Philosophy Now Forum

pljamesone@att.net wrote:The answer to that question is...no...! Regardless if the helping person is either a philosopher or psychology counselor or if neither person has had the same experience with the other persons problem, no amount of logic or reason willl help. The answer is the helpers experience that equals the patients problems. Thoughts? Paul

If you want thoughtful responses to your questions, you should take the time to proofread your posts for proper grammar, punctuation, and sentence structure. It sounds as if you are rattling off thoughts off the top of your head.

So you are saying that psychologists ought to be bipolar (for instance) in order to treat bipolar patients? Should judges be criminals before they are allowed to sentence defendants?

pljamesone@att.net wrote:The answer to that question is...no...! Regardless if the helping person is either a philosopher or psychology counselor or if neither person has had the same experience with the other persons problem, no amount of logic or reason willl help. The answer is the helpers experience that equals the patients problems. Thoughts? Paul

Wyman's right. In fact if you were right, pljamesone@att.net, since we haven't had the experience of the thought that provoked this thread, we couldn't even understand the question.

pljamesone@att.net wrote:The answer to that question is...no...! Regardless if the helping person is either a philosopher or psychology counselor or if neither person has had the same experience with the other persons problem, no amount of logic or reason willl help. The answer is the helpers experience that equals the patients problems. Thoughts? Paul

Of course it 'can' 'help.' Though any particular proposed help may not help, in the minds eye of the one looking for help, for a plethora of reasons, including them not 'actually' looking for help, rather simply argument.

Did I supply what you truly sought?

pljamesone@att.net wrote:.... If one has not had the same emotions that you have had, how can they help them? Thoughts, please. Paul

Everyone has had emotions and also seen many different forms and manifestations of emotions. Nobody needs help with experiencing emotions - they need help when the emotions overwhelm them. That's when somebody who is better able to understand how emotions operate, and to regulate their expression, can help. Whether they can best do it through psychology or philosophy, faith or hypnotic suggestion, drama or dance, empathy or shamanic ritual is a matter of culture and personality.

pljamesone@att.net wrote:I have proofread the post, if this post has fault, check Grammarly. You judged me, oh you're perfect, I see! If one has not had the same emotions that you have had, how can they help them? Thoughts, please. Paul

My point was that one has to really want help, for help to actually be help. Anyone can cross any language barrier, whether about understanding anothers emotions or otherwise, they just have to really want to.

I would say that philosophy causes more personal problems then it solves. This is because it presents a weight of what is supposed to be right or wrong. And that can be a burden. Particularly when its weight of rational analysis is actually no more than a façade that hides nothing more than an emptiness.

But the problems that philosophy causes are best resolved by philosophy; but a truer and more honest philosophy.

What problems does philosophy cause ?

In Antiquity psychology was a branch of philosophy.

Philosophy used to deal with big problems like: how to lead a happy life ? how to organize a community ?

Socrates argued that you should live a life of virtue, Epicure pleaded for a life of healthy pleasure.

Philosophy is an art of thinking. If a problem can be solved by thinking, then philosophy might help.

No.

A_Seagull wrote:I would say that philosophy causes more personal problems then it solves. This is because it presents a weight of what is supposed to be right or wrong. And that can be a burden. Particularly when its weight of rational analysis is actually no more than a façade that hides nothing more than an emptiness.

But the problems that philosophy causes are best resolved by philosophy; but a truer and more honest philosophy.

OK, that's true to some extent.

The old saying is true, "Ignorance is bliss." So conversely it's also true, 'Knowledge can make things complicated.'

Can it be a problem when things become complicated? Sure! Because then we have to change, and change can be difficult for some. Old dogs and new tricks and all. The funny thing is the cosmos is nothing but change, at ever relative and varying rates, yet people find this unnerving, they tend to fear it, but they ignore it, because there is nothing they can do about it.

As to some things, this makes complete sense. If a source of food dries up, animals fear not finding new sources. The same would go with water and shelter. But how we see one another can get messy and nasty. I mean I get it, it's all fear based, and anxiety, "what if they don't see things our way?" We are a selfish Waring animal, after all, and all for fear, all for fear!

So the fear of survival is very much the reason things become complicated. If we could only concentrate on our similarities realizing our differences, surely of thought at least, aren't that important. That only the acting out of selfish inconsiderate thoughts and fears, truly divide us.

So understanding the truth of the universe, leaves one striped bare and naked for themselves and all to see. And that's hard to come to terms with.

pljamesone@att.net wrote:I have proofread the post, if this post has fault, check Grammarly. You judged me, oh you're perfect, I see! If one has not had the same emotions that you have had, how can they help them? Thoughts, please. Paul

A little advice for everyone else, Don't feed the Troll. It seems like PJ has come here with a chip on his shoulder looking for a fight, let him fight with himself.

duszek wrote:What problems does philosophy cause ?

Philosophy describes a paradigm, a self-consistent way of viewing the world. But it is not the only way, nor can it even be shown to be the best way.

Yet many people consider that philosophy describes the way the world actually is, and when this does not dovetail with their own personal experience of life, they may consider that it is themselves that is at fault rather than the philosophy. This can cause problems.

A_Seagull wrote:

duszek wrote:What problems does philosophy cause ?

Philosophy describes a paradigm, a self-consistent way of viewing the world. But it is not the only way, nor can it even be shown to be the best way.

Yet many people consider that philosophy describes the way the world actually is, and when this does not dovetail with their own personal experience of life, they may consider that it is themselves that is at fault rather than the philosophy. This can cause problems.

Yes, I understand.
But there are so many competing theories that explain the world. Why should anyone stick to a theory that does not dovetail with their own experience of life ?

A philosophical counseller can help and point to theories that the client can be more happy with.

thedoc wrote:

pljamesone@att.net wrote:I have proofread the post, if this post has fault, check Grammarly. You judged me, oh you're perfect, I see! If one has not had the same emotions that you have had, how can they help them? Thoughts, please. Paul

A little advice for everyone else, Don't feed the Troll. It seems like PJ has come here with a chip on his shoulder looking for a fight, let him fight with himself.

I am grateful for good advice from friendly people.

On the other hand one should not condemn a person too quickly by labeling him a troll.

How can we decide that a troll is a troll ?
By a majority vote ?
By trusting an expert opinion ?

Sometimes a troll is like a poisonous mushroom that looks like an eatable one.