On the touchy subject of marriage in the philosophers contex

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

Re: On the touchy subject of marriage in the philosophers co

Postby MagsJ » Wed Oct 28, 2020 5:15 pm

_
@Fixed and the OP.. I guess it’s better than suffering the fate of Nietzsche.
The possibility of anything we can imagine existing is endless and infinite.. - MagsJ
I haven't got the time to spend the time reading something that is telling me nothing, as I will never be able to get back that time, and I may need it for something at some point in time.. Huh! - MagsJ
You’re suggestions and I, just simply don’t mix.. like oil on water, or a really bad DJ - MagsJ
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist: a chic geek
 
Posts: 21571
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: Suryaloka / LDN Town

Re: On the touchy subject of marriage in the philosophers co

Postby MagsJ » Thu Oct 29, 2020 12:40 am

_
I had said: “That was so good a caricature, that anyone would think you were Silhouette ; )”

obsrvr524 wrote:Maybe iambiguous?
Ecmandu seems to need a mate?

Do likes really attract?

I had got the iambiguous caricature too, but I thought that because you would have realised my astute brilliance by now, lol, that you would now automatically assume I had gotten it?

Regarding the mention of that other person.. why are you mentioning the name of that Fickwitz to me? How very dare you, sir.

obsrvr524 wrote:
MagsJ wrote:Or do you mean different personality types? as in opposite personality traits..
I think an actual marriage requires soul mates. I am certain of that. To the degree that the soul determines the character type, the two characters must be one. But the soul does not control everything. Their opinions on many matters, even important matters can be different. Many of their tastes can be different. And in the long run, I think that each must be missing something within themselves that the other fills (being opposite in that regard). That was definitely a James paraphrase from I don't remember where.

I'm sure in business it would be the same each partner must contribute something the other doesn't have.

Perhaps souls always have a deliberate void in them, which acts as a catalyst for the individual to need to seek out another, to fill that void within. Quite poetic, when thought of like that..
The possibility of anything we can imagine existing is endless and infinite.. - MagsJ
I haven't got the time to spend the time reading something that is telling me nothing, as I will never be able to get back that time, and I may need it for something at some point in time.. Huh! - MagsJ
You’re suggestions and I, just simply don’t mix.. like oil on water, or a really bad DJ - MagsJ
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist: a chic geek
 
Posts: 21571
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: Suryaloka / LDN Town

Re: On the touchy subject of marriage in the philosophers co

Postby obsrvr524 » Thu Oct 29, 2020 1:00 am

MagsJ wrote:I had got the iambiguous caricature too, but I thought that because you would have realised my astute brilliance by now, lol, that you would now automatically assume I had gotten it?

Regarding the mention of that other person.. why are you mentioning the name of that Fickwitz to me? How very dare you, sir.

I had assumed that you not only got it, but was still getting it although now I am wondering. Did one of us miss something?

MagsJ wrote:Perhaps souls always have a deliberate void in them, which acts as a catalyst for the individual to need to seek out another, to fill that void within. Quite poetic, when thought of like that..

I'm sure that is true.
Member of The Coalition of Truth - member #1

              You have been observed.
    Though often tempted to encourage a dog to distinguish color I refuse to argue with him about it
obsrvr524
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1883
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:03 am

Re: On the touchy subject of marriage in the philosophers co

Postby Magnus Anderson » Thu Oct 29, 2020 1:30 am

Fixed Cross wrote:Is it possible for a philosopher to get married without screwing up his being-philosopher?
By now it has become nearly impossible for me to count the relationships Ive broken off in favor of my philosophic solitude. I dont want to recall as all of these acts of separation have been painful to both the ladies in question and myself. I may have a child or two running around that, in my philosophic arrogance, I have no knowledge of, and because of this arrogance, never will have. It has worked for me so far, but this time I feel I might be a fool to tread the same path. I am terribly apprehensive still, not at all keen on tying myself to another human by law and indefinitely - my instincts rebel.

Philosophic instinct - foremost, a yearning for solitude. The absolute need to have the opportunity to sink into Tartaric depths and to rise to Olympic heights on a whim, without notice, without consideration for anything less extreme - the philosopher is necessarily an extremist. On occasions though, he must perhaps at least acknowledge the possibility of adopting an attitude that might be called sensible.


What exactly is the problem in your case?

Do you find it impossible to have free time when you're in a relationship? Are you saying that women do not allow you to be alone and that you see no way of protecting yourself against their intrusions without ending the relationship?
"Let's keep the debate about poor people in the US specifically. It's the land of opportunity. So everyone has an opportunity. That means everyone can get money. So some people who don't have it just aren't using thier opportunities, and then out of those who are using them, then most squander what they gain through poor choices, which keeps them poor. It's no one else's fault. The end."

Mr. Reasonable
Magnus Anderson
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4829
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:26 pm

Re: On the touchy subject of marriage in the philosophers co

Postby MagsJ » Thu Oct 29, 2020 2:19 am

obsrvr524 wrote:I had assumed that you not only got it, but was still getting it although now I am wondering. Did one of us miss something?

You can’t miss something you weren’t aware of.. fickwitz or otherwise.

Let’s just say that it’s a personal issue I have, with such types/fickwitzs.
The possibility of anything we can imagine existing is endless and infinite.. - MagsJ
I haven't got the time to spend the time reading something that is telling me nothing, as I will never be able to get back that time, and I may need it for something at some point in time.. Huh! - MagsJ
You’re suggestions and I, just simply don’t mix.. like oil on water, or a really bad DJ - MagsJ
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist: a chic geek
 
Posts: 21571
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: Suryaloka / LDN Town

Re: On the touchy subject of marriage in the philosophers co

Postby obsrvr524 » Thu Oct 29, 2020 3:42 am

MagsJ wrote:You can’t miss something you weren’t aware of

I thought that was the only something you could miss. But enough playing around. :)
Member of The Coalition of Truth - member #1

              You have been observed.
    Though often tempted to encourage a dog to distinguish color I refuse to argue with him about it
obsrvr524
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1883
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:03 am

Re: On the touchy subject of marriage in the philosophers co

Postby Ecmandu » Thu Oct 29, 2020 4:05 pm

MagsJ,

Grow up. You’re trying to play some childish psychological game with the idea that I can’t stand being abandoned by a female, and then always saying that I’m a hypocrite because I’m violating your female consent.

It’s the game of a child.

The better a person I become, the angrier you get.

You abused your power on this board. That wasn’t my decision, yet you take it out on me like a whining child who can’t have their cookie.

I don’t mind you in your current role on ILP, but when you call me a fuckhead... I am going to tell you to start being an adult.

An adult would make a thread in rant of all the reasons I’m a fuckhead and debate it.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 11459
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: On the touchy subject of marriage in the philosophers co

Postby MagsJ » Thu Oct 29, 2020 4:19 pm

obsrvr524 wrote:
MagsJ wrote:You can’t miss something you weren’t aware of
I thought that was the only something you could miss. But enough playing around. :)

Sometimes, playing sharpens one’s game.. into a very good blade. ; )

How can a person miss something they know nothing of.. like it doesn’t exist.. never has.. never will, for them?

It simply sounds like you are erring on the side of FOMO, but one doesn’t know what of.. as that is the nature of FOMO.
The possibility of anything we can imagine existing is endless and infinite.. - MagsJ
I haven't got the time to spend the time reading something that is telling me nothing, as I will never be able to get back that time, and I may need it for something at some point in time.. Huh! - MagsJ
You’re suggestions and I, just simply don’t mix.. like oil on water, or a really bad DJ - MagsJ
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist: a chic geek
 
Posts: 21571
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: Suryaloka / LDN Town

Re: On the touchy subject of marriage in the philosophers co

Postby Ecmandu » Thu Oct 29, 2020 4:54 pm

MagsJ wrote:
obsrvr524 wrote:
MagsJ wrote:You can’t miss something you weren’t aware of
I thought that was the only something you could miss. But enough playing around. :)

Sometimes, playing sharpens one’s game.. into a very good blade. ; )

How can a person miss something they know nothing of.. like it doesn’t exist.. never has.. never will, for them?

It simply sounds like you are erring on the side of FOMO, but one doesn’t know what of.. as that is the nature of FOMO.


It’s intuition yet to be put in words.

I provide those words. We’re all missing out on positive non zero sum realities that never violate the consent of any being. ALL of us! It’s a nagging feeling we all feel in our bones!

The tragedy of marriage (and sex in general) is that we CELEBRATE the worst possible aspects of our reality, instead of mourning it!

To set yourself aside as a philosopher, in a reality like this, you must abstain and mourn your success.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 11459
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: On the touchy subject of marriage in the philosophers co

Postby obsrvr524 » Thu Oct 29, 2020 6:56 pm

MagsJ wrote:How can a person miss something they know nothing of.. like it doesn’t exist.. never has.. never will, for them?

Perhaps we are using the word "miss" differently. "It was there but you missed it" - meaning that something actually did happen that you could have experienced except that you were occupied elsewhere.

Or are you doing the "if I don't see it, it doesn't exist" thing?
Member of The Coalition of Truth - member #1

              You have been observed.
    Though often tempted to encourage a dog to distinguish color I refuse to argue with him about it
obsrvr524
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1883
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:03 am

Re: On the touchy subject of marriage in the philosophers co

Postby MagsJ » Thu Oct 29, 2020 10:54 pm

obsrvr524 wrote:
MagsJ wrote:How can a person miss something they know nothing of.. like it doesn’t exist.. never has.. never will, for them?
Perhaps we are using the word "miss" differently. "It was there but you missed it" - meaning that something actually did happen that you could have experienced except that you were occupied elsewhere.

Yes.. we miss much because we are preoccupied in our day to day dealings and appointments, that lead us elsewhere.. but not to new experiences, because we have appointments to keep and people to see and places to go, and such and so-forth, ergo.. London life. We ain’t that chill here you know.

Or are you doing the "if I don't see it, it doesn't exist" thing?

Oh I saw it alright, and it did exist, but if I don’t see or know about something or someone, then how can they exist in my mind, until such a time arose that I did see them, or saw them again.
The possibility of anything we can imagine existing is endless and infinite.. - MagsJ
I haven't got the time to spend the time reading something that is telling me nothing, as I will never be able to get back that time, and I may need it for something at some point in time.. Huh! - MagsJ
You’re suggestions and I, just simply don’t mix.. like oil on water, or a really bad DJ - MagsJ
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist: a chic geek
 
Posts: 21571
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: Suryaloka / LDN Town

Re: On the touchy subject of marriage in the philosophers co

Postby Ecmandu » Thu Oct 29, 2020 11:07 pm

MagsJ wrote:
obsrvr524 wrote:
MagsJ wrote:How can a person miss something they know nothing of.. like it doesn’t exist.. never has.. never will, for them?
Perhaps we are using the word "miss" differently. "It was there but you missed it" - meaning that something actually did happen that you could have experienced except that you were occupied elsewhere.

Yes.. we miss much because we are preoccupied in our day to day dealings and appointments, that lead us elsewhere.. but not to new experiences, because we have appointments to keep and people to see and places to go, and such and so-forth, ergo.. London life. We ain’t that chill here you know.

Or are you doing the "if I don't see it, it doesn't exist" thing?

Oh I saw it alright, and it did exist, but if I don’t see or know about something or someone, then how can they exist in my mind, until such a time arose that I did see them, or saw them again.


Fuck MagsJ! Do I have to repeat myself?

It’s called intuition.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 11459
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: On the touchy subject of marriage in the philosophers co

Postby MagsJ » Thu Oct 29, 2020 11:18 pm

_
Da fuck you want?
The possibility of anything we can imagine existing is endless and infinite.. - MagsJ
I haven't got the time to spend the time reading something that is telling me nothing, as I will never be able to get back that time, and I may need it for something at some point in time.. Huh! - MagsJ
You’re suggestions and I, just simply don’t mix.. like oil on water, or a really bad DJ - MagsJ
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist: a chic geek
 
Posts: 21571
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: Suryaloka / LDN Town

Re: On the touchy subject of marriage in the philosophers co

Postby Ecmandu » Thu Oct 29, 2020 11:26 pm

MagsJ wrote:_
Da fuck you want?


Intuition is why people sense things that they don’t ‘see’.

Happens everyday for all of us. Our intuitions can be proven wrong —. Some people are intuitive without defense mechanisms and others have defense mechanisms which make their intuitions always wrong.

How do you tell between the two? You can’t.

Fucked up part of life here isn’t it?
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 11459
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: On the touchy subject of marriage in the philosophers co

Postby MagsJ » Thu Oct 29, 2020 11:30 pm

_
You didn’t answer the question.

Typical!
The possibility of anything we can imagine existing is endless and infinite.. - MagsJ
I haven't got the time to spend the time reading something that is telling me nothing, as I will never be able to get back that time, and I may need it for something at some point in time.. Huh! - MagsJ
You’re suggestions and I, just simply don’t mix.. like oil on water, or a really bad DJ - MagsJ
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist: a chic geek
 
Posts: 21571
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: Suryaloka / LDN Town

Re: On the touchy subject of marriage in the philosophers co

Postby Ecmandu » Thu Oct 29, 2020 11:33 pm

MagsJ wrote:_
You didn’t answer the question.

Typical!


I’m staying on topic. What do I want (here) ?

To answer the OP. You’re the one who brought up intuition in the context of moral evaluation (not me)
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 11459
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: On the touchy subject of marriage in the philosophers co

Postby MagsJ » Thu Oct 29, 2020 11:42 pm

_
I didn’t!

What you presume, does not equate to what I meant.. fact!

Don’t piss me off!
The possibility of anything we can imagine existing is endless and infinite.. - MagsJ
I haven't got the time to spend the time reading something that is telling me nothing, as I will never be able to get back that time, and I may need it for something at some point in time.. Huh! - MagsJ
You’re suggestions and I, just simply don’t mix.. like oil on water, or a really bad DJ - MagsJ
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist: a chic geek
 
Posts: 21571
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: Suryaloka / LDN Town

Re: On the touchy subject of marriage in the philosophers co

Postby Ecmandu » Thu Oct 29, 2020 11:47 pm

MagsJ wrote:_
I didn’t!

What you presume, does not equate to what I meant.. fact!

Don’t piss me off!


MagsJ, here’s the deal:

The “non seen felt thing” is only intuition.

Also, based on this reply, you feel powerless in life.

Everyone on earth is a god, they just don’t know it yet.

Do I want to fuck with you?

Not really.

Do you want to fuck with me?

Not really.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 11459
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: On the touchy subject of marriage in the philosophers co

Postby MagsJ » Thu Oct 29, 2020 11:56 pm

_
I’m back to ignoring this fickwitz!

Man ain’t doing philosophy.. man’s mansplaining and shit, wtf.. :lol:
The possibility of anything we can imagine existing is endless and infinite.. - MagsJ
I haven't got the time to spend the time reading something that is telling me nothing, as I will never be able to get back that time, and I may need it for something at some point in time.. Huh! - MagsJ
You’re suggestions and I, just simply don’t mix.. like oil on water, or a really bad DJ - MagsJ
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist: a chic geek
 
Posts: 21571
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: Suryaloka / LDN Town

Re: On the touchy subject of marriage in the philosophers co

Postby Ecmandu » Fri Oct 30, 2020 12:02 am

MagsJ wrote:_
I’m back to ignoring this fickwitz!

Man ain’t doing philosophy.. man’s mansplaining and shit, wtf.. :lol:


You just embarrassed yourself. Not my fault.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 11459
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: On the touchy subject of marriage in the philosophers co

Postby MagsJ » Fri Oct 30, 2020 12:26 am

Bump!
obsrvr524 wrote:
MagsJ wrote:How can a person miss something they know nothing of.. like it doesn’t exist.. never has.. never will, for them?
Perhaps we are using the word "miss" differently. "It was there but you missed it" - meaning that something actually did happen that you could have experienced except that you were occupied elsewhere.

Yes.. we miss much because we are preoccupied in our day to day dealings and appointments, that lead us elsewhere.. but not to new experiences, because we have appointments to keep and people to see and places to go, and such and so-forth, ergo.. London life. We ain’t that chill here you know.

Or are you doing the "if I don't see it, it doesn't exist" thing?

Oh I saw it alright, and it did exist, but if I don’t see or know about something or someone, then how can they exist in my mind, until such a time arose that I did see them, or saw them again.
The possibility of anything we can imagine existing is endless and infinite.. - MagsJ
I haven't got the time to spend the time reading something that is telling me nothing, as I will never be able to get back that time, and I may need it for something at some point in time.. Huh! - MagsJ
You’re suggestions and I, just simply don’t mix.. like oil on water, or a really bad DJ - MagsJ
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist: a chic geek
 
Posts: 21571
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: Suryaloka / LDN Town

Re: On the touchy subject of marriage in the philosophers co

Postby zinnat » Fri Oct 30, 2020 8:25 am

I do not see any reason why marriage or having a relationship with opposite sex can curb a philosopher's persuit in any way. This argument of having less spare time may have merit but that is not a very sound one. One can always find time for his/her likings, if one wants to. Otherwise it is a good excuse.

Secondly, and more importantly, philosophy does not fall from the sky and neither one can become a philosopher in true sense by reading books only. Real understanding of the issues come from going through different aspects of the life in person. So, if marriage or a relationship is a strict no- no, then one is going to miss a lot of valuable experiences and thus derived cogitations.

Thus, pros are far more than cons.

With love,
Sanjay
User avatar
zinnat
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3700
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 7:27 pm

Re: On the touchy subject of marriage in the philosophers co

Postby Magnus Anderson » Fri Oct 30, 2020 12:29 pm

zinnat wrote:I do not see any reason why marriage or having a relationship with opposite sex can curb a philosopher's persuit in any way. This argument of having less spare time may have merit but that is not a very sound one. One can always find time for his/her likings, if one wants to. Otherwise it is a good excuse.


That's why I asked FC to present a specific problem (his own, for example) rather than a general one.

It doesn't look like it is women who are ending the relationship, so the problem is not of the type "Women leave me (or cheat on me) because I don't spend enough time with them". So what kind of problem we're dealing with here? It could be "Women make it difficult for me to be alone". If that's the case, I'd say the problem is rather solvable.

Secondly, and more importantly, philosophy does not fall from the sky and neither one can become a philosopher in true sense by reading books only. Real understanding of the issues come from going through different aspects of the life in person. So, if marriage or a relationship is a strict no- no, then one is going to miss a lot of valuable experiences and thus derived cogitations.


That's another good point though one can defend oneself by saying that they want to study other aspects of life.
"Let's keep the debate about poor people in the US specifically. It's the land of opportunity. So everyone has an opportunity. That means everyone can get money. So some people who don't have it just aren't using thier opportunities, and then out of those who are using them, then most squander what they gain through poor choices, which keeps them poor. It's no one else's fault. The end."

Mr. Reasonable
Magnus Anderson
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4829
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:26 pm

Re: On the touchy subject of marriage in the philosophers co

Postby Ecmandu » Fri Oct 30, 2020 4:17 pm

Philosophy is ultimately a task of reality orientation (truth), instead of unreality.

Marriage and sex here are not reality orientation.

Part of reality orientation is context. So, if you’re going to throw yourself into sex and/or marriage in a negative zero sum species ... you have a deficit of mind.

Even further, and I always tell people this...

The survival of this reproductive species is not worth your soul. Zero sum species are cosmic trash, garbage.

One of the goals of a philosopher is not to be trash or garbage.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 11459
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: On the touchy subject of marriage in the philosophers co

Postby Pedro I Rengel » Fri Oct 30, 2020 6:43 pm

You don't know what philosophy is, you just do as your told.
User avatar
Pedro I Rengel
ᛈᛖᛉᛖᛉ
 
Posts: 8794
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2018 2:55 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Philosophy



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users