the bottom line
the bottom line
Just like killing, dumping a relationship with someone who has an inadequate epistemology gets easier each time. But if you follow this path, you'll be alone in an instant.
Truth only loses in compromise. People lose consistently by being involved in a system full of people who consistently compromise on truth.
Truth only loses in compromise. People lose consistently by being involved in a system full of people who consistently compromise on truth.
- RCSaunders
- Posts: 4704
- Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
- Contact:
Re: the bottom line
What's wrong with that. Is your own person so inadequate you must have someone else to fill some void in your life. Only those who are sufficient in themselves have anything to offer others of value. People who need people are parasites. Lice need people.
-
- Posts: 2151
- Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2021 2:12 am
Re: the bottom line
RC,RCSaunders wrote: ↑Thu Feb 24, 2022 3:01 amWhat's wrong with that. Is your own person so inadequate you must have someone else to fill some void in your life. Only those who are sufficient in themselves have anything to offer others of value. People who need people are parasites. Lice need people.
Humans are social creators, I think you are describing a psychopath, but even the psychopath needs his victims.
Re: the bottom line
That social stuff could be learned behavior that becomes a need out of habit and nostalgia. Could be indulging weakness.
Check out the hermit life of Dick Proenneke, if you get a chance. He was an ex-machinist who bought a piece of lakefront in wilderness Alaska and built a little home with hand tools, to live out his remaining decades, although near the end, when physically weak, he went back to civilization. He filmed the whole thing; his observations and films are quite sane when measured by life, and aspects of modern culture.
Check out the hermit life of Dick Proenneke, if you get a chance. He was an ex-machinist who bought a piece of lakefront in wilderness Alaska and built a little home with hand tools, to live out his remaining decades, although near the end, when physically weak, he went back to civilization. He filmed the whole thing; his observations and films are quite sane when measured by life, and aspects of modern culture.
-
- Posts: 6801
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm
Re: the bottom line
Shared values, attraction, sense of humor, getting along, having a similar sense of play, interests in common, trusting the other person in a pinch...that's the kind of stuff that affects my choice of relationships (taking the word to include friends and romance both, not that it changes much if it is just one or the other). I mean, sure an inadequate epistemology might wreak havoc in a live-in relationship or parenting together, but it seems an odd criterion
- RCSaunders
- Posts: 4704
- Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
- Contact:
Re: the bottom line
Human beings are not, "social animals." [See, "Unique Human Nature," in the article, "Moral Nature."]popeye1945 wrote: ↑Mon Apr 25, 2022 1:05 amRC,RCSaunders wrote: ↑Thu Feb 24, 2022 3:01 amWhat's wrong with that. Is your own person so inadequate you must have someone else to fill some void in your life. Only those who are sufficient in themselves have anything to offer others of value. People who need people are parasites. Lice need people.
Humans are social creators, I think you are describing a psychopath, but even the psychopath needs his victims.
Only those individuals who refuse any ralationship with others that is not totally voluntary, who desire nothing from others except what those others find of their own value and interest can be any benefit to others, and are the only who are truly worthy of the society of others or are of any value to others. Why Society.
-
- Posts: 2151
- Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2021 2:12 am
Re: the bottom line
Seems an odd stance considering what all observation would tell you both presently and historically. No, I did not read the link as I thought the suggestion of no value.
-
- Posts: 6801
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm
Re: the bottom line
I get warnings from my virus protect etc. on both those links.
-
- Posts: 6801
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm
Re: the bottom line
Yeah, it's odd. Of course we are social mammals (I tweaked the term). Our babies are much more dependent and for longer than nearly all other creatures, which requires long term social relations between children and parents. Primates tend to be social animals and it is precisely our group activities the passing on of knowledge, the shared of knowledge, the social and other interconnections between us that have made us, for good and for ill, the dominant species. Given that there are billions of us, some will choose not to be social. But the vast majority will choose and choose again to be social. And those with poor social connections tend to get sick more and die younger.popeye1945 wrote: ↑Tue Apr 26, 2022 2:26 am Seems an odd stance considering what all observation would tell you both presently and historically.
- RCSaunders
- Posts: 4704
- Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
- Contact:
Re: the bottom line
Wow, you must miss lots on the Internet. The site for those links has no advertisements, is totally private, gathers no information about anyone. There is not a saver site on the Internet.Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Tue Apr 26, 2022 11:19 amI get warnings from my virus protect etc. on both those links.
Unless your virus protection is protecting you from sound reason, it's broken.
So, just for you, these are right here on Philosophy Now:
"The Moral Nature"
"Why Live In Society? And Who Is Worthy Of It?"