values into this
society/ state viewpoint? I am alienated/disconnected because my own
personal values are in conflict with the society/state values.....

how do I overcome?

a society that holds to martial values cannot, cannot last or survive for long....

it cannot because of the lessons learned during the Peloponnesian War....

Athens extended itself too much in its attempt to gain or influence more
territory....its attack upon Syracuse Sicily, was a bridge too far and lead
Athens to be destroyed... we too are holding unto land very far from home
and we are being bleed dry by this conflict... we are not going to die by some
massive attack upon America, we are simply going to bleed to death by
a thousand cuts.....a war here, a war there, troops being sent here, there,
everywhere.....time, money, effort, energy and lives are being lost in
some vain attempt to be a "superpower"....

so, how do I reconcile my alienation/discontentment with the reality
that is America today? we have two possible options, fight or flight.....

I stand and fight for what I believe in or I flee.. to some
place where I wait out my remaining years reading, or watching movies,
or drinking myself to death or some other engagement with things that
occupy myself while I escape into death...…

the state/society holds to a set value group and I hold to another
set value group...….. how do I reach some sort of compromise between
the state/society and myself? Is compromise even possible?

so, how do I integrate into a society/state that holds to different values
then myself?

I am one, but the path is not just about I, but the path is us.....

so how do I achieve us, given we hold different values?

Kropotkin
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security
wind up with neither."
"Ben Franklin"
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7835
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: a new understanding of today, time and space.

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Sun May 17, 2020 5:59 pm

I thought this the other day...…

the social nature of existence...….

my existence is not defined by I, but it is defined by us...….

we don't exists individually, we exists socially.. within multiple
groups, multiple associations..... family, work, school, church.....

for example, my relationship with god is personal, individual....

and yet, I go to church, a social association..... why does my own
personal engagement with god require me to go to church?

it is because we are, by our own software, given to us by evolution,
that we engage socially....we are programed to engage with other
people... so we go to movies and hang out in bars and go to
restaurants and pray in churches.....human beings must have,
must have contact with other people.... it is forces upon us by
evolution and our software.....

so existence isn't a personal, all about me existence.. it is all about us....
who we are, not who I am...…

all those things we consider to be important is important because we
are social creatures..... does history have any value when you take out
the collective us? is there an individual ethics? is there any value
to concepts like justice, honor, peace, love, charity... without other people?

so the question of, how do I fit into society/state/culture? isn't just a
random question... it is the fundamental question of our own personal
existence... for existence isn't a matter about me, it is about us.....

so, how do I fit into society?

the question isn't, how I do I navigate existence?

no, the question is, how do we navigate existence?

Kropotkin
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security
wind up with neither."
"Ben Franklin"
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7835
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: a new understanding of today, time and space.

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Mon May 18, 2020 6:32 pm

iambiguous wrote:
Peter Kropotkin wrote: IAM, just read your post. Let me think about
it.

We have morality and we have "legal".
As I have noted before, the two are not
synonymous. You can have legal and not moral.
For example slavery was legal, Jim Crow laws
were legal, the Holocaust was legal,
the denial of rights of one, few, some or all
of an race, religion, color, sex orientation,
political beliefs or nationality, can be legal
but not necessarily moral.

The miser who evicts the old woman
from her home might be legal, but it isn't moral...


Okay, then how would the philosopher/ethicist demonstrate that these things are necessarily immoral? In a No God world. From my frame of mind, your frame of mind has acquired a set of political prejudices that divides the world up into "moral" and "immoral". But this is something that I have come to believe that you have come to believe -- re dasein -- are basically existential contraptions. Subjective/subjunctive leaps of faith.

In other words, how are behaviors shown to be inherently good or evil? Where's the argument for that? And where's the demonstration of this argument such that all men and women who wish to be thought of as rational, are obligated to agree?

Where's the argument that makes the amoral personal agenda of the nihilist, narcissist and sociopath go away?

K: we must start from the starting point of the nihilist, narcissist and sociopath.
and that starting point is all three believe that the world begins and ends with them....
see Herr Trump for a true sociopath, narcissist and nihilist... he has no idea that
there are human beings outside of himself...he has no empathy, no compassion,
no insight, no rapport or affinity for anyone else on planet earth.....but these
things, compassion and empathy and rapport are the basic fundamental
aspects of human existence.....look at the people you have known in your
life... the people who seem to be complete human beings are the ones
who have compassion and empathy and a connection to other human beings....

over my lifetime of 61 years, I have dealt with some who were sociopath and
narcissist and nihilistic.....they were unable to connect with other human beings
on a basic human level....they lack the software, the programming that other
human beings have....we don't react to people rationally, we react emotionally,
instinctually, from the gut, as it were...the sociopath, narcissist, nihilist is
unable to do that...sociopaths, narcissist and nihilist are an aberration,
defective, an abnormality.... and because they are who they are, they
wouldn't even care to be called defective or an aberration because
to understand that basic concept would require them to become aware of
others.. and this they cannot do....

in other words, you cannot make sociopaths, narcissist or nihilists
understand.... they are too far gone... like IQ45... rational or even
irrational arguments won't work with him or them.....

they are a lost cause... think of the terminator, Arnold played...
think of his emotional range.... that is exactly the emotional range of
these people we are talking about...and they cannot be argued with or
reason with or guilted into an emotional response.... don't bother....

as for what is moral and immoral? I have defined moral has being
the ability to meet our needs....our basic needs of food, water,
shelter, education and health care...… these are our basic needs
and they must, must be met in order for us to survive....

and any attempt to deprive people or persons of these needs,
that is immoral...if children are starving in Chicago, that is immoral....
and why are these children starving? I would hold to the fact, in part,
to people like Jeff Bezos or Bill Gates, who hold wealth of hundred of
billions of dollars...…if 90% of the American wealth is held by
400 people, as is the fact, then how are we suppose to feed the lower
90% of people? Income inequality is one of the prime movers of
what I would consider to be immoral... the inability of people
to meet their basic human needs of food, water, shelter, education,
health care....

what is moral? the ability of people to meet their basic needs...
what is immoral? the prevention of people meeting their basic needs....

as I have pointed out, we human beings are social creatures... we
cannot exists or survive by ourselves.... we must have others to aid
in our reaching our basic needs, both physical... food, water....so on
and our emotional needs of love, esteem, safety/security, belonging....

one could make the argument that the rise of the state/government/civilization
rose because of the increased need of people to meet their basic needs...

in other words, the family meet our needs, until it didn't, and
then we grew to tribes, and that worked until it didn't,
then we, to meet our needs, grew to cities and towns..
and that meet our needs until it didn't, then we grew into
nations and states.... and that will hold until our needs grow
and we must expand our political and economic infrastructure to
meet our needs, both physical and emotional....and soon, we shall
need to meet our needs by expanding our political and economic structure
to a world wide state/civilization.....that is the pattern of growth
so far...

to be human means to be social and part of something....
be it a crowd or a group or a society...…..

you keep bringing everything back to some individual context,
whereas I am taking it to a social, society context...…

we are only human beings in context to others...

in other words, we cannot become a human being without others....

but that also means we can damage the souls of human beings
by our immoral actions, or by hurting or damaging people....
you want moral people, you need to treat others morally.....

we can create moral people by our moral actions...…

human beings learn best from our experiences...
if our experiences are moral, then more then likely
we too shall be moral...….morality is learned from others...
that too is the lesson of a society...… we teach....

what lessons are you teaching others right now?

now one might say, Kropotkin, you are hitting several different
areas, but I say unto you, no, each area I talk about, learning, needs, society,
desires, teaching, morality, experience, is the same thing.....

you break it out because it is easier to think about when it is broken down
into separate area's..... but that simplifies it too much....

life is complicated and some of it can't be broken down into
nice, neat compartments...…

Kropotkin
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security
wind up with neither."
"Ben Franklin"
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7835
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: a new understanding of today, time and space.

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Mon May 18, 2020 9:04 pm

one of the most interesting things to ponder is this
idea of nature.....

read about what philosophers and thinkers thought about "nature"
before Darwin...…

From the Enlightenment to Marx, everyone wrote about "nature"...

but in reading their thoughts about "Nature", at least for me,
its very abstract..... Nature is this or that... but it doesn't seem
to have anything to do with human beings... nature exists outside
of human beings... it is something that we watch or observe or
try to emulate.... but nature isn't something that is within us
or about us...…

the thing about Darwin is that he brought nature into us....

nature wasn't something outside of us, it was us, inside of us,
it was us.....

we see animals and we think that they exists outside of us
and the fact is we are animals, writ another new species of
animal....

if we are nature and we are, then if we destroy nature,
we are destroying ourselves....simple as that....

if we act in such a way that animals go extinct, then we
ourselves get a little bit closer to extinction...….

the lesson of Darwin is this, man is a part of nature
and as such, we must exist within nature.. if we destroy
nature, we are destroying the environment in which we live....

the lesson is, we are nature... and as such, we must
begin to engage with nature as a partner, not as a
a force to dominate and destroy, but as a part of nature....

Darwin put man back into nature... and we still haven't understood
this lesson...… our philosophy and thinking and understanding still
hasn't caught up with Darwin...…

and little less with Freud... Freud brings home the lesson
that human beings are creatures born within and living within
nature...…. our environment, be it family or society or state or
our political and/or economic systems, help create who we are.....

our nature is defined by the systems we choose to exists under....
because those systems create the environment we live under...…

we exist by reacting to our environment... that is basic evolution 101.....

the environment creates the type of people who live within it....

both physically and mentally/emotionally/psychologically.....

we respond to our environment.... and that response is
what create human thinking, emotions, mental and physical
response...… if it is cold, then we respond by dressing warm
and adapting cold weather thinking... Recall, I was born in
Minnesota and I know that because of the environment, it being
cold for 6 months of the year, we think about things differently..
then they do here in California... the environment itself creates
the form of thinking we do.... here in the Bay Area, it rarely ever
gets down to 45 degrees and that is really cold around here....

in Minnesota, 45 degrees in the winter is a rather warm day...…
and we react and think about "nature" differently because of the
difference in the weather.....

nature influences how we think about life and who we are
and what we can become.....

the environment, be it weather or our political system or
the economic system or the media, can influence how we
think and feel about what it means to be human.....

capitalism, the environment we live under, is negative...
it dehumanized, negates people and their values,
and we change to adapt to this negation in our environment....

we adapt by believing the negation of us by our economic
and political system...….we react by confirming
the negation of who we are, by acts of violence
and acts of depravity..... we can kill without remorse
because our environment encourages that lack of remorse....

when money become more important then people, we value
money before people... we can accept killing people for their
money because we value money more then people.....

the environment allows this... the political and social
and economic system, our environment tells us that
money has more value and is worth more then people.....

thus violence against people is not only accepted, but encouraged...…

we live in a martial society, that is the society of America, in which
we think in terms of military values and the values of the military
is of or appropriate to war or warlike..... we accept violence
as part of being human.... and we shouldn't...…

we accept the proposition that our environment is violent
and warlike and so we must be violent and warlike...…

but that is a reaction to our environment, which has nothing
to do with who we actually are.....our environment is nature...…

to those who see nature as being warlike or a war of all against all,
has learned the wrong lesson from nature...….

in fact, nature operates by cooperation far more then a war of all, against
all.....

you can this cooperation everywhere you look in nature and you can see
it everywhere you look in human society...…

in fact, an environment where all is at war, with the rest, cannot survive,
the environment would destroy itself if it were true...….

the notion of the "survival of the fittest" is simply a misinterpretation of
what actually happens in nature.... more animals survive by cooperation,
then they do by "war" with its neighbors...…

the grass and tree's and birds and bee's and plants all survive by cooperation with
each other instead of battling each other....

animals and plants and tree's, each occupy different levels in which they
don't go to war with each other, they cooperate with each other....

the world gets by, by cooperation... and not by violence or attacking its
neighbor...….

the way to survive as human beings is to be a part of nature,
not by being at war with it.....for we are part of nature.....

and that is the lesson of Darwin...

and what of the remaining lessons of Freud?

next post...

Kropotkin
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security
wind up with neither."
"Ben Franklin"
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7835
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: a new understanding of today, time and space.

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Mon May 18, 2020 9:38 pm

we have in America today, and in the world, a
despair, a melancholy about the world and ourselves...…

how are we to be saved?

I would suggest that to be saved, is as always a communal, community,
an event that needs the polis to achieve...…

we find salvation, not as a individual, but as part of the group....

salvation is found in becoming more human, not less....

of going forward, becoming human, is the path toward salvation....
to becoming human.... that is our salvation...…

look at your dog or your cat or your bird if that is the case....

look at them.. truly see that dogs and cats and birds cannot,
be anything more then dogs or cats or birds.... it is impossible for
them....they have reached the height of what is possible for them....
their very own nature has no where else to go..... they cannot grow
or become anything else.....

we can.. we have traveled from animal to animal/human and now we
must take the next step of becoming who we are, which is human.....
this doesn't mean we reject or deny our animal side of human existence,
no, we simply have control over our animal side of us... we will still
need to eat and sleep and drink water and have shelter, fornicate
and shit... that is the animal side of us and we cannot deny or do anything
less.... but we can rise above our animal nature and become human...
we can control our animal side and allow our human nature to
dominate who we are....

think of addiction... think of how an addiction can control someone's
life to the point where all they do is attempt to feed that addiction...
every waking second is an attempt to feed their addiction....
that is not human, that is animal.... they have no control over
what they think or what they do... they are controlled by their
addiction... that is not human.... to be human means to be
in control over our thoughts and our actions....

and then, and then we can begin to overcome our animal nature....
which is being unable to control ourselves... being animal means
being unable to control who we are... to be addicted for example....

to meet our basic bodily needs is just the first step of becoming
human... we must also meet our emotional needs of
safety/security, belonging, love and esteem....

to achieve that then means we are about to become human, fully human
where we now are at the point of self achievement... we seek out our
possibilities and attempt to achieve them....if we are painters, we
become painters, and if we are philosophers, then we become philosophers...

and if our possibilities is to run a 4:00 minute mile, then that is how
we become more human... by seeing and then achieving our
possibilities of being human....

we have a path, a journey, of becoming human.....
and that we means we are more then just
trying to achieve our basic needs of food, water, shelter...…
or even trying to achieve our emotional needs.....

to become human requires us to overcome and grow
and become who we are...….and this is by achieving our
possibilities...….

and the journey begins with knowing thyself
and beginning the process of examining one's life...…

"the unexamined life isn't worth living"

Kropotkin
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security
wind up with neither."
"Ben Franklin"
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7835
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

PreviousNext

Return to Philosophy



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users