A Philosophy of Mind

[Barbara Brooks]

Tyranny is the extreme opposite of philosophy, one is the best and the other the worst. The tyrant is the most miserable person, look into penetrate their inner self, and do not get panic-struck by their vain pomp of oppression Tyrants are masters of others when they are not masters of themselves; Their better part is enslaved to the worse they are full of misery and sorrow. When wanting some thing then they are most extreme humble flatterer.

The maintainer of philosophy on the other hand, tries to strengthen, nourish the gentle principle within self, and make an alliance with the heart’s desires. Thus in every point of view, whether in relation to pleasure, honour, or any advantage the just person is right and the unjust person is wrong.

[Barbara Brooks]

I am seeking a nobler purpose and will devote my energies of my life. In the first place, I will honor studies, which impress these qualities on my soul and disregard others.

[koyaanisqatsi]

I am seeking a nobler purpose and will devote my energies of my life. In the first place, I will honor studies, which impress these qualities on my soul and disregard others.

How did you arrive at this decision Barbara? Why do you think studying is noble?

I'm not saying it isn't (I personally think it is) but I'm wondering if you see it as being inherently noble or if acts as some sort of catalyst/trigger for developing noble attributes.

p.s. This is actually me - I've changed my password and had no further intrusions.

[Barbara Brooks]

Koy,

The noble person subjects the beast to the gentleperson; the ignoble subjects the gentleperson to the beast and the beast degrades the noblest part of them to be put under the worst intemperance.

The noble person, on the other hand, boost the gentleperson nourishes the gentle principle within self and makes an alliance with the beast “the many-headed hydra” and brings all into unity with oneself.

[Nikolai]

Barbara,

Koy asked you a fairly straightforward question. He is interested why you consider study to be a noble activity, and whether nobility is an inherent or emergent property of study. All interesting ground to cover.

You replied thus:

The noble person subjects the beast to the gentleperson; the ignoble subjects the gentleperson to the beast and the beast degrades the noblest part of them to be put under the worst intemperance.

The noble person, on the other hand, boost the gentleperson nourishes the gentle principle within self and makes an alliance with the beast “the many-headed hydra” and brings all into unity with oneself.

You reply by introducing three characters: a beast, a noble person and a gentle person - the first of which we later learn to be 'many-headed'. They seem to be engaged in some sort of interaction, or some form of inter-subjective activity, whose active variables appears to be 'boosting' and'nourishing'. The noble person then forms an alliance with the beast and this freshly created dyad seems to achieve unity with a fourth and final character: 'one self'. You end with a tone of happiness, or of resolution.

A nice story. But the question, woefully unanswered, was about study and the virtues of study. This, your most recent post, illustrates the point I've been trying to make.

[Barbara Brooks]

Nikolai,

Socrates believed when a person's pulse is healthy and temperate, and feeds on noble thoughts and questions, and allayed with the passionate element that person is free to contemplate and aspire to knowledge. When a person pacifies the two irrational principles, and rouses up the third, which is reason truth most nearly is attained, and is least likely to be the sport of fantastic and lawless visions.

[mark black]

hey barbara, i was just passing and thought i'd look in, say hello and see what you're writing about. i agree, tyrants and would be tyrants the same - how can one think and not care? mb.

[Nikolai]

Barbara,

the sport of fantastic and lawless visions.

Your writings are lawless, they are - lawlessness is the exact thing I charge you with. Now I have no doubt that you are noble and passionate, poetic and beautiful of spirit- I even enjoy the Delphic wildness of your ecstatic pronouncements on the Soul. I also don't doubt that you have read an immense amount of Plato and philosophy and seem to be something of a fount of knowledge.

But you think you can just type whatever comes into your head and that the reader will understand it. I for one understand hardly anything of what you say, and I would be amazed if anyone does either. I know it must seem very tedious and prosaic to submit your thoughts to the law of comprehensibility. But manage that and you will be read, admired, and loved - and by no-one more than I.

[Barbara Brooks]

Nikolai

I would like to see you write consistently on one subject. You can make up a forum and let us see what you can do. I don't mean a post that does nothing but knock a person but their valid thoughts, not that is what they teach you in school, I think they call it "One up menship." in which you do so well.

[Barbara Brooks]

I myself believe that if I knew what I was talking about: declaring truth about matters of high interest and carrying on this reasoning I need to be sure of my footing. People fall into the practice thinking that they are reasoning when they are really stating a difference of opinion because they cannot define and divide, merely unrecorded opposition in the spirit of argument and not serious speech.

I write to permeate my thoughts and writing here on this forum helps me knowing someone is reading it.

[Nikolai]

I write to permeate my thoughts and writing here on this forum helps me knowing someone is reading it

As I suspected, your motives are entirely selfish. People might be reading it but they ain't understanding a word of it - and you don't even care.

Another thing, how does other people reading it help you? If you were getting feedback and advice then I could understand it, but you deliberately prevent that by writing as you do. Do you benefit by magic? or does it help you with the illusion that your drivel influences your fellow Man?

I won't say anymore on this subject, I'm sure everyone would prefer me to leave you be. I also suspect that you are incapable of writing well so going on at you is probably unfair. But, it would be nice to see you joining in a bit more and giving us the benefit of your wisdom, or, as you would put it: Wisdom.

[Barbara Brooks]

Nikolai

Wait just a God Dam minute I challenged you to write a post that consistently stays on one subject. Now you have had enough of this post.

Come on with your big mouth lets here about your thoughts on justice, or life itself or any philosophical subject to prove to me your not just opinionated troublemaker.

[Nikolai]

Who here writes on just one subject?

I know you probably think you do, but the content on your post is nothing more than a motley collection of vacuous word spewings consistent only by being, without exception, expressed in utter and unadulterated gibberish.

As for my own opinions, just click on my profile and you'll get a flavour of what I write about. I'm consistently being caught out for being inconsistent, but in a sense I guess that's what I'm here for. I've learned a great deal from others here. You meanwhile shun everyone in favour of your own autistic fantasy world. Feel free to challenge me on whatever I've written, after all that is what I want from you.

[Barbara Brooks]

Nikolai


Oh no, I challenged you, to pick a subject and let us see how smart you are.

[Psychonaut]

Barb, why not just browse the forum to look for Nikolai's posts, and then perhaps respond to them there with criticism in which you clearly state the manner in which they are erroneous?