Moderator: Carleas
phyllo wrote:You're better than the 'kids'.
phyllo wrote:No more.
Oh, glad to hear it. I guessed it was a choice, but good to know. Happy New Year. And not only do I know why, I'm packing.phyllo wrote:I'm touched that someone cares. That really means something to me.
I'm still alive and 'well'. Or at least no worse than before.
I walked out the door and I don't intend to walk back in. You, no doubt, understand why.
May the Force be with you.
Actually I did, around the time you starting running around like you won the lottery with your paraphrase. But the thing is, I bear no onus to convince you your hallucinations about my internal life are incorrect. 'Refuses' would have been a silly verb even I didn't clarify. When you've beaten the Randi challenge, then people might have to take your word over their own about their own internal processes. But not before.iambiguous wrote:I don't know. He says I am wrong about it. But he refuses to go further.
Karpel Tunnel wrote:And not only do I know why, I'm packing.
One way or another the conclusions that I have come to in regard to "morality here and now and immortality there and then" have sunk down into you as well. And not [I suspect] just in regard to owning up to the possibility/probability that we live in an essentially meaningless world. Other things about the "fractured and fragmented" "I" as well.
But that you have is actually my way of complimenting you. Or, sure, complimenting myself in turn. In, perhaps, coming at least somewhat close to understanding the "human condition"...philosophically.
However profoundly grim and problematic the conclusions might be.
In fact, it may well be that, in Karpel Tunnel's refusal to go there, he has invented this "visceral, intuitive deep-down-inside-me" Self in order to keep the "for all practical purposes" implications of that essentially meaningless world at bay.
I don't know. He says I am wrong about it. But he refuses to go further.
Karpel Tunnel wrote:Actually I did, around the time you starting running around like you won the lottery with your paraphrase.iambiguous wrote:I don't know. He says I am wrong about it. But he refuses to go further.
Karpel Tunnel wrote: But the thing is, I bear no onus to convince you your hallucinations about my internal life are incorrect. 'Refuses' would have been a silly verb even I didn't clarify.
Well, yeah.To MAKE meaning.
phyllo wrote:Well, yeah.To MAKE meaning.
But these guys who talk about meaninglessness, generally want some sort of deity to come and tell them what they should be doing ... "Become an accountant because it's part of my grand plan for the universe." - "Yes, Lord." - "What next, Lord?"
What else could it be, right?
Curly wrote:But he just gets to state things about my internal life - my motivations for example - based on unstated arguments that would not even convince a couple of people here. IOW hypocrisy. But it's great someone finally solved the problem of other minds.
But if you come and say God says pedophilia is good, or you have a logical proof (somehow) a secular one that proves pedophilia is good, I will not override my revulsion. Because that revulsion is, at least now, more me than a bunch of words on a page that seem, even to me, logical. Are you different?
Curly wrote: Then he made the mistake of waxing nostaligically about those great forums back then with real philosophers and I saw that he posted the same things and they reacted to his BEHAVIOR the same way. Sure, his arguments bothered some of them, but people got pissed at his behavior. And he had to know this, so he was lying, theatrically, in an attempt to put down people here, I would guess. Before I was never sure before that he knew he was lying. I always wondered what was really going on in him. There was an asterisk.
Curly wrote: Anyway, got a new job starting Monday, and I find I am getting pissed off at too many people. With a few exceptions it's just team posting and team attacking, and yeah, binary thinking is the zeitgeist. I am finding I avoid discussions in my private life also. There are no gray areas any more.
phyllo wrote:I'm touched that someone cares. That really means something to me.
I'm still alive and 'well'. Or at least no worse than before.
I walked out the door and I don't intend to walk back in. You, no doubt, understand why.
May the Force be with you.
Ecmandu wrote:phyllo wrote:Well, yeah.To MAKE meaning.
But these guys who talk about meaninglessness, generally want some sort of deity to come and tell them what they should be doing ... "Become an accountant because it's part of my grand plan for the universe." - "Yes, Lord." - "What next, Lord?"
What else could it be, right?
I agree with you. From my perspective it’s fucking insane. Unless you make everyone god, you are not god.
That’s the problem with people... they want to be god at the expense of others... they want to win. Being a person with my personal privileges ... I always ask myself “what are you going to do with it?” Every moment of everyday I ask myself this question. Lots of people do.
The one thing I teach is that unless everyone is great, you are not, nor ever will be great.
People have funny ways of believing that existence eventually makes everyone great through some bizarre type of faith, so they ignore the great work.
Bullshit. That’s not good enough for me.
Work is hard. The great work is the hardest.
Ecmandu wrote:phyllo wrote:Well, yeah.To MAKE meaning.
But these guys who talk about meaninglessness, generally want some sort of deity to come and tell them what they should be doing ... "Become an accountant because it's part of my grand plan for the universe." - "Yes, Lord." - "What next, Lord?"
What else could it be, right?
I agree with you. From my perspective it’s fucking insane. Unless you make everyone god, you are not god.
That’s the problem with people... they want to be god at the expense of others... they want to win. Being a person with my personal privileges ... I always ask myself “what are you going to do with it?” Every moment of everyday I ask myself this question. Lots of people do.
The one thing I teach is that unless everyone is great, you are not, nor ever will be great.
People have funny ways of believing that existence eventually makes everyone great through some bizarre type of faith, so they ignore the great work.
Bullshit. That’s not good enough for me.
Work is hard. The great work is the hardest.
Zero_Sum wrote:Hate to see Karpel Tunnel and Phyllo leave, they offered their own contrary opinions where this place will be stale without them.
Variety is the spice of life. Karpel Tunnel is always fun to argue with.
1] I argue that while philosophers may go in search of wisdom, this wisdom is always truncated by the gap between what philosophers think they know [about anything] and all that there is to be known in order to grasp the human condition in the context of existence itself. That bothers some. When it really begins to sink in that this quest is ultimately futile, some abandon philosophy altogether. Instead, they stick to the part where they concentrate fully on living their lives "for all practical purposes" from day to day.
2] I suggest in turn it appears reasonable that, in a world sans God, the human brain is but more matter wholly in sync [as a part of nature] with the laws of matter. And, thus, anything we think, feel, say or do is always only that which we were ever able to think, feel, say and do. And that includes philosophers. Some will inevitably find that disturbing. If they can't know for certain that they possess autonomy, they can't know for certain that their philosophical excursions are in fact of their own volition.
3] And then the part where, assuming some measure of autonomy, I suggest that "I" in the is/ought world is basically an existential contraption interacting with other existential contraptions in a world teeming with conflicting goods --- and in contexts in which wealth and power prevails in the political arena. The part where "I" becomes fractured and fragmented.
Zero_Sum wrote:Biggie, you don't like me because you don't even understand my philosophy and you've never made an attempt to even try to understand, so really, your petty insults do you no favors. You and others think you got me all figured out, you really don't. I also don't take life or philosophy all that serious either because I view the entire world now going through the entropic process of crashing down. You of course don't like that along with many others because you still pitifully believe there is something in this current world worth saving or salvaging, I of course don't.
I'm just a guy waiting for when the primordial earth takes all of modern mankind's artifices, abstracts, ridiculous notions, cultural inventions, and simulations throwing them up into a huge global event of chaos. I'll be such a happy boy on that day, I hope I'm alive to see it as a witness.Only on that day will the world truly change along with being free and men like you will be brought to tears or ruin.
But there's still this part:1] there is a "real me" and there is a set of moral and political values that encompass objectively "the right thing to do". You thought it was one thing, then another, then another.
2] there is no "real me" and there is no set of moral and political values that encompass objectively "the right thing to do". Instead "I" here is embodied subjectively/existentially in dasein, in moral and political prejudices...in the arguments I make for it/this in my si
gnature threads; and specifically in this thread: https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=176529 .
And this part:Also, once you change your moral and political frame of mind, you are acknowledging that you were once wrong about the is/ought world around you. And, once you acknowledge this, you are acknowledging that, sure, you might be wrong again. You are acknowledging that, yeah, given new experiences, new relationships and access to new information, knowledge and ideas, you might be prompted to change your mind again. And again.
And this part:So, what I suggest is that we focus in on a particular set of circumstances in which we can examine our respective moral and political philosophies. Given all of the points we raise above.
And, most important of all, I'm less interested in what you or I believed/believe regarding all of the things you and I were/are, and more interested in how exactly you and I would go about demonstrating to others that all rational men and women are obligated to think and feel the same.
And especially this part:You say that "here and now" you are a "polytheistic pagan Gnostic with an affinity for mysticism, the esoteric, and the general occult. I lean kinda towards pantheism."
Okay, let's zero in on a particular context, a particular set of "conflicting goods" in which as this you now choose one set of behaviors that you would not have chosen as one of the many things you once were previously.
As this relates to my own interest in philosophy: morality here and now, immortality there and then.
And as it relates to your interests.
I can't help but wonder if it might be me they were dispensing with rather than the "mob" that has overrun ILP now.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users