Advocate wrote: ↑Wed Sep 23, 2020 8:14 pm
If there's no intent for it to be useful it's not philosophy. Wisdom cannot stand alone, it must lead toward a better something, and that's an inherent property. And to be part of the "love of wisdom", one must to understand that there are two kinds of wisdom, truth, and practical. The point of all truth is also practical. This is not debatable. If you believe otherwise, you've pulled the primary support beam out from under anything else you might possibly say. "My words aren't useful but they're still philosophy." is incoherent. There is never such a case in reality. Even the example just given aims toward clarifying something in spite of itself.
Quite naive. Of course my comments aren't useful, if anything, they are not.
Is the idea that the point of all truth is practical, not debatable, because it's simply not true?
Sometimes truth and practicality coincide, sometimes they don't.
That's not irony. Why would anyone expect otherwise? Every philosophical thought has been independently derived many times. What has not been done, so far as i can find, is putting all the pieces together. That i've done, but it doesn't address any point in the OP.
Obviously I meant that they more or less put all the pieces together. You should be aware of this. I've done that too, big deal. You are new to this aren't you.
>Yet they all failed to make a big enough difference, and so will you.
You've just restated one of my original points as though i didn't make it and it's your own. GTFO. This is evidence of the part about what society allows. People who are apparently incapable of working with deep thoughts have much more power than people who are.
>And it's not because you don't have enough 'integration/resources/privilege', but because humanity as a whole is beyond repair.
Can't it be both? Humanity is beyond repair BECAUSE it's core principles do not include respect for intellect. If we would give smart (knowledge + intelligence) people more resources, they'd find ways to use them more effectively than everyone else and in ways that would benefit everyone else, but we don't, and people think it's a bad idea largely because of it not being that way; non-smart people are elevated and entitled as though they were, making it seem that smart isn't important. And to the extent it is respected, knowledge is elevated over the ability to process that knowledge effectively, because DK effect.
>No matter how good your usable philosophy is, it will never be actionable enough hehe, the average human is just not capable of understanding and following such things.
Actionable enough is nothing to do with whether it's recognised as actionable. That's combining two concepts with extremely different dynamics as though they are one. But i've taken great pains to keep my philosophy as simple as possible, within the limits of justifiable certainty, for just that reason, as any true philosopher should.
>And this insight is also part of the search for 'truth'. But the bubble you're living is kinda amusing to me.
I'm not searching for it, i'm teaching it. the truth cannot be found, it can only be recognised. The bubble is all around you.
Average people can't comprehend what intellect is, so how could they respect it?