Philosophy Now Forum

If you do not regard evil as harmful then what is it? Well, it raises a question about the regulatory ideal. By analogy with the pearls-before-swine issue, these days people talk a great deal about individualism and collectivism. And claim China does not respect the unlimited value of individual li...

Atla wrote: ↑Fri Apr 24, 2020 12:58 pm

TheVisionofEr wrote: ↑Thu Apr 23, 2020 6:25 pm

Atla wrote: ↑Tue Apr 21, 2020 8:19 pm
Dunno, didn't use that word.

What word do you suppose it is meant to translate?

Not quite the same thing when it comes to philosophy, is it.

It's not clear. The Greeks understood the theoros as the most extreme practioner. The most worthy.

I disagree. In my experience, "despising" and "attacking" generally go hand in hand. And attacking generally implies a lack of "regard" for the one being attacked. By despise I mean such things as Aristotle's saying that those who want a "why" for being just ...

So you think this is "evil" then? What about the superiority of evil The practice of evil so often seems to win dividends that practicing so seldom does? No. I'm not passing judgment on whether it is evil/very harmful or not. But, rather, raising the subject matter for discussion. If you ...

The superior despise the lower forms of their genus. Those with weakness in the area of their exclusionary primacy. Thus, to be superior, not to say supreme, is to attack the common by a spontaneous characteristic or drive. So you think this is "evil" then? What about the superiority of e...

Stupidity also despises and attacks... perhaps even more so. Well, properly, I would say that despising excludes attacking. Attacking implies some regard. I disagree. In my experience, "despising" and "attacking" generally go hand in hand. And attacking generally implies a lack ...

Guy seems to have dedicated his life to formally studying philosophy, but in the end 95%+ of that knowledge is pretty worthless. Not even his fancy way of speaking, or all the drama he came up with, can change that. Must be pretty maddening, huh :) Useless for what? You are very thoughtless. Dunno,...

Well, properly, I would say that despising excludes attacking. Attacking implies some regard. Do you just make shit up as you go? Are you aware you're doing that? Guy seems to have dedicated his life to formally studying philosophy, but in the end 95%+ of that knowledge is pretty worthless. Not eve...

As someone who can think I must confess to somewhat despising you. As is the usual case in all superiority here on the earth. Liar. Not 'somewhat' - you can't stand me. People who worship lies hate the truth thus people who both hold and speak truth above all else. Interestingly, the Nazis didn't m...

Lacewing wrote: ↑Tue Apr 21, 2020 3:39 am

TheVisionofEr wrote: ↑Tue Apr 21, 2020 3:14 am

Lacewing wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2020 6:37 pm
Stupidity also despises and attacks... perhaps even more so.

Well, properly, I would say that despising excludes attacking. Attacking implies some regard.

Do you just make shit up as you go? Are you aware you're doing that?

Well, on whatever planet you are on, I hope you are happy.

Lacewing wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2020 6:37 pm

TheVisionofEr wrote: ↑Fri Apr 17, 2020 1:59 am Thus, to be superior, not to say supreme, is to attack the common by a spontaneous characteristic or drive.

Stupidity also despises and attacks... perhaps even more so.

Well, properly, I would say that despising excludes attacking. Attacking implies some regard.

Well, does, eg, Magnus Carlsen meerly believe himself superior, or does he win more at chess than the rest of humanity? And decisively overmatch almost everyone. Magnus Carlsen employs a conscious discipline, as motivated by his passion for the game of chess. He need not "believe" he is b...

It takes a "believer" to ever "believe" themselves superior to another and/or others are inferior to themselves. The "superiority" factor is "belief". "BELIEVER vs. UNBELIEVER" Where are all the Nazis? On the side of the "believers". Who i...

You are very thoughtless. ... Do you mean ethically or epistemologically? If the former then please explain how and I'll consider a sincere apology but if the latter then I'd need to understand what you mean by a thought before I could consider a reply. And truly were prepared for a life of intelec...

All being exists through a repetition as recursion. One thing repeats into another, in a new variation. This new phenomenon, as a variation of the original, in turn repeats through a new variation. An example of this would be 1 repeating into 2. 2 repeats into 4, thus 1 is repeating through 2 and 4...