• Can the majority ever be morally wrong?

    I would imagine modern atheists would ultimately have to conclude their own moral opinions incorrect by default if they went against the majority. What other authority would there be to determine all these things? I'm also wondering how we can condemn things in the past that had majority support, that future... show more
    I would imagine modern atheists would ultimately have to conclude their own moral opinions incorrect by default if they went against the majority. What other authority would there be to determine all these things? I'm also wondering how we can condemn things in the past that had majority support, that future people won't condemn us for in the same ways.
    29 answers · 2 days ago
  • Can a WRONG...become RIGHT?

    16 answers · 3 days ago
  • Do you think life just doesnt make sense ?

    Is it just me or does life just not make sense. I see people trying to make sense of things that happen in life, but maybe things just happen in life. Good or bad, some people are extremely lucky, some just are not. THings just happen and many times there really is no reason it happened, it just happened. I guess... show more
    Is it just me or does life just not make sense. I see people trying to make sense of things that happen in life, but maybe things just happen in life. Good or bad, some people are extremely lucky, some just are not. THings just happen and many times there really is no reason it happened, it just happened. I guess thats just humans, trying to make sense of everything when maybe its not suppose to make sense. It just is what it is. Deep down, i really dont know if i believe this myself but it could be the truth. Im just kinda lost in life like so many others, just asking the question why am i here, but maybe im just here and there is no reason. I dont know
    12 answers · 2 days ago
  • Would ambition be considered human nature?

    if not, then why? and what would it then be considered?
    if not, then why? and what would it then be considered?
    8 answers · 3 days ago
  • Philosophy: Which famous philosopher do you find it difficult to respect?

    How quickly did you write them off & why?
    How quickly did you write them off & why?
    9 answers · 3 days ago
  • Philosophy: How can I think more systematically or 3-dimensionally?

    Best answer: If your awareness is in the following interpretation (which is a recognized and honored orientation) of "systematically" or "3-dimensionally," would suggest these resources which will be listed after explication of said interpretation of your awareness, to wit: your awareness is not primarily... show more
    Best answer: If your awareness is in the following interpretation (which is a recognized and honored orientation) of "systematically" or "3-dimensionally," would suggest these resources which will be listed after explication of said interpretation of your awareness, to wit: your awareness is not primarily seeking what is given in e.g. "Ready to Be a Thought Leader? How to Increase Your Influence, Impact, and Success," by Denise Brosseau, but is more after what is less-sought after, namely metacognitive techniques. The time-honored method is to study in a tradition, learning its mentative techniques. For example, Charles Peirce, the great American phenomenologist (he termed his awareness "universal phenomenology") systematically studied the writings of Kant two hours a day, for three years.

    While this latter facility imho is correlative with what you're seeking, Peirce's method may seem daunting or even arduous. Howbeit, what Peirce attained is rare--a facility within, and with, Kantian archetectonics. This is a level of serious or genuine philosophy. You might note Kant's parallel between a philosophical doctrine and a given architecture, vis a vis the "3-dimensional" quale of moving within a building, noting and presumably knowing its vaults, ceiling, wiring, foundation, and so on--i.e., professional facility (no pun intended), which is somewhat reprised by and aspired to by some academics. Peirce was properly cautious about "one-idea" philosophies (e.g., all is sex (gross oversimplification of Freud), all is economics (Marx), etc.), and a musical analogy to "3-d" thinking is like what Beethoven, referring to string quartet composition, termed "obbligato accompaniment"--in which each of the four solo parts are both unique voices with unique themes, and the four work together as a company with transformations and exchanges. (Beethoven's so-called "late string quartets" are among the greatest achievements of Western classical music https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_strin... and one may learn much by "actively listening" (a la Emerson's "active reading") to them. The great 20th century personage, Sunyata, was working on an English estate when he and Rabindranath Tagore were introduced, as Tagore was en route to accepting the Nobel Prize for Literature; Sunyata introduced and explicated Beethoven's later string quartets to Tagore, who invited Sunyata to teach "Silence" at his University. Sunyata also tutored Indira Gandhi, who was significantly assisted by him. "Sunyata: The Life and Sayings of a Rare-Born Mystic" is one introduction to this gentleman who also imho "improved" some lines of Shakespeare.) Two additional examples of such "3-D" archetectonics and facility are Bach (who wisely always dedicated each page of music to the glory of God) and Monet (whose paintings, viewed in real space, show an incredible "obbligato" dimensionality, which imo are not discernable even in the best reproductions ( https://denverartmuseum.org/exhibitions/... is an opportunity for many).

    So, fine art, classical music, and Shakespeare are rewarding ways to increase "3-D" cognitive processing.

    As for recent philosophers, would note Husserl and Whitehead, also Merrell-Wolff's "Pathways through to Space" (he was an early 20th century Harvard and Stanford trained mathematician and philosopher, who left a professorship at Stanford to work on the "3-D" process).

    Would note as easy, popular meditations on archetectonics and geometrization of energy,
    Aivanhov's "The Symbolic Language of Geometrical Figures,"
    "The Path of the Higher Self" as a generally helpful guide,
    "Kundalini West" (written by a woman who, in the presence of a public audience, spontaneously levitated up and over a podium and a balustrade, landing gently some rows into the audience; the explanation: her body was so enhanced by and filled with Light, that her weight was displaced);
    and "Answers," by Mother Meera (if you attend a session with this God-woman, you will be gently blessed
    to the maximum lawful progress; she is visiting the U.S. this year; https://www.mothermeera.com ).

    Would also note Mihaly C's "Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience" and Almaas' "Runaway Realization."
    5 answers · 3 days ago
  • Pessimists make me want to stab my eye with a spork. How to love them despite their retardation that prevents them from any success at all?

    Best answer: AVOID PESSIMISM THE BIBLE SAYS: “If you become discouraged in the day of distress, your strength will be meager.”—Proverbs 24:10. WHAT IT MEANS: Pessimism will sap you of the strength you need to improve your situation or to help you deal with it. FOCUS ON THE POSITIVE THE BIBLE SAYS: “All the days of the afflicted... show more
    Best answer: AVOID PESSIMISM
    THE BIBLE SAYS: “If you become discouraged in the day of distress, your strength will be meager.”—Proverbs 24:10.
    WHAT IT MEANS: Pessimism will sap you of the strength you need to improve your situation or to help you deal with it.
    FOCUS ON THE POSITIVE
    THE BIBLE SAYS: “All the days of the afflicted one are bad, but the one with a cheerful heart has a continual feast.”—Proverbs 15:15.
    WHAT IT MEANS: If you see everything negatively, you will feel “afflicted” and every day will appear “bad,” or gloomy. But if you focus on positive things, you will have “a cheerful heart” and even feel joyful. The choice is yours.
    9 answers · 5 days ago
  • What is the meaning of life?

    13 answers · 1 week ago
  • How do we hear our own thoughts?

    35 answers · 2 weeks ago
  • Philosophy: Would you say Jesus himself advocates what Nietzsche calls a "slave morality"?

    Best answer: Lets first understand what Nietzche means. Nietzche and Hegel use the term "slave morality" in the context of the "Master-Slave" dialectic. Masters are those with power. Slaves are the oppressed. Christ's "slave morality" from Nietzche's point of view is a morality from the... show more
    Best answer: Lets first understand what Nietzche means. Nietzche and Hegel use the term "slave morality" in the context of the "Master-Slave" dialectic. Masters are those with power. Slaves are the oppressed.

    Christ's "slave morality" from Nietzche's point of view is a morality from the perspective of the weak, vulnerable and oppressed. So yes, you could say Christ advocates a slave morality. He died on the cross, which in Roman times was an execution reserved for slaves and spoke about the poor inheriting the Kingdom of God.

    The God of the Old Testament also advocates a slave morality. In the Exodus he takes the side of the slaves against the Imperial power of the Pharaoh and in the Law speaks about how Israelite society should take care of the poor, widow, orphan and stranger since "you were once strangers in the land"(Deuteronomy 25).
    5 answers · 5 days ago
  • How's the Philosophy going ?

    Best answer: its going welll thank you
    Best answer: its going welll thank you
    10 answers · 1 week ago
  • Philosophy: Scholar Stanley Rosen said Nietzsche is calling for a new system of values and morality, and that many misinterpret him?

    Best answer: Stanley Rosen focuses (in "The Mask of Enlightenment") on Nietzsche's intuitive understanding of Enlightenment (Descartes-Kant) scientism as art, as a creation of man ("the world as a work of art that gives birth to itself"--cf Ouroboros), and Nietzsche's "modern" awareness of... show more
    Best answer: Stanley Rosen focuses (in "The Mask of Enlightenment") on Nietzsche's intuitive understanding of Enlightenment (Descartes-Kant) scientism as art, as a creation of man ("the world as a work of art that gives birth to itself"--cf Ouroboros), and Nietzsche's "modern" awareness of "man as maker" (science, art) as--per Nietzsche's "overcoming" vitality--needing a renewal, a new enlightenment.

    Imho, Mr. Rosen does not focus on the personage of Nietzsche, on the "muddle" of Nietzsche's early life and own strong character, out of which grew the lotus of "Zarathustra." Briefly, FN lost both his beloved father (to an unexpected illness) and shortly thereafter prophetically dreamt of his brother's unexpected passing. Prior to this, he was called "the little Pastor" by his schoolmates, as he loved giving them brief Bible-based sermons (like his Pastor father). Without his beloved father-guidance, Nietzsche succeeded in a Heideggerian-type focus on "word"ness (Heidegger, son of a sexton, also having early on been a religious; studying in a Jesuit seminary, and then majoring in theology at uni). Howbeit, Nietzsche continued to search for "father figure," finding such in Schopenhauer, later with Wagner and Dostoevsky, and finally positing "Zarathustra" as his own maturing father-figure "alter ego" or "wise counselor"--essentially Nietzsche's idealized, overcoming, self-realizing father (Karl Ludwig).

    So, Nietzsche is an example of a man whose personal arc correlated with the needs of a post-Christian Europe (i.e., in which God the Father and Christ Jesus the Son are not so "present" in the techno-darkened cultural matrix. Mr. Rosen's focus is of course on the applicability of Nietzsche's strong vitality as way-showing for what Vladimir Solovyov and others have termed e.g. "Lectures on Divine Humanity" (Solovyov's book.) Nietzsche stated his own psychological understanding was best promoted by Dostoevsky, who in turn was majorly influenced by his own friend Solovyov. (Rosen does not mention Solovyov or Dostoevsky in his book.)

    Rosen has good insight into the more constructive path and example of the maturing Nietzsche and how such a "mensch" offers a role model for revivifying Western culture. Rosen does not mentiion Abraham Maslow, whose research on healthy psychology is key to what Nietzsche intuited: that "overcomers" (Nietzsche cites da Vinci and Goethe, among others) are self-actualizing, and strong enough to overcome the stale techno-darkness which Heidegger also discussed, vis a vis Dasein--a word that may be appropriately rendered as "da Vinci/Goethe"-type "authentic societal being."

    So, imho, Mr. Rosen (in 2004) is behind the curve of Maslow ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow's_h... and positive education https://phys.org/news/2018-08-positive-f... ) and ahead of much nihilistic academic (mis)interpretation of later Nietzsche. It is also worth noting the influence of Dostoevsky, and of the distinction between Nietzsche's agonistic "strong man running against the tide of mediocrity," and what Solovyov and Maslow have brought forth: that most healthy people are able to self-actualize, given reasonable cultural incentivization (e.g., need to work for a living, healthy inner child nurturing), which latter mitigates against what Kant termed "radical evil," or the tendency of man, Saint Paul-like, to know the right and yet to choose the wrong. (Aristotle's notion of ethical virtue also prefigures Kant, as Plato held that knowing the right was sufficient to choosing the right; Aristotle, more like Saint Paul, noted that Platonic gnosis was insufficient, and "radical evil" needed to be guarded against).
    4 answers · 5 days ago
  • What did philosophers Sartre and Plato had in common?

    Thank you
    Thank you
    7 answers · 1 week ago
  • Why is it that philosophers (often) in particular are blind-to-their-own mistakes ?

    Best answer: It's hard being objective.
    Best answer: It's hard being objective.
    5 answers · 7 days ago
  • Is LYING – more of an ‘ability’?, or ‘disability’?

    Best answer:   .   Lying is the basis of the biblical tales forged in stone, since the value of one sided ethics are bias to the global gambit, the factor of lying as a skillful ability unfolds to deception and diversion from realism, since most humans float on water, they all must be bewitched like wood, therefore all trees... show more
    Best answer:   .
      Lying is the basis of the biblical tales forged in stone, since the value of one sided ethics are bias to the global gambit, the factor of lying as a skillful ability unfolds to deception and diversion from realism, since most humans float on water, they all must be bewitched like wood, therefore all trees are liars, but if some people drown for lack of abilities, then some trees must be disabled,

      The type of lying keeps one alive to lie another day, the trues only bring to and end a rope less tethered,
     
      In knowledge lies the true skill of abilities to use a disability of truth to decoy the reality as thoughts that can not breach life.

      Lying is in the knowing so, the ability allude deceptions of equal conflict is the truth that lies within itself the honest intent.

    ..
    17 answers · 2 weeks ago