Verbal abuse and cyber-bullying on Philosophy Now forums

General chit-chat

Moderators: AMod, iMod

marjoram_blues
Posts: 1623
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2015 12:50 pm

Re: Verbal abuse and cyber-bullying on Philosophy Now forums

Post by marjoram_blues » Tue Jan 09, 2018 11:20 am

Dubious wrote:
Tue Jan 09, 2018 11:08 am
marjoram_blues wrote:
Tue Jan 09, 2018 10:31 am
Dubious wrote:
Tue Jan 09, 2018 10:25 am
For some "inner unity" simply means never disagreeing with oneself.
Whatever 'oneself' is.
"Oneself" is the "I" which separates me from you.
And if you disagree with yourself, are you still not a 'unity' ?
Or is there more than one 'I' to contend with.
An 'I' which can also be at one with another, and not separate, as such.
In agreement - in harmony with a number of people with similar core values.
Even given the uniqueness of an individual...made up of different parts...

Nick_A
Posts: 2126
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: Verbal abuse and cyber-bullying on Philosophy Now forums

Post by Nick_A » Tue Jan 09, 2018 2:28 pm

So it becomes obvious why the idea that "I am not I" cannot be discussed. The secular mind is closed to any sincere efforts to "know thyself" so becomes restricted to mindless negativity and denial as opposed to inner verification.

User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 6132
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: Verbal abuse and cyber-bullying on Philosophy Now forums

Post by vegetariantaxidermy » Tue Jan 09, 2018 9:02 pm

There goes that pesky bot again. :roll:

Nick_A
Posts: 2126
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: Verbal abuse and cyber-bullying on Philosophy Now forums

Post by Nick_A » Tue Jan 09, 2018 10:15 pm

A person has a choice when confronted with something they don't understand. They can keep an open mind or mindlessly condemn to protect ones ego. Secularists here choose to mindlessly condemn. Your loss.

Impenitent
Posts: 1660
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm

Re: Verbal abuse and cyber-bullying on Philosophy Now forums

Post by Impenitent » Tue Jan 09, 2018 11:53 pm

Dubious wrote:
Tue Jan 09, 2018 10:25 am
For some "inner unity" simply means never disagreeing with oneself.
the group for glue drinkers anonymous meets tuesday nights at the church

-Imp

User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 6132
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: Verbal abuse and cyber-bullying on Philosophy Now forums

Post by vegetariantaxidermy » Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:50 am

Nick_A wrote:
Tue Jan 09, 2018 10:15 pm
A person has a choice when confronted with something they don't understand. They can keep an open mind or mindlessly condemn to protect ones ego. Secularists here choose to mindlessly condemn. Your loss.
Who doesn't understand who? I think, Nick-A, that you are perfectly understood--loud and clear. Did your heroine, Simone Weil, spend all her time whining about 'seculars'? Hmmm? I have a feeling she would have looked right down her (ample) nose at you.

Nick_A
Posts: 2126
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: Verbal abuse and cyber-bullying on Philosophy Now forums

Post by Nick_A » Wed Jan 10, 2018 1:07 am

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:50 am
Nick_A wrote:
Tue Jan 09, 2018 10:15 pm
A person has a choice when confronted with something they don't understand. They can keep an open mind or mindlessly condemn to protect ones ego. Secularists here choose to mindlessly condemn. Your loss.
Who doesn't understand who? I think, Nick-A, that you are perfectly understood--loud and clear. Did your heroine, Simone Weil, spend all her time whining about 'seculars'? Hmmm? I have a feeling she would have looked right down her (ample) nose at you.
You are unable to understand those like Simone Weil. the best you can do is to attack her nose. Those like Simone don't look down at our species. rather they look inwardly up in the direction of truth. They are willing to transcend their self while those like you will defend it at all cost.
“There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self.” ― Ernest Hemingway

"The true value of a human being is determined primarily by how he has attained liberation from the self."
--quote from Einstein Archive 60-492, 1932; published in Mein Weltbild.
Secularists will always attack others while people of wisdom transcend pettiness in the cause of understanding. All the verbal abuse and cyber bullying have served to prove how far the majority are from this potential

User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 6132
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: Verbal abuse and cyber-bullying on Philosophy Now forums

Post by vegetariantaxidermy » Wed Jan 10, 2018 1:18 am

How do you know? She was actually human, despite what your fantasies. Your petty religious conservative views wouldn't have gone down well with her, of that I am certain.

Nick_A
Posts: 2126
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: Verbal abuse and cyber-bullying on Philosophy Now forums

Post by Nick_A » Wed Jan 10, 2018 1:26 am

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Wed Jan 10, 2018 1:18 am
How do you know? She was actually human, despite what your fantasies. Your petty religious conservative views wouldn't have gone down well with her, of that I am certain.
You don't understand Simone or me and yet allow your misguided egoism to assume you do. Pure progressive arrogance.

Dubious
Posts: 1448
Joined: Tue May 19, 2015 7:40 am

Re: Verbal abuse and cyber-bullying on Philosophy Now forums

Post by Dubious » Wed Jan 10, 2018 1:34 am

marjoram_blues wrote:
Tue Jan 09, 2018 10:31 am

Whatever 'oneself' is.
Dubious wrote:
Tue Jan 09, 2018 11:08 am
"Oneself" is the "I" which separates me from you.
marjoram_blues wrote:
Tue Jan 09, 2018 11:20 am
And if you disagree with yourself, are you still not a 'unity' ?
Weird question! How can you not be? One body, one mind with conflicting tendencies generated internally and externally in a million different ways effectually forcing us to compromise with ourselves and others.
marjoram_blues wrote:
Tue Jan 09, 2018 11:20 am
Or is there more than one 'I' to contend with.
People can interpret "I" in whatever manner they like. For me it's a single letter variable denoting the whole including the less known or unknown parts. As simple as that in spite of being immensely complicated when defining volition and questioning motives in all their shifting perspectives.

marjoram_blues wrote:
Tue Jan 09, 2018 11:20 am
An 'I' which can also be at one with another, and not separate, as such.
In agreement - in harmony with a number of people with similar core values.
Being soulmates in some sense does not blend two separate I's into one and love, highly overrated, won't do it either. Parts of different personalities may blend or overlap but never the total. There is distance even between clones.

None of this, btw, requires philosophy!

User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 6132
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: Verbal abuse and cyber-bullying on Philosophy Now forums

Post by vegetariantaxidermy » Wed Jan 10, 2018 1:40 am

Nick_A wrote:
Wed Jan 10, 2018 1:26 am
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Wed Jan 10, 2018 1:18 am
How do you know? She was actually human, despite what your fantasies. Your petty religious conservative views wouldn't have gone down well with her, of that I am certain.
You don't understand Simone or me and yet allow your misguided egoism to assume you do. Pure progressive arrogance.
She would have squished you like a cockroach.

Dubious
Posts: 1448
Joined: Tue May 19, 2015 7:40 am

Re: Verbal abuse and cyber-bullying on Philosophy Now forums

Post by Dubious » Wed Jan 10, 2018 1:41 am

Impenitent wrote:
Tue Jan 09, 2018 11:53 pm
Dubious wrote:
Tue Jan 09, 2018 10:25 am
For some "inner unity" simply means never disagreeing with oneself.
the group for glue drinkers anonymous meets tuesday nights at the church

-Imp
...and then we'll all sing Hallelujah together!

User avatar
Greta
Posts: 2821
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:10 am

Re: Verbal abuse and cyber-bullying on Philosophy Now forums

Post by Greta » Wed Jan 10, 2018 2:18 am

Nick_A wrote:
Mon Jan 08, 2018 2:58 pm
Greta, you seem to have a strong emotional rejection of Christianity. This is normal because over time Christianity has devolved into sects of Christendom or man made Christianity into society producing mixed results. Many here have had bad experiences with these mixed results. However, St. Paul provides and elegant personal description of our dual nature and how far we are from “I Am.” Are you open to contemplating it and experiencing the same within you? This is the essential beginning. Can a person living as a plurality consciously evolve into inner unity? To “know thyself” means to experience this great contradiction within ourselves. Without it we just intensify our negativity through frustration producing the verbal abuse and cyber bullying this thread is about. We cannot solve a problem without first experiencing the problem and admitting it.

Romans 7
14 We know that the law is spiritual; but I am unspiritual, sold as a slave to sin. 15 I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. 16 And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. 17 As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. 18 For I know that good itself does not dwell in me, that is, in my sinful nature.[c] For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. 19 For I do not do the good I want to do, but the evil I do not want to do—this I keep on doing. 20 Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.

21 So I find this law at work: Although I want to do good, evil is right there with me. 22 For in my inner being I delight in God’s law; 23 but I see another law at work in me, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within me. 24 What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body that is subject to death? 25 Thanks be to God, who delivers me through Jesus Christ our Lord!

So then, I myself in my mind am a slave to God’s law, but in my sinful nature[d] a slave to the law of sin.
Nick, IMO all any of us do is is the best they know how at the time. The ideas of theists, atheists, pantheists, panentheists, deists, agnostics, pagans and so on have many commonalities due to our common biology and existential situation.

So, nowadays I try hard to understand what key points people are trying to get across rather than worrying about detail. To do that, sometimes I need to translate into my kind of language, and this is the case with your ideas.

To deal with the second part of your post first, I see "sin" as our atavistic animal nature - our greed, lust, aggression, anger, vengefulness, cruelty, and so forth. Freud called this base evolved nature the Id, Jung termed it the Shadow (Plato would have approved). It is a lifetime challenge to maintain control over one's more unhelpful base impulses.

It's true that we need to recognise the impulses that prevent us from being the kind of people we most want to be, but recognising the many activities of the animal within (many of them helpful) is only the first step in potentially domesticating ourselves. At this juncture many meditation masters will talk about the importance of mindfulness, of regulating oneself, of noticing those things we take for granted, and to grasp the nettle of needed but unwanted tasks and ideas. It's much harder than it sounds; self mastery is more than a lifetime's work.

My, and Kant's, understanding is that we cannot get in touch with actual reality. Consider what happens to people who return from NDEs - their filters are somewhat disabled and they tend to be overwhelmed by even dim light and gentle sounds. Without the buffer of our brain's filtering we could not function. That's life - you are born without a clue and struggle for a while until your inevitable destruction. One can only hope that when we die, rather than complete annihilation, that the actual reality we have been unable to touch becomes manifest. I suppose one can believe in that, but it's impossible to rationally justify.

Nick_A
Posts: 2126
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: Verbal abuse and cyber-bullying on Philosophy Now forums

Post by Nick_A » Wed Jan 10, 2018 2:21 am

Dubious wrote
None of this, btw, requires philosophy!
The modern transformation of the love of wisdom into the love of egoism. At one time the essential philosophical question was "who am I." The modern philosophical question is how to decorate Plato's cave. Now that is real philosophy and a pure indication of Man's evolutionary Progress.

Dubious
Posts: 1448
Joined: Tue May 19, 2015 7:40 am

Re: Verbal abuse and cyber-bullying on Philosophy Now forums

Post by Dubious » Wed Jan 10, 2018 3:40 am

Nick_A wrote:
Wed Jan 10, 2018 2:21 am
Dubious wrote
None of this, btw, requires philosophy!
The modern transformation of the love of wisdom into the love of egoism. At one time the essential philosophical question was "who am I." The modern philosophical question is how to decorate Plato's cave. Now that is real philosophy and a pure indication of Man's evolutionary Progress.

You have no comprehension of what love of wisdom actually means; the best you can do is talk about it by proxy borrowing from others and transposing that into the same trademark of sentimental mush post after post. Most pathetic is your desperation to prove how wise you are based on nothing more than repetition and disembodied quotes. It would be wiser if you first stepped down and then work your way up since wisdom is much more demanding than your obtuse distortions which negate any semblance of what is wise.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests