Any Philosophers?

[Discordian 6,015]

See - Kant managed to creep into modern philosophies, infecting people, and at the end of the day, even with a considerable contingent of people not having read more than a few pages of him, declare happily that their reasoning is invalid because we aren't omniscient.

 

 

You did the same: You've already assumed that your perception is invalid. Now, Kant's view is that you can't prove the correctitude of your perception - of any consciousness, in fact - and of existence and identity.

 

Therefore, he concluded, knowledge must come without a form of cognition.

 

 

But I'll choose to harp on that: Why do you assume that you don't see things how they are?

 

 

Bold italic underlined: The way we view everything is restricted by logic. Well, I.. agree?

Because people don't typically use it.. in fact, don't most people operate on intuition and faith?

 

Logic restricts us because it 'believes' in causality. It believes in consistency.

 

You are free to contests these principles... just as you are free to assert that knowledge is impossible - but for the dignity of us all, don't say that you know...

Never once in my life will I ever claim to know anything. I question for the sake of possibility and expansion of perception above all else.

 

As for the question "Why do you assume that you don't see things how they are?" well...everyone views something different. More often than not even a slight change in perspective can change the entire meaning of something. Why, then, is it not possible that this is also true of our physical senses? We are programmed to view things a specific way. Our eyes can only see certain colors when there are many, many other colors we can't see directly.

 

Pushing all that a step further, or another step further, eventually we come to the possibility that there is a true shape and meaning to anything both tangible and intangible but we can only see them through the eyes and mind we are given. Give that same object to another person or even another being and they will come up with an entirely different view and meaning. The most basic example is giving a book to a dog. It's more like the dog will treat it as something to chew on, lay on or even something to ignore.

 

As humans we give more meaning to certain things than an animal would. So then a being (even if one we can't understand the form or function of) that is not human but with a better understanding and perception of the universe were to see that same object they'd give it a meaning that neither we or a dog would give it.

 

I don't necessarily think there is a higher power but neither do I believe humans are necessarily the highest level of intelligence. But as I said, I don't claim to know. I only think and question. Everything, no matter how trivial or valid, can be questioned. Even into total nonsense.

 

This rambling, repetitive and possibly highly redundant post brought to you by your local madman.

Edited May 23, 2014 by Discordian

[WunderWaffen_ 165]

*munches popcorn* Mhmrfffmrffmfhmrf! *another handful*

[Discordian 6,015]

*munches popcorn* Mhmrfffmrffmfhmrf! *another handful*

 

Amirite? Interesting conversations are interesting.

[WunderWaffen_ 165]

 

Amirite? Interesting conversations are interesting.

Why am I still watching this GIF? Its been almost an hour now.

Anyway...

PHILOSOPHY!

3...

2...

1...

GO!...

[Twilight Circuits 603]

Have you philosophers ever had this thought: "whenever someone starts off with 'I enjoy multiple contradictory ideologies as well as this and that philosopher', they should know that they kind of appear to be liking philosophy "for effect"?

 

Because if you did, you should know that you kind of appear to be liking philosophy "for effect". I don't mean to sound mean, it's just what my experience tells me.

Because here's the thing - in order for a philosophy to work, you have to prepare yourself to predicate your basic choices upon its tenets and basal assumptions. If you don't (which is undoubtedly the case if you subscribe to more than one philosophy), you'd stand accused of not giving a fuck about it, and I would not enjoy seeing that.

 

Philosophers construct their philosophies. Anyone of you could subsume their validations for their philosophy, had you read a single article or book published by them. That's what I'm interested in: Can you validate any philosopher's philosophy?

 

Wouldn't you like to do that? For starters?

I'll start and end the whole thread with... All of you are going to find me a tough act to follow. When will you find out, is the question. And that answer I can only give you as: Soon.

[Milky Jade 138]

Never once in my life will I ever claim to know anything. I question for the sake of possibility and expansion of perception above all else.

I know why people dislike the idea of knowledge, and urge to vanquish it.

 

Knowledge gives you something clear. It gives you something intelligible. It gives you something absolute and incontrovertible.

 

Which also means.. that people, should they accept knowledge as possible, cannot persist to "be for everything". Their basic concerns, gasp, invalid. What now?

 

The pretext for their movement is what you said it is: based on the assumption that scepticism furthers our understanding, and any claim to knowledge is undercutting it...

 

But it is the other way around, love. Scepticism is not " well, i'm going to use my mind to the fullest of its capabilities, lead the march of science, while humbly swinging the banner of guesswork ". It is in principle the attempt to edify an either-or  -  a false dichotomy - between itself and basically, nonsense. Any claim to knowledge is false because it is a claim to knowledge - including that punch I just threw in your face, you also have to stay sceptic about it. Shame on you, if you retaliate and take your revenge on someone you can neither prove has hit you, nor prove he even exists...

 

Another prominent pretext of scepticism is the "questioning" of everything, as if there were merit badges waiting for anyone smart enough to question something.

It's all fun, at first. But once you start questioning your own mind's validity (which scepticism stands accused of), you are drawn into an infinite regression, a void you cannot escape from.

 

I don't think you have to do this. Make yourself aware that you are typing on a keyboard that directs impulses to your computer which are being converted to commands made visible on a screen consisting of a million-odd lights and are transmitted across the world via a network of cables and satellites, to be faithfully relayed to a person you have never seen in your life.

[myzz7 73]

I have only researched one philosophy, so I am a bit ignorant on some of the technical terms used in other philosophies. However, for anyone that enjoys philosophy here, I would recommend the podcast, Partially Examined Life. I am not sure if I can link it, but a quick search engine query will pull it up.

 

Anyone wanting discuss a particular issue of philosophy? I'm down for that.

[Milky Jade 138]

I'll start and end the whole thread with... All of you are going to find me a tough act to follow. When will you find out, is the question. And that answer I can only give you as: Soon.

 

"That is very interesting, you are very interesting."

I have only researched one philosophy, so I am a bit ignorant on some of the technical terms used in other philosophies. However, for anyone that enjoys philosophy here, I would recommend the podcast, Partially Examined Life. I am not sure if I can link it, but a quick search engine query will pull it up.

 

Anyone wanting discuss a particular issue of philosophy? I'm down for that.

 

That philosophy being?

Wait - is linking things forbidden on mlpforums?

[myzz7 73]

 

 

Wait - is linking things forbidden on mlpforums?

 

Not sure. Another forum I'm on most of the time has moderation rules about linking websites that could be seen as advertising for them. May not be the case here, but I didn't want to look it up or risk it.

[Discordian 6,015]

I know why people dislike the idea of knowledge, and urge to vanquish it.

 

Knowledge gives you something clear. It gives you something intelligible. It gives you something absolute and incontrovertible.

 

Which also means.. that people, should they accept knowledge as possible, cannot persist to "be for everything". Their basic concerns, gasp, invalid. What now?

 

The pretext for their movement is what you said it is: based on the assumption that scepticism furthers our understanding, and any claim to knowledge is undercutting it...

 

But it is the other way around, love. Scepticism is not " well, i'm going to use my mind to the fullest of its capabilities, lead the march of science, while humbly swinging the banner of guesswork ". It is in principle the attempt to edify an either-or  -  a false dichotomy - between itself and basically, nonsense. Any claim to knowledge is false because it is a claim to knowledge - including that punch I just threw in your face, you also have to stay sceptic about it. Shame on you, if you retaliate and take your revenge on someone you can neither prove has hit you, nor prove he even exists...

 

Another prominent pretext of scepticism is the "questioning" of everything, as if there were merit badges waiting for anyone smart enough to question something.

It's all fun, at first. But once you start questioning your own mind's validity (which scepticism stands accused of), you are drawn into an infinite regression, a void you cannot escape from.

 

I don't think you have to do this. Make yourself aware that you are typing on a keyboard that directs impulses to your computer which are being converted to commands made visible on a screen consisting of a million-odd lights and are transmitted across the world via a network of cables and satellites, to be faithfully relayed to a person you have never seen in your life.

I dunno about anyone else but in my case I don't deny what is proven at all. I'm quite capable of seeing what is clearly definable and what isn't within the scope of existing knowledge. And I often use that knowledge to change the way I think as often as I use something's nonexistence as a point.

 

But for me, there is no endgame. I don't question to deny truth, merely change the way truth is viewed. If I question myself into madness then I've done more good for myself than harm.

 

I know what you're trying to say. The denial of knowledge as it is will lead down a path with no discernible end but I choose that path not for the destination but for the sake of doing it in the first place. There's a pleasure I take in asking questions of things. It's likely not more than amusement or fun but in my life, fun and amusing myself are the entire reason for my existence.

[Milky Jade 138]

Not sure. Another forum I'm on most of the time has moderation rules about linking websites that could be seen as advertising for them. May not be the case here, but I didn't want to look it up or risk it.

I think it should be fine. Youtube is allowed, news (and) articles are allowed.. i guess a podcast, too.

 

You could spare your answer as to the other question, if you want - because I'm not going to stick around for the weekend. The thread'll be left to fester while I'm gone. Make the worst of it, my friends.

[Steel Accord 6,660]

I dabble in philosophy. I wouldn't be able to say which one I adhere to most strongly, but I do have the most grounded understanding of martial arts philosophy from my practice in the martial arts. (That sword I'm holding in the avatar box isn't just for show.)

 

I would say my philosophical outlook is most strongly about the agency of the self. My forms and kata are the same as my meditations, they reveal more about the archetype within me, although I myself have some trouble exactly nailing down or concretely defining it. Morally, I guess I would be closest to an Ethical Hedonist, the increase of happiness is the most moral thing one can do. For themselves and for others.

[Twilight Circuits 603]

"That is very interesting, you are very interesting."

Thanks for the compliment.

Some of this below has been copied and pasted from elsewhere from discussions i've been having elsewhere... Even if it would seem as if it were here..

Folks... I'm going to lay it down like this. It's one thing to talk about philosophy , but it's another to talk about issues, and you talk about issues by talking about and sharing stories. Stories that relate to oneself and what drives someone in the world they live in. I'm out there doing things for you that you do not see. Time has not been on my side at all. As matter of fact... it's been utter chaos and where to begin I would almost have a problem with. However... something i would almost consider a slight portion of irony is although the personal life I have outside here is that my life IS interwoven with what we do as a form of individual people and person. 

   First off... I'm writing now because... I want you all to know that i care... I care deeply... perhaps almost too much. I would even go so far as to accuse myself of putting to much on my own plate... but experience has now taught me that it would seem that myself as an person thinks much faster then the physical world allows. That might sound strange to some of you, but my confidence in such a statement comes from both knowledge AND experience. Even now as I type this out. What i've wanted to say i'm already 10 paragraphs in on the inside of my mind and I actually find myself sometimes missing out key words or information more often than I would like to admit. It would also be a reason as to why I can seem kinda cryptic. I can answer a lot and all sorts of questions... Everyone's problem seems to be giving me the time for explaination.

  I sometimes feel like there's so much I want to say but feel sad that I don't have the time I need to do it. So let me break down some simple facts. Cause there's one pony that told me to break it down to the nitty gritty.... Alright fine... here's the nitty gritty. My teacher, Bob Proctor (he doens't know I exist btw) said that he actually needed AN HOUR just to present his information to company's.... I seriously need all of you to comprehend this simple fact. He said it, so therefore I'm not lying when I can't possibly break any part of me or my material down to just an hour.... Why? Because I've made it so much farther then even my teachers and I have absolutely NO doubt in my mind AT ALL that they wouldn't be happy, or proud, or even sorry to be students themselves.

... Now Bob's seminar was TWO DAYS. HOW BIG DO YOU WANT ME TO TYPE THAT OUT AGAIN!!!!!!!!  OR MENTION IT OVER AND OVER AGAIN. No, i'm not yelling, i'm just being real stern here. I can't even begin to tell you what it tells me when a 20 minute read is killing you... just killing you....

 

YOU'RE IN DEEP TROUBLE PONY IF THAT'S THE ATTITUDE YOU HAVE!!  Because I am seriously not the problem there. What that teaches me, is that so many of you are simply not willing to learn. That is a very big problem. Because without knowledge and i'm being serious when I say this that you; How are you ever going to be better at ANYTHING?

 

Some like to keeps some things simple that's fine. So I said wear this outfit and I get "I can't, I won't, I'm scared to, I don't like the religous tone on the back of the jacket, and I haven't even touch the surface as to why I would get anyone to do that in the first place, and naturally I already know that's it's a fact you all seem to like shortcuts, and are now telling me that you don't want to do even the shortcuts... the irony in all of that... is that I'm also simply being myself. But I'm also the one that knows how much time I put in. And I'm in it for eight years now...

   I know what you're thinking pony... why are we here and who are we? Do we actually have a job to do as a community? That job is to talk about love and tolerance kinda like we already do. But we're different because we take that and carry it with us already. And people don't understand us becuase we're so new it's not even funny.... I mean seriously... We fight an invisible war... What is that invisble war? Well, where do rumours come from? Lies? Personal info shared with others? I know what they're saying online... But what are you saying OFFLINE? And believe it or not the answers I seem to be getting is either, nothing, or very little...  even though we come online and talk about things and important  issues. We talk about those issues, regardless of what country we're from, regardless of what nationality, we are. Regardless for how many differences we equally know each other to have, we still as a whole.. know how to get along in harmony. Just don't think it's perfect. But it's pretty damn close.

   My point here is that I have gotten started... I just have a different mind set and different knowledge then yours... it's not scary... it's actually more magical then you think. Consider this fact. We're so new that i never have a problem running into someone that didn't even know the show existed let alone our culture. That's the truth I get from wearing my outfit out there. Do I feel like I'm setting an example? Yes I do. Why? Because pony. You're not going to find me doing anything to harm anyone. But I'm watching the world do it to itself... I pray God take me all the time... But that's also a topic that you guys ARE afraid of... so what if I simply let you understand how I could let you "cheat the system" Now, I'm not cheating here because I'm the one doing it first in my fashion. (no pun intended it just rolled out like that. A part of my personality that is almost beginning to be an annoying problem... I actually have a problem right now with puns because they roll right off my tungue without me thinking about them... Then afterward... the emotions... I think to myself... "wow did i really just say that?" I say, yeah I deal. I deal with love and tolerance. lol

   Now imagine this for a second... you're wearing a getup like mine... people out there see you... you might be scared they might laugh at you... but that's the trade off... because it's still a positive form of emotional energy one that is then permanently engrained into their memory. So you get more people out there getting them... you have this postive energy returning to you at all times... I'll just say that in no time you'll be like "whoa..... what the hell is happening?" and that is the power of love. All by saying nothing but visually unforgettable. So where am I going with this then? Well... I don't have a problem saying that I don't belong to a single group BUT bronies. So I'm proud to stand out even if you aren't. But the payoff... that where you guys still come in to play... (ugh... again... the puns...) Now, you need to be open minded here... This really IS the bare basics pony so even if you feel you don't understand me right now, we'll get there, relax. So where do you guys come in? That's actually simple... Take something like energy... amplify it... then multiply it. You guys are my multiplier in a manner of speaking... Think about it like this... I already have a high degree of awareness and energy, it's how i know this works in the first place. So when it comes to just how positive my raw energy is even though you can see it... that in and of itself, gets projected at you and into your subconsciouse memory... So why would you want that... Well.. Imagine in almost little to no time at all having a burst of pure raw positive energy... You can a little bit looking at a picture of me... BUT it also depends on the time the picture was taken. So newer picture of me, say yesterday or today, would have way more energy in it then say one from months earlier. Because wearing the outfit out more builds more energy still. Probably also one of the reason people love the outfit and find it unforgettable. Perhaps simply... a 'good' side effect i would hope. But once still, you're going to have to get the courage to wear it out there.... So what would having me in your mind do for you that you'd never get anywhere else? That actually IS in fact knowledge. But it would be the same kind of knowledge that would allow me how to instruct you on how to "cheat the system" I actually DO want to share this knowledge with you, it deserves to be in your hands... but you have to give me the time pony.... all of you... at the same time... so together i raise you in harmony...

I have had the pleasure of having a side kick for a while, seeing me in action, talking about my material, talking about my ideas, and more or less talking about what we in this group are talking about. He watches people reactions as I we go around and I'm out full P.O.N.Y. Another thing about this sidekick, is that he's also living with me at the moment, which has been surreal to say the least. It's actually been great having someone to explain all of this to. Which kinda brings me back to you that's reading this. That's something I'm aware of right now. You are going to read this at a different time then someone else. I, Twilight Circuits am pretty much speaking to all of you right now, as I type, as well as in my mind... Basically, am I talking the same way to you right now as I would in real life? The answer is yes. That might sound like a simple concept and it is. But I AM the same person online as i am offline so why that's hard to figure out is why I'm here to tell you. I've shown you my picture. None of you have shown me yours. Now, I've come across quite a few of you that hide behind your online profile living in fear as far as I can see it. I've challenged some of you to wear my getup even outside this conversation and for what's worth it's actually been fairly hard. Despite the great comments I get over and over and over... I wouldn't be lieing if I said I felt alone in the outfit. I actually come across people that have never heard of MLP or bronies or anything. Technically speaking, I actually wouldn't exist at all had it not been for the internet but I've even come across people that aren't even connected to the interent let alone the world... So you talk about something that makes a brony different... well... I have a pretty open mind about it. Seeing as I am a physical being out there though I'm beginning to desire differently seeing the world in it's state of affairs. Not to mention, the time it takes to get things done sometimes... and I don't have the same distractions as you guys do. But when it comes to time... I have to be honest... you guys have a hard time fathoming time and what it takes to do things and why. How do I know that? Actually, you guys tell me all the time. But the answer also lies in the truth of my own words and actions. It's the action's that you see at the moment as a proxy such as a picture of myself and the outfit. As it were... would I object to a live video feed where the same words I would write and you read at this moment would be the same words you hear and see for yourself? No. Actually, that's something I've already been working on and move closer and closer to achieving. Might be hard to fathom to you as you read this but I almost didn't even get to make this sentence as I've almost come close to death twice between the time you read this and since when I was born. So if I feel I deserve to have this chance when the time comes... Saying goodbye was something I didn't even get to do before I even got to say hello. So what would I say on the show? Well... pony... let's put it this way... I had teachers... a different kind of teachers long before Twilight Circuits was a sparkle in God's eyes. So how long was school? Two months of hard core each day and 2 hours every day. 8 years later now... Hm... wow... It really does seem to me like it's been the blink of an eye but years is a different look at it. So if I was to talk about time with you again. I'd be a tough act to follow there.   So where am I going with this? Well, I know you're still reading this pony so let's face it. I lean forward into the camera look at you and say directly to you're face: Where DO you want to go...? Cause I hear you loud and clear. It's you guys that don't hear me loud and clear but you can, you will, and I want you to hear me, I want to be heard. I have a lot to say, I have a lot to genuinely teach. How much time I need for that... is actually a very, long, time...  As for representing... I already got you beat. Let's see you follow MY lead on that one.

[myzz7 73]

@,

Umm, what? No offense, but that was a story rather than something philosophical.

[Milky Jade 138]

I know what you're trying to say.

 

If there is a case proper to the "benefit of the doubt", then that's what I addressed. I like to "beat them to it", as it is said..

 

Because should anyone think of "scepticism" as the equivalent to "passion for science", then that is what I meant by "false dichotomy".

 

The basal assumption of scepticism is wayward to that of science. You do not call yourself a scepticist for any reason aside from thinking that that is what it is to be a scientist. If you understood me, Discord, then you should find yourself in no place able to say that about yourself... unless you'd like me to accuse of you intellectual dishonesty?

 

If you believe in consequential proof (as science clearly does), you're already a step-up from a scepticist.

 

People love scepticism, it's their favourite toy. Because the easiest (and most evidently set to fail) way to appear smart and compelling is by questioning something well-established, because it suggests that you are privvy to information that could undermine it single-handedly. Ironically, you don't, but since you started it, people are jumping onto the uncertainty bandwagon - even those that established the thing in question in the first place...

 

It is often said, that scientists are "humble", aware of the things that they don't know (which is a perfectly alright thing by the way), and so on. What you won't see them say, however, is that they don't know if that car's safety system actually works. Or that they don't know whether or not the rocket is going to achieve escape velocity. Or that they don't know whether or not that surgical laser has an appropriate intensity for human flesh.

 

Like it, or not.. scepticism doesn't stand against random assertions. It is not science's corollary. It doesn't stand in a dichotomy with a chance hillbilly's claim to have seen bigfoot. It is trying to stand in a dichotomy with knowledge itself - and thus, it is a cult thing. It is pretentious. It is not constructive.

 

I think we should be landed with some grounds of agreement, if only slim.

[Twilight Circuits 603]

@,

Umm, what? No offense, but that was a story rather than something philosophical.

But it's a true story. What's YOUR story pony. Because I'm not going around in circles. Talking about philosiphy IS going around in circles.

 

Instead of sharing your stories and such, your pretty much all talking about what to read and who to read instead of actually deciding to be the person everyone should be reading about instead. So your reading their stories and their life and views and your telling me i'm nothing nor even a person to talk about philisophically?  I ain't your average individual, pony.

[Discordian 6,015]

If there is a case proper to the "benefit of the doubt", then that's what I addressed. I like to "beat them to it", as it is said..

 

Because should anyone think of "scepticism" as the equivalent to "passion for science", then that is what I meant by "false dichotomy".

 

The basal assumption of scepticism is wayward to that of science. You do not call yourself a scepticist for any reason aside from thinking that that is what it is to be a scientist. If you understood me, Discord, then you should find yourself in no place able to say that about yourself... unless you'd like me to accuse of you intellectual dishonesty?

 

If you believe in consequential proof (as science clearly does), you're already a step-up from a scepticist.

 

People love scepticism, it's their favourite toy. Because the easiest (and most evidently set to fail) way to appear smart and compelling is by questioning something well-established, because it suggests that you are privvy to information that could undermine it single-handedly. Ironically, you don't, but since you started it, people are jumping onto the uncertainty bandwagon - even those that established the thing in question in the first place...

 

It is often said, that scientists are "humble", aware of the things that they don't know (which is a perfectly alright thing by the way), and so on. What you won't see them say, however, is that they don't know if that car's safety system actually works. Or that they don't know whether or not the rocket is going to achieve escape velocity. Or that they don't know whether or not that surgical laser has an appropriate intensity for human flesh.

 

Like it, or not.. scepticism doesn't stand against random assertions. It is not science's corollary. It doesn't stand in a dichotomy with a chance hillbilly's claim to have seen bigfoot. It is trying to stand in a dichotomy with knowledge itself - and thus, it is a cult thing. It is pretentious. It is not constructive.

 

I think we should be landed with some grounds of agreement, if only slim.

Okay maybe I didn't fully understand. My bad. I'm not a big words guy. A lot of things go over my head when people start using big words.

 

But no, I don't deny things that are proven. As with my example on the perception changes, there is an obvious pattern and provable idea behind an object. I don't try to tell someone "you think you see that but you definitely don't". It's more along the lines that no matter how much we understand something, we don't necessarily understand all of it and it's the things we don't understand that interest me most.

 

I don't take existing knowledge and try to disprove it, rather I try to incorporate that knowledge into the idea of a whole. It's possible for an object to be one thing and also another, whether we see the second definition or not. But the fact that we do see the one definition means that this particular view is proven to be true.

 

The way I look at it, there's more to it that we can see but not necessarily that what we see is wrong either. I believe that there are multiple layers to everything and that is why I question. To understand the layers that are lesser known or unviewable through the eyes we have.

 

I fully admit to not knowing any philosophy, including Kant's, in any great capacity. I would learn more about them as I love to learn but there is something else that takes up more of my time and attention, enough so that I'm usually quite satisfied with it.

 

I don't know if it's obvious or not but as I post I'm trying to understand the things you say. I actually appreciate a good back-and-forth like this as it helps to focus my thoughts and I fully believe that opposing viewpoints help me to understand and bolster my own. I hope you aren't in any way frustrated with me. I have that effect on people.

[myzz7 73]

But it's a true story. What's YOUR story pony. Because I'm not going around in circles. Talking about philosiphy IS going around in circles.

 

Instead of sharing your stories and such, your pretty much all talking about what to read and who to read instead of actually deciding to be the person everyone should be reading about instead. So your reading their stories and their life and views and your telling me i'm nothing nor even a person to talk about philisophically?  I ain't your average individual, pony.

Well, I have to disagree with you about philosophy and it being about going around in circles. Philosophy shouldn't be insinuated to have no answers or be hapless to grasp much needed answers and guidance to a person's life. 

 

I understand your sentiment in taking the initiative to discuss philosophy instead of talking about what or who to read, but anecdotal stories don't lend much towards firm philosophical principles, especially if they're written primarily with pathos and not expressive in why any particular point is being taken. Philosophy has to be demonstrable within a logical framework to have appropriate validity. I'm not trying to drive you off this discussion, so please don't feel offended.

[Kel_Grym 1,917]

@,

 

Space your paragraphs. Your story if it has any merit, should be done justice by being made readable.

 

The reason why you're a tough act to follow is because no one can really follow what you're trying to tell them. This is not failure on the reader's part, but failure on you part to communicate efficiently.

Edited May 24, 2014 by Minister KelGrym

[myzz7 73]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pIJHJzDQcRM&feature=player_detailpage#t=375

 

Any philosophers want to take a stab in discussing the ideas in this video? In case the link messes up the time stamp, skip to 6:15 and listen onward to about 12:23.

 

As a quick preface, it talks about the unified field of the universe being a wave of intelligence on which all matter and beings are built upon. As in, we are united and that the universe isn't necessarily an inert, "dead", material universe; but overwhelmingly conscious at its fundamental foundation.

[Kel_Grym 1,917]

But I'll choose to harp on that: Why do you assume that you don't see things how they are?

 

Literal reasons. When I look outside I only see the visible light spectrum, and not the rest of the spectrum that's out there. If you have some understanding on how vision works and how the brain processes information, there is much in your field of vision which is a result of the brain "filling in the gaps"

 

 

Our perception is limited to subjectivity. It gives us a close approximation to how things are, and that approximation serves its utility as far as what we need to survive on, however it can be unreliable.

Edited May 24, 2014 by Minister KelGrym

[Milky Jade 138]

I have that effect on people.

 

I initially wanted to make a big detour around philosophy threads because I'm no good at making a proper case, half of the time.

 

 

Essentially, what happens in these threads is that you are trying to prove somebody wrong, or yourself right, and that's where the "fun" only begins.....

 

So, you've brought up "different views", "subjectivity" and "meaning".

 

In order to resolve these, you first have to ask the questions that they presuppose:

 

"what is the decisive factor in the validity of a view?"

 

"of meaning to whom?"

 

If you go ahead and assume that everyone's view is equally valid, in their own minds, then you are basically saying that no one's view is valid. This is where I'll need to explain 'identity'.

 

You said: "It's possible for an object to be one thing and also another"

 

This idea is incompatible with the philosophical idea of identity - namely, "A equals A" - the idea by which a delineated object with specific nature made of specific attributes is separated from the nothingness of nonexistence. In order to arrive here, you will have to start with existence, because identity is concerned with existence.

Do things exist? Well, you should find evidence aplenty in your porn folder, so there's that. Do things have an identity?

 

Generally speaking, can you have your cake and eat it, too?

 

The idea of identity is concerned with things as they are - because in order to assert the state of something to be something, you have to assume that it cannot be another thing outside of its delineation - which is to say, you cannot be both in New York and Hong Kong, you cannot be a human and a crocodile, nor can you be right and wrong at the same time. The law of identity is similar to an axiom because it affects you in your most basic, inescapable assumptions. However, the thinkable objections are not pertinent to the kind of identities that we are discussing: Things as they are - and a thing is what it is. The attributes that constitute its identity is what a thing is. An existence apart from its attributes would be an existence apart from its identity, a nonexistence.

 

 

 

It is said thus that your white view and my black view don't make an object grey. The next step from this is subjectivity, which stands in direct contradiction with knowledge yet again (surprise, surprise), and is famous for statements along the line of "true for me", "that's just, like, your opinion, man", and so on. If you want an object to maintain its identity, you have to grant it the possibility to be understood by people that care to understand it. Kant obviously doesn't, but we're better than that.

 

You mentioned "meaning", and showing a book to a dog. A book is a book. It has a different meaning to us (comparing humans to dogs is kind of "silly", considering how they aren't rational beings) than it has to dogs - sure, but does that constitute a good example?

 

"Meaning" is the direct consequence of a meaning-giver, the corollary of intent. Things that weren't intended, have no meaning - such as rocks, for example.

 

Books, however.. are being printed to be sold, read, shelf'd, maybe even burned.

 

That, and nothing else, is the proper definition of "meaning". The presupposed question of "meaning" is: "of meaning to whom? and for what reason?". This, however, is not to be united or confused with the law of identity. A rock's identity is a rock - being a bear's back-scratcher doesn't make it "not a rock". The bear's hypothetical subjective view cannot impede on the rock's identity, because it is not capable of altering its delineations or reality. A book will still be a book, no matter if it is intelligible to a dog. The identity of things does not require all sentient beings to parse it equally.

[Twilight Circuits 603]

@,

 

Space your paragraphs. Your story if it has any merit, should be done justice by being made readable.

 

The reason why you're a tough act to follow is because no one can really follow what you're trying to tell them. This is not failure on the reader's part, but failure on you part to communicate efficiently.

Alright I'll communicate effectively. To everyone else reading this thread. Fake minister Kelgrym here can't even muster the courage to wear an outfit like mine on in the public on a daily basis even though it's a true fact that I'm out there doing it already. Anyone want to follow someone that has no faith in what they do or talk about? I'm not wearing a mask. But you? Minister... pffftt. I spit on your mockery of a title.  I wouldn't be surprised if that's what landed you in fail jail.

So what am I trying to tell everyone that you seem so blatenly trying to challenge me or throw in my face or accuse me of? Simple. You suck and aren't worth following. My time is precious. Debating with you is a lost cause becuase you're equally lost as you are smart. I'm certainly not calling you a dumby. As a matter fact I think everyone has potential and I want to maximize everyone's potential. To do that, one has to set an example and not wear a mask like you, Sinister KillGrim. I showed you the chariot of my God. What's yours?

[Milky Jade 138]

Literal reasons. When I look outside I only see the visible light spectrum, and not the rest of the spectrum that's out there. If you have some understanding on how vision works and how the brain processes information, there is much in your field of vision which is a result of the brain "filling in the gaps"

 

Our perception is limited to subjectivity. It gives us a close approximation to how things are, and that approximation serves its utility as far as what we need to survive on, however it can be unreliable.

 

Since perception is a prerequisite to cognition, I think it cannot ever be seriously dismissed as unreliable. It is precisely as you said: it gives us a close approximation - which contains the implicit statement that it is reliable.

 

 

What we first need to resolve: Do we require to see the entire spectrum of light?

Well, unless you want to drown in a murky blur, no... but is it imperative to making a statement pertinent to your perception?

 

Again, no - and this is why I'm a bit disappointed that people tend to be cute and immediately jump to electromagnetic radiation.

 

Generally, it'd only work as a thinkable objection if it went down like this:

"This lamp is green"

"No, it's not, dumbass, it's pilmy"

"What the fuck is pilmy?"

"Oh, I just remembered that you don't have mantis shrimp eye implants"

 

Since this kind of conversation never goes down - principally because we all share the same set of eyes, more or less - as well as the fact that even if we did see different colours, we'd still be unable to prove it because we've been calling the same colours the same names for all our lives - I really don't see the impact on the validity of perception.

 

A perception is satisfied with what stimulates it. To ask it to be stimulated by more than it is, is to in turn ask it to be 'omniperceptive', because that'd be the prerequisite for 'omniscience'. The fact that it isn't, makes it invalid insofar you think that validity is equal to 'omniperception', which is in turn incompatible with our identity: that we're human beings, not omniscient beings.

 

The entire colour argument is, more or less, a strawman.

[Kel_Grym 1,917]

Alright I'll communicate effectively. To everyone else reading this thread. Fake minister Kelgrym here can't even muster the courage to wear an outfit like mine on in the public on a daily basis even though it's a true fact that I'm out there doing it already. Anyone want to follow someone that has no faith in what they do or talk about? I'm not wearing a mask. But you? Minister... pffftt. I spit on your mockery of a title.  I wouldn't be surprised if that's what landed you in fail jail.

So what am I trying to tell everyone that you seem so blatenly trying to challenge me or throw in my face or accuse me of? Simple. You suck and aren't worth following. My time is precious. Debating with you is a lost cause becuase you're equally lost as you are smart. I'm certainly not calling you a dumby. As a matter fact I think everyone has potential and I want to maximize everyone's potential. To do that, one has to set an example and not wear a mask like you, Sinister KillGrim. I showed you the chariot of my God. What's yours?

 

I love you.

 

I merely pointed out the ineffectiveness of your communication, and you drag your beef with me from our PMs on to his thread.

 

As for the outfit let me set you straight on this.

 

That outfit is the entire crux of your ego and identity.

 

It's not that I lack the courage to wear something like that, it's because it is inconvenient to me.

 

Do you have people who depend on you? I do.

 

While I will not deny that I'm a brony, I will no flaunt it either. That is literally asking for trouble in backwoods Texas. If someone asks me if I'm a brony, I'll answer then yes, and if they want to make a big deal about it I'll handle it there, however I will not increase the statistical odds of me being jumped by a group of homophobic meth heads I know in my neighborhood when I walk 45 minutes from work back home at 3am in the dead of the night.

 

This isn't cowardice, this is street smarts, a philosophy you can't appreciate.

 

If I do what you do, I will eventually get into a fight over it. I will. I know myself. I can't allow myself to do that.

 

I have an Aunt that recently lost her job and cousin sick with cancer I need to be there for.

 

I am pragmatic.

 

I did not accuse you of anything. I did not challenge you in anything. Not on this thread. Only that you are ineffective in communication.

 

But now that you bring the subject up, I will accuse you.

 

I accuse you of being a massive man-child who's entire ego is fixed on a jacket he wears, one which if he did not have, would have nothing. You're so proud of it. Is that all that you are? I guy who obsesses over how awesome he is and bases his merits solely on wearing a jacket?

 

I also accuse you of arrogance, for the way you first approached me in your PM's.

 

 

At first I thought you were honestly just playing along with me, but later on you showed you were all too serious.

 

 

 

TwilightCircuits, you are embarrassing your self.

 

I gave you a chance to save face. You blew it.

 

And just to stay on topic:

 

I think you could learn a great deal from Buddhist philosophy.

 

Suffering comes from the ego, you know?

 

O mani padme hum.

Edited May 24, 2014 by Minister KelGrym