Your inspiration for philosphy?

[HexHammer]

We are all drawn to different things in life, often based on a varaity of different things.

It can be childhood memories, movies, music, vacations, idols, religion, etc.

[mickthinks]

Hey all your cozy chatters- here's the thread you've been waiting for!

We are all drawn to different things in life, often based on a varaity of different things.
LOL With vacuous platitudes like that, you are in no danger of being mistaken for an intellectual heavyweight, Hex.

[HexHammer]

mickthinks

LOL? How old are you?

[The Voice of Time]

Sophie's World. The movie that is, which came out in Norwegian but not English. Never read the book.

[hammock]

It can be childhood memories...

Probably circa age ten, late at night in bed, staring at the dark-gobbled ceiling and quietly rejoicing over being a meaningless construction of atoms. Then some vehicle with blinking lights passes by the road and hurls uninvited flashes of color into the room. My placid view of material being suddenly disrupted by: "Wait a minute... What the heck is this funny stuff doing here, this showing of images and acoustic manifestations, olfactory affairs, etc. How dare this phantom crap violate the nothingness of my consciousness as just brain / body reactions to the surrounding environment via mechanistic relationships!"

Or something like that. Obviously I can't completely remember what transpired for my thoughts back during that cave-youth era of croaking guttural speech patterns. But it did amount to some kind of alarm over being kicked-out of the peaceful, blank universe of p-zombiehood and into the questions that qualiaphiles would later mutter madly to themselves about as they shuffled like unshaven, overcoated strays through the windswept and drizzly streets of Phenomenal City.

[The Voice of Time]

It can be childhood memories...

Probably circa age ten, late at night in bed, staring at the dark-gobbled ceiling and quietly rejoicing over being a meaningless construction of atoms. Then some vehicle with blinking lights passes by the road and hurls uninvited flashes of color into the room. My placid view of material being suddenly disrupted by: "Wait a minute... What the heck is this funny stuff doing here, this showing of images and acoustic manifestations, olfactory affairs, etc. How dare this phantom crap violate the nothingness of my consciousness as just brain / body reactions to the surrounding environment via mechanistic relationships!"

Or something like that. Obviously I can't completely remember what transpired for my thoughts back during that cave-youth era of croaking guttural speech patterns. But it did amount to some kind of alarm over being kicked-out of the peaceful, blank universe of p-zombiehood and into the questions that qualiaphiles would later mutter madly to themselves about as they shuffled like unshaven, overcoated strays through the windswept and drizzly streets of Phenomenal City.

This is not really about philosophy as a discipline though. It's just the mind trying to orient itself in the world. Philosophy would purposefully deconstruct the world, not construct it. And that, in my opinion, is a major difference between philosophy and simple curiosity.

If you are a real master philosopher, you'd also deconstruct things that nobody else has, and in that way be a form of pioneer or explorer into unknown realms of thought. As a child, you are just playing around with a big world, trying to see where all the Lego pieces fit together. Your thoughts are as little a piece of art as the drawings you do in kindergarten.

[hammock]

This is not really about philosophy as a discipline though.

This thread is about "philosophy as a discipline"? Hell, and I was afraid that I might be intruding upon informal schools of homespun sagacity.

[Advocate]

For me it's truth as a prerequisite for justice. But since the next requirement is getting people to recognise the truth, basically i give up.

[Advocate]

[quote="The Voice of Time" post_id=161769 time=1394046694 user_id=7289]
Sophie's World. The movie that is, which came out in Norwegian but not English. Never read the book.
[/quote]

The book was horrid, as is The Alchemist and so forth. Popular Philosophy will never be a popular genre.

[Advocate]

[quote=hammock post_id=161802 time=1394063471 user_id=8014]
[quote="HexHammer"]It can be childhood memories...[/quote]
Probably circa age ten, late at night in bed, staring at the dark-gobbled ceiling and quietly rejoicing over being a meaningless construction of atoms. Then some vehicle with blinking lights passes by the road and hurls uninvited flashes of color into the room. My placid view of material being suddenly disrupted by: "Wait a minute... What the heck is this [i]funny stuff[/i] doing here, this showing of images and acoustic manifestations, olfactory affairs, etc. How dare this phantom crap violate the nothingness of my consciousness as just brain / body reactions to the surrounding environment via mechanistic relationships!"

Or something like that. Obviously I can't completely remember what transpired for my thoughts back during that ...cave-youth era...
[/quote]

#bandname

[Advocate]

[quote="The Voice of Time" post_id=161804 time=1394063733 user_id=7289]This is not really about philosophy as a discipline though. It's just the mind trying to orient itself in the world. Philosophy would purposefully deconstruct the world, not construct it. And that, in my opinion, is a major difference between philosophy and simple curiosity.

If you are a real master philosopher, you'd also deconstruct things that nobody else has, and in that way be a form of pioneer or explorer into unknown realms of thought. As a child, you are just playing around with a big world, trying to see where all the Lego pieces fit together. Your thoughts are as little a piece of art as the drawings you do in kindergarten.
[/quote]

Woah Nelly! First, originality is Not proper criteria for philosophy. Every philosophical idea that matters has been independently derived many times by the time someone is well enough known to the public or considered worthwhile by philosophers.

A master philosopher is one who can explain how all the pieces fit together in the most meaningful way, not one who simply ventures into new territory. The old territory is still the groundwork for literally everything. A master philosopher recognises necessary truths when he sees them.

Second, deconstruction alone is useless. Deconstruction can be immediate and subconscious, and is never the point of anything in philosophy. Stand-alone deconstruction is pessimistic nihilism Deconstruction is a necessary prerequisite for understanding and arranging the relationship of our ideas to each other, leading to actionable certainty - but it's nothing on its own. Likewise nay-saying or responding to every contention with "let's see the evidence" or "prove it".