Principles vs Pragmatism

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Nick_A
Posts: 3804
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: Principles vs Pragmatism

Post by Nick_A » Mon Feb 18, 2019 1:32 am

Arising, you seem to deny the caravans approaching America with the intent to crash the border. This seems OK for you since laws are irrelevant to pragmatists and made to be broken by the "right" people. However for those who still believe in the rule of law and blind justice, they cannot be in favor of caravans with the intent of crashing the border. They strive to defend it. What better defense than a wall?
You do realise it is your capitalist utopia that is fuelling this drugs trade, that your capitalist utopia appears to produce the largest drug need on the planet?
Secularized America fuels the drug trade

John Adams ~. “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

The United States Constitution is no longer relevant. It is only relevant for a moral and religious people which no longer exists in secularized America. So without feeling the great ideas which serve as real philosophy and the essence of religion to respond to the human need for meaning, people turn to drugs in order to forget. The problem isn’t capitalism but secularism. For capitalism to serve a society it must serve a moral and religious people who respect what freedom offers. When its goal is to serve greed and prestige, it no longer can serve its desired purpose and potential.
N. Plato's dark horse is on a roll

A. You really need to read Plato one day.
Plato’s dark horse in the Chariot allegory refers to what has happened to our mortal nature in contrast to the white horse representing our spiritual nature.
The mortal horse is deformed and obstinate. Plato describes the horse as a “crooked lumbering animal, put together anyhow…of a dark color, with grey eyes and blood-red complexion; the mate of insolence and pride, shag-eared and deaf, hardly yielding to whip and spur.”

The immortal horse, on the other hand, is noble and game, “upright and cleanly made…his color is white, and his eyes dark; he is a lover of honor and modesty and temperance, and the follower of true glory; he needs no touch of the whip, but is guided by word and admonition only.”
Our mortal dark horse is dominant in the world. It does seem that the aim of secular society in the world is to provide the environment and attitudes necessary to keep it on a roll and make a few bucks off of suffering.
You think Jesus would have thought these people 'invaders' and rejected the children?
People invaded the Temple and Jesus threw them out. Invasions by definition are made up of invaders

For Jesus the world is a world dominated by the Prince of Darkness. It cannot change. Jesus offered the means to acquire freedom from inner slavery for those open to the potential to enter the path of human conscious evolution.

For America to become great again it has to first respect its borders which define a country. Without secure borders there is nothing to be made great again since by definition the country no longer exists.

Principles or American values in this case are what made America great while pragmatic interests serve to deny the principles in favor of temporary concerns that serve to transform America into statist slavery. A person has to choose if they support the principles America was founded upon which make freedom possible or it they prefer to live under statist slavery where people are equal in their slavery to the state. I support those who further the course of freedom made possible by a moral and religious people.

User avatar
Greta
Posts: 4391
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:10 am

Re: Principles vs Pragmatism

Post by Greta » Mon Feb 18, 2019 2:41 am

Nick_A wrote:
Mon Feb 18, 2019 1:32 am
Arising, you seem to deny the caravans approaching America with the intent to crash the border.
Let's see if they kill 30,00 a year the way guns do.

Re: the OP (instead of Americans who clearly have no problem with placing ends before Trumpian means).
Nick_A wrote:
Tue Jan 29, 2019 4:27 am
I remember during my first year of high school I experienced a contradiction I couldn’t resolve. In those days students were taught about the obligation to vote. I being the type who would seek to find holes in any argument reasoned that since a person just has one vote and elections are decided by millions, why bother? There are more important uses for their time. At the same time if everyone thought this way we would be living by dictatorship. I was faced with two contradictory but equal truths. Voting is necessary but one vote is virtually meaningless.

When I got older I saw the problem in a new light which is the relationship between the truths of principles and pragmatic truths. Both are true but how does a person balance them?
The key word is in the last: balance. Or, in your language, "To give to Caesar ...".

Instead of programming ourselves with a rule to always respond the same way in the same situation, we have this gift of (apparent?) free will and can thus use judgement based on the situation. So, for instance, while a vote only represents a tiny percentage of the whole, so does the act of voting only impose the tiniest bit on electors - just maybe an hour or two once every few years.

IMO the benefit of being "part of the solution" (albeit very small) is well worth the small imposition of time. Still, if it was to interfere with something important to me - work, keeping a commitment etc - then I would prioritise voting down in that instance. Again, this is having the freedom to decide based on circumstance.

That's one of the nice things about being a grownup - we can exercise judgement rather than having to always follow rules. The danger, though, is the slippery slope - that one might become ever more "flexible" to the point of being unreliable. One can never afford to be complacent with these things - it either inevitably comes back to bite you on the arse or I'm just really bad at getting away with things.

Minds are like gardens. Sometimes it's best to leave weeds be because some will make nutrients in the soil more available for desired plants, or their might shade the roots or protect the soil from erosion and radiation. However, there are standards so some invasive weeds are never welcome. Again, balance and judgement.

Nick_A
Posts: 3804
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: Principles vs Pragmatism

Post by Nick_A » Mon Feb 18, 2019 4:09 am

Greta wrote:
Mon Feb 18, 2019 2:41 am
Nick_A wrote:
Mon Feb 18, 2019 1:32 am
Arising, you seem to deny the caravans approaching America with the intent to crash the border.
Let's see if they kill 30,00 a year the way guns do.

Re: the OP (instead of Americans who clearly have no problem with placing ends before Trumpian means).
Nick_A wrote:
Tue Jan 29, 2019 4:27 am
I remember during my first year of high school I experienced a contradiction I couldn’t resolve. In those days students were taught about the obligation to vote. I being the type who would seek to find holes in any argument reasoned that since a person just has one vote and elections are decided by millions, why bother? There are more important uses for their time. At the same time if everyone thought this way we would be living by dictatorship. I was faced with two contradictory but equal truths. Voting is necessary but one vote is virtually meaningless.

When I got older I saw the problem in a new light which is the relationship between the truths of principles and pragmatic truths. Both are true but how does a person balance them?
The key word is in the last: balance. Or, in your language, "To give to Caesar ...".

Instead of programming ourselves with a rule to always respond the same way in the same situation, we have this gift of (apparent?) free will and can thus use judgement based on the situation. So, for instance, while a vote only represents a tiny percentage of the whole, so does the act of voting only impose the tiniest bit on electors - just maybe an hour or two once every few years.

IMO the benefit of being "part of the solution" (albeit very small) is well worth the small imposition of time. Still, if it was to interfere with something important to me - work, keeping a commitment etc - then I would prioritise voting down in that instance. Again, this is having the freedom to decide based on circumstance.

That's one of the nice things about being a grownup - we can exercise judgement rather than having to always follow rules. The danger, though, is the slippery slope - that one might become ever more "flexible" to the point of being unreliable. One can never afford to be complacent with these things - it either inevitably comes back to bite you on the arse or I'm just really bad at getting away with things.

Minds are like gardens. Sometimes it's best to leave weeds be because some will make nutrients in the soil more available for desired plants, or their might shade the roots or protect the soil from erosion and radiation. However, there are standards so some invasive weeds are never welcome. Again, balance and judgement.
You assume something that isn't true. You believe that as a whole we are capable of wisdom. That is the fatal flaw. the balance that you wrote of is not possible for the human condition. Socrates accepted death as a principle. The oracle praised his wisdom. Is accepting death as Socrates did an act of wisdom or insanity?

Everyone says they exercise judgement and they disagree. The question is an essential part of Christianity. There is the law furthered by the Pharisees and the good of the law represented by Jesus. It is against the LAW to work on the Sabbath and Jesus healed on the Sabbath. How to reconcile this apparent contradiction? The mistake you are making is looking for answers instead of contemplating the wholeness of the question and allow the intuition of your higher mind to open your lower mind so as to become able to realistically contemplate the balance between principles and pragmatism. You don't want to accept that like Socrates, as you are you know nothing. If this is true how can you balance principles and pragmatism if you don't know the higher value of principles?

User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 11735
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: Principles vs Pragmatism

Post by Arising_uk » Mon Feb 18, 2019 12:59 pm

Nick_A wrote:
Mon Feb 18, 2019 1:32 am
Arising, you seem to deny the caravans approaching America with the intent to crash the border. ...
:lol: And they'll do that how? What they are doing is coming to claim asylum or apply for immigration.
This seems OK for you since laws are irrelevant to pragmatists and made to be broken by the "right" people. However for those who still believe in the rule of law and blind justice, they cannot be in favor of caravans with the intent of crashing the border. They strive to defend it. What better defense than a wall? ...
I agree, the American Indians should have built one. You do realise that you have a vast coastline don't you?

These people are coming to apply under your laws.
Secularized America fuels the drug trade
:lol: And yet a vast percentage of your population claim godbothering status?
John Adams ~. “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

The United States Constitution is no longer relevant. It is only relevant for a moral and religious people which no longer exists in secularized America. So without feeling the great ideas which serve as real philosophy and the essence of religion to respond to the human need for meaning, people turn to drugs in order to forget. The problem isn’t capitalism but secularism. For capitalism to serve a society it must serve a moral and religious people who respect what freedom offers. When its goal is to serve greed and prestige, it no longer can serve its desired purpose and potential. ...
Are you claiming that your fellow citizens are heathens?
Plato’s dark horse in the Chariot allegory refers to what has happened to our mortal nature in contrast to the white horse representing our spiritual nature.
The mortal horse is deformed and obstinate. Plato describes the horse as a “crooked lumbering animal, put together anyhow…of a dark color, with grey eyes and blood-red complexion; the mate of insolence and pride, shag-eared and deaf, hardly yielding to whip and spur.”

The immortal horse, on the other hand, is noble and game, “upright and cleanly made…his color is white, and his eyes dark; he is a lover of honor and modesty and temperance, and the follower of true glory; he needs no touch of the whip, but is guided by word and admonition only.”
Our mortal dark horse is dominant in the world. It does seem that the aim of secular society in the world is to provide the environment and attitudes necessary to keep it on a roll and make a few bucks off of suffering.
I'd take you seriously if I thought you had actually read what you spout.
People invaded the Temple and Jesus threw them out. Invasions by definition are made up of invaders.
I think you'll find Jesus 'invaded' the temple.
For Jesus the world is a world dominated by the Prince of Darkness. ...
You're a Gnostic, HERETIC!!
It cannot change. Jesus offered the means to acquire freedom from inner slavery for those open to the potential to enter the path of human conscious evolution. ...
I look forward to you showing any sign of what you assert one day.
For America to become great again it has to first respect its borders which define a country. Without secure borders there is nothing to be made great again since by definition the country no longer exists. ...
:lol: Do you even understand how hard it is to immigrate to the US?

:lol: 'America great again', when was it?

You show no sign of being a follower of Jesus. The amount of people in these caravans is miniscule in comparison to your population and country. You have vast areas of your country in massive decline and could easily let people settle there and try regenerate those areas and they'd be very grateful and work very hard to do so is my thought.

You demonstrate very ably the sickness that has come to a country built upon immigrants.
Principles or American values in this case are what made America great while pragmatic interests serve to deny the principles in favor of temporary concerns that serve to transform America into statist slavery. ...
American values like slavery is that?
A person has to choose if they support the principles America was founded upon which make freedom possible or it they prefer to live under statist slavery where people are equal in their slavery to the state. I support those who further the course of freedom made possible by a moral and religious people.
Amazing given that your America was founded upon betrayal and pragmatic interests.

You do understand that those coming are likely to be very Christian don't you but you appear unwilling to join them in Christian Brotherhood? So much for your conscious evolution.

Nick_A
Posts: 3804
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: Principles vs Pragmatism

Post by Nick_A » Mon Feb 18, 2019 9:42 pm

Arising
These people are coming to apply under your laws.
Then why are so many crossing the border illegally. They don’t know the laws or anything about American values. They have been told by those seeking to overload the system to just come on over. No one cares how the young girls are being raped as part of the caravan. They are unimportant. Rump is rump. All that is important is overloading the system as recommended in the Cloward–Piven strategy
Are you claiming that your fellow citizens are heathens?
Your trouble is that you don’t know what a Christian is. You attack a word but have no conception of its meaning. My fellow citizens live in a secular society whose God they are motivated by has become the Great Beast. If you want to call them heathens then that is what they are for you.
I'd take you seriously if I thought you had actually read what you spout.
You don’t value ideas. You only value those who express them. If you like the person expressing ideas then you support their ideas. If you have been indoctrinated to dislike a person, you will dislike their ideas. You have become a normal progressive.
You're a Gnostic, HERETIC!!
No, I am a svoloch for progressives.
Do you even understand how hard it is to immigrate to the US?
It’s easy. All you have to do is crash the border get a court date to appear in ten years and you are in. It is so simple it happens every day.
'America great again', when was it?
You show no sign of being a follower of Jesus. The amount of people in these caravans is miniscule in comparison to your population and country. You have vast areas of your country in massive decline and could easily let people settle there and try regenerate those areas and they'd be very grateful and work very hard to do so is my thought.

You demonstrate very ably the sickness that has come to a country built upon immigrants.
America was great when it remembered it is a country built on ideas furthering freedom rather than a secularized culture. Ideals are necessary to keep ideas alive under the pressure from those who seek to destroy them. Secularism has killed the ideas so the ideals must fall leading to the transformation of America into a form of statist slavery.

From Jacob Needlemn’s book: The American Soul:
Our world, so we see and hear on all sides, is drowning in materialism, commercialism, consumerism.

But the problem is not really there. What we ordinarily speak of as materialism is a result, not a cause. The root of materialism is a poverty of ideas about the inner and outer world. Less and less does our contemporary culture have, or even seek, commerce with great ideas, and it is the lack that is weakening thehuman spirit. This is the essence of materialism. Materialism is a disease of the mind starved for ideas.

Throughout history ideas of a certain kind have been disseminated into the life of humanity in order to help human beings understand and feel the possibility of the deep inner change that would enable them to serve the purpose for which they were created, namely, to act in the world as conscious individual instruments of God, and the ultimate principle of reality and value. Ideas of this kind are formulated in order to have a specific range of action on the human psych: to touch the heart as well as the intellect; to shock us into questioning our present understanding; to point us to the greatness around us in nature and the universe, and the potential greatness slumbering within ourselves; to open our eyes to the real needs of our neighbor; to confront us with our own profound ignorance and our criminal fears and egoism; to show us that we are not here for ourselves alone, but as necessary particles of divine love.

These are the contours of the ancient wisdom, considered as ideas embodied in religious and philosophical doctrines, works of sacred art, literature and music and, in a very fundamental way, an indication of practical methods by which a man or woman can work, as is said, to become what he or she really is. Without feeling the full range of such ideas, or sensing even a modest, but pure, trace of them, we are bound to turn for meaning.
Yes a secularized culture must turn to drugs for meaning.
Amazing given that your America was founded upon betrayal and pragmatic interests.
No, America was founded on the ideal of freedom. Freedom is not a pragmatic interest. It is an ideal the value of which must be contemplated, supported, and defended.
You do understand that those coming are likely to be very Christian don't you but you appear unwilling to join them in Christian Brotherhood? So much for your conscious evolution.
But since you don’t know what Christianity is, its purpose and how its values further a free society, you are only doing what Dostoyevsky described as “pouring from the empty into the void.”

User avatar
Greta
Posts: 4391
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:10 am

Re: Principles vs Pragmatism

Post by Greta » Mon Feb 18, 2019 10:51 pm

Nick_A wrote:
Mon Feb 18, 2019 4:09 am
Greta wrote:
Mon Feb 18, 2019 2:41 am
Nick_A wrote:
Mon Feb 18, 2019 1:32 am
Arising, you seem to deny the caravans approaching America with the intent to crash the border.
Let's see if they kill 30,00 a year the way guns do.

Re: the OP (instead of Americans who clearly have no problem with placing ends before Trumpian means).
Nick_A wrote:
Tue Jan 29, 2019 4:27 am
I remember during my first year of high school I experienced a contradiction I couldn’t resolve. In those days students were taught about the obligation to vote. I being the type who would seek to find holes in any argument reasoned that since a person just has one vote and elections are decided by millions, why bother? There are more important uses for their time. At the same time if everyone thought this way we would be living by dictatorship. I was faced with two contradictory but equal truths. Voting is necessary but one vote is virtually meaningless.

When I got older I saw the problem in a new light which is the relationship between the truths of principles and pragmatic truths. Both are true but how does a person balance them?
The key word is in the last: balance. Or, in your language, "To give to Caesar ...".

Instead of programming ourselves with a rule to always respond the same way in the same situation, we have this gift of (apparent?) free will and can thus use judgement based on the situation. So, for instance, while a vote only represents a tiny percentage of the whole, so does the act of voting only impose the tiniest bit on electors - just maybe an hour or two once every few years.

IMO the benefit of being "part of the solution" (albeit very small) is well worth the small imposition of time. Still, if it was to interfere with something important to me - work, keeping a commitment etc - then I would prioritise voting down in that instance. Again, this is having the freedom to decide based on circumstance.

That's one of the nice things about being a grownup - we can exercise judgement rather than having to always follow rules. The danger, though, is the slippery slope - that one might become ever more "flexible" to the point of being unreliable. One can never afford to be complacent with these things - it either inevitably comes back to bite you on the arse or I'm just really bad at getting away with things.

Minds are like gardens. Sometimes it's best to leave weeds be because some will make nutrients in the soil more available for desired plants, or their might shade the roots or protect the soil from erosion and radiation. However, there are standards so some invasive weeds are never welcome. Again, balance and judgement.
You assume something that isn't true. You believe that as a whole we are capable of wisdom. That is the fatal flaw. the balance that you wrote of is not possible for the human condition. Socrates accepted death as a principle. The oracle praised his wisdom. Is accepting death as Socrates did an act of wisdom or insanity?

Everyone says they exercise judgement and they disagree. The question is an essential part of Christianity. There is the law furthered by the Pharisees and the good of the law represented by Jesus. It is against the LAW to work on the Sabbath and Jesus healed on the Sabbath. How to reconcile this apparent contradiction? The mistake you are making is looking for answers instead of contemplating the wholeness of the question and allow the intuition of your higher mind to open your lower mind so as to become able to realistically contemplate the balance between principles and pragmatism. You don't want to accept that like Socrates, as you are you know nothing. If this is true how can you balance principles and pragmatism if you don't know the higher value of principles?
This is a misreading. The balance I referred to is an individual's, not a society's. In the short term it's true that "not all boats can be lifted", be it economically or cognitively, but there is broad (if not universal) progress over the long term.

Individuals, of course, can achieve balanced views and exercise good judgement, and a person does not necessarily need the ancient laws of Bronze Age Arabs to achieve balance, rather, they will ideally jettison such baggage and observe situations as clearly and objectively as possible. This most certainly allows for intuition, but recognises intuition's fallibilities. If intuition was reliable no one would have bothered with the scientific method.

This "know nothing" business is catchy hyperbole but factually incorrect. We all most certainly know many things. That our knowledge is just a drop in the ocean is of no concern - the universe is large so tiny, short-lived, mobile, watery dimples on the surface of the Earth cannot be expected to understand broader reality.

The "higher values" are clear enough to anyone paying attention. Ultimately wisdom is the goal - a balancing of love and strategy. Again, I see the Abrahamic gods as antithetical to wisdom, handing down simplistic rules that cannot be questioned and thus end up infantilising minds in its thrall.

Nick_A
Posts: 3804
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: Principles vs Pragmatism

Post by Nick_A » Tue Feb 19, 2019 2:02 am

Greta
Individuals, of course, can achieve balanced views and exercise good judgement, and a person does not necessarily need the ancient laws of Bronze Age Arabs to achieve balance, rather, they will ideally jettison such baggage and observe situations as clearly and objectively as possible. This most certainly allows for intuition, but recognises intuition's fallibilities. If intuition was reliable no one would have bothered with the scientific method.
Intuition reveals the value of conscious recognition of the big picture or universal purpose and becomes the domain of a human perspective connecting above and below. Intuition reveals the value of principles. In contrast science reveals the mechanics and details of materiality increasing pragmatic possibilities. The faculty of objective conscience is opened through the emotional depth of intuition not science.
This "know nothing" business is catchy hyperbole but factually incorrect. We all most certainly know many things. That our knowledge is just a drop in the ocean is of no concern - the universe is large so tiny, short-lived, mobile, watery dimples on the surface of the Earth cannot be expected to understand broader reality.
You know details but not the forms from which they arise. What is objective justice? If you don’t know and are limited to subjective conceptions of justice, then like Socrates, you know nothing.

You define human progress as increased awareness of more facts and their relationships. I define human progress by the quality of objective emotional awareness connecting above and below. Where factual awareness has increased, emotional awareness and the awareness of objective values has remained the same. In fact a sound argument could be made that as scientific factual awareness has increased, emotional awareness leading to the inner perception of objective values has decreased. A sure sign of catastrophe not many will survive. The emotional quality required to support recognition of the value of principles will perish in favor of increased demands for pragmatic satisfaction. We cannot survive living with this imbalance.
The "higher values" are clear enough to anyone paying attention. Ultimately wisdom is the goal - a balancing of love and strategy. Again, I see the Abrahamic gods as antithetical to wisdom, handing down simplistic rules that cannot be questioned and thus end up infantilising minds in its thrall.
What is hope as a higher value and how does it compare to hope as a lower value? Why isn’t the distinction clear? It has to be for a person to be considered wise.

Logik
Posts: 4048
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:48 pm

Re: Principles vs Pragmatism

Post by Logik » Tue Feb 19, 2019 8:46 am

Nick_A wrote:
Tue Feb 19, 2019 2:02 am
What is hope as a higher value and how does it compare to hope as a lower value? Why isn’t the distinction clear? It has to be for a person to be considered wise.
Simply because a person can be considered wise-but-immoral vs wise-and-moral is why philosophical discussion needs to focus on human (NOT individual) values first and foremost.

Do you choose to use your wisdom for good?

User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 11735
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: Principles vs Pragmatism

Post by Arising_uk » Tue Feb 19, 2019 11:49 am

Nick_A wrote:Then why are so many crossing the border illegally. ...
Who are you talking about now?

This 'caravan' you talk about is in a camp on the other side whilst they apply for entry.
They don’t know the laws or anything about American values. ...
They don't have America TV or films where they come from, lucky them.
They have been told by those seeking to overload the system to just come on over. ...
You Yanks and your conspiracy theories, I'm always amazed how fearful the Yank is but in reality its just a reflection of your need to have an enemy all the time as you have no common culture to speak of.
No one cares how the young girls are being raped as part of the caravan. ...
Be fair, no-one cares about the girls being raped in your own country so why should they.
They are unimportant. Rump is rump. All that is important is overloading the system as recommended in the Cloward–Piven strategy.
Make your mind up, either they are illegals who can't claim from your welfare system(what there is of it) and have to find work to survive or they are legal and by and large most immigrants work in the country they arrive in as they are grateful for the chance.
Your trouble is that you don’t know what a Christian is. ...
But you do eh! Nick.
You attack a word but have no conception of its meaning. ...
You are right I'm just a Samaritan who loves his neighbour and helps his brother in distress, given you claim to be a Christian I can see how not like a Christian I am.
My fellow citizens live in a secular society whose God they are motivated by has become the Great Beast. ...
You do realise that a society is made up of its citizens don't you? So what you are claiming is that your fellow citizens are not Christians. I guess this is why you wish to repeal your first amendment so that you can use the state to impose your vision of 'Christianity' upon others but luckily for them your founding fathers knew about such as you and took steps to ensure you can't by making the state a secular institution.
If you want to call them heathens then that is what they are for you. ...
Nah! I think them all godbothering loons just like you.
You don’t value ideas. You only value those who express them. If you like the person expressing ideas then you support their ideas. If you have been indoctrinated to dislike a person, you will dislike their ideas. You have become a normal progressive. ...
LMFAO! This from the person who continually quotes others. Unlike you Nick I've read Philosophy and as such have had to read many ideas that conflict with mine but have still had to examine the pros and cons of them. As such I've been in agreement with you about the need for the return to a full Arts, Science and Humanities education but in my case it would be for all, a la Plato, unlike your selective approach to education provision. Although I do differ from you as I won't be punting a singular religious metaphysic.
No, I am a svoloch for progressives. ...
No, no, Nick, with the belief of the 'Prince of Darkness' as the ruler of this world you are a Gnostic and as such a HERETIC.
It’s easy. All you have to do is crash the border get a court date to appear in ten years and you are in. It is so simple it happens every day. ...
Tell you what Nick, put your money where your mouth is. Give up your American nationality, move a few thousand miles away with very little money and try to get back in.
America was great when it remembered it is a country built on ideas furthering freedom rather than a secularized culture. Ideals are necessary to keep ideas alive under the pressure from those who seek to destroy them. Secularism has killed the ideas so the ideals must fall leading to the transformation of America into a form of statist slavery. ...
What year was this?
From Jacob Needlemn’s book: The American Soul: ...
:lol: Given what you said to me above irony is definitely not an American trait.
Yes a secularized culture must turn to drugs for meaning. ...
Must it? Do you consider wine a drug?
No, America was founded on the ideal of freedom. Freedom is not a pragmatic interest. It is an ideal the value of which must be contemplated, supported, and defended. ...
:lol: The America you talk about was founded upon the pragmatic mercantile interest of not paying taxes.
But since you don’t know what Christianity is, its purpose and how its values further a free society, you are only doing what Dostoyevsky described as “pouring from the empty into the void.”
I know, I know, as a Samaritan all I do is love my neighbour and help my brother in distress, abominable behaviour from your Christian point of view.

Nick_A
Posts: 3804
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: Principles vs Pragmatism

Post by Nick_A » Tue Feb 19, 2019 9:22 pm

Arising
Nick_A wrote:Then why are so many crossing the border illegally. ...

Who are you talking about now?

This 'caravan' you talk about is in a camp on the other side whilst they apply for entry.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/20 ... e-day-dhs/
The government snared more than 3,000 immigrants who illegally attempting to cross into the U.S. in just one day last week, the Trump administration’s top border official told Congress on Tuesday, saying the situation qualifies as a full-blown “crisis.”
Kevin K. McAleenan, commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, said the majority were traveling as families and another 350 were children traveling without parents.
Between those and the children who came as part of families, that means more than 1,100 juveniles caught that day were forced to make a treacherous journey he said that often involves sexual abuse and other trauma.
Anyone supporting this invasion should be ashamed of themselves
Be fair, no-one cares about the girls being raped in your own country so why should they.
Some do. They are the ones remaining with religious and moral values who have respect for life. Those who have lost this love and respect in the cause of fear, greed, and hate of course are eager to cash in on young rump.
Make your mind up, either they are illegals who can't claim from your welfare system(what there is of it) and have to find work to survive or they are legal and by and large most immigrants work in the country they arrive in as they are grateful for the chance.
Illegal aliens by definition are illegal. Of course they are attracted to a land in which the benefits of freedom are made possible. But if they have no interests in the ideals which have made freedom possible, they cannot be expected to support them.

You are one of these feelgooders who want to kill the goose which lays the golden eggs. It never dawns on you what happens after the goose is ded and the eggs are gone.
Your trouble is that you don’t know what a Christian is. ...

But you do eh! Nick.
It doesn’t matter if I understand.

You attack a word but have no conception of its meaning. ...
You are right I'm just a Samaritan who loves his neighbour and helps his brother in distress, given you claim to be a Christian I can see how not like a Christian I am.
You don’t know what it means to love your neighbor. You believe it is the same as helping your neighbor. Of course it may be a good thing to do but isn’t the definition of a Christian or christian love.
You do realise that a society is made up of its citizens don't you? So what you are claiming is that your fellow citizens are not Christians. I guess this is why you wish to repeal your first amendment so that you can use the state to impose your vision of 'Christianity' upon others but luckily for them your founding fathers knew about such as you and took steps to ensure you can't by making the state a secular institution.
It is the secular progressives who violently prevent conservatives from speaking at universities. You simply have no appreciation for what it means to give to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s and what is lost from this PC ignorance.
LMFAO! This from the person who continually quotes others. Unlike you Nick I've read Philosophy and as such have had to read many ideas that conflict with mine but have still had to examine the pros and cons of them. As such I've been in agreement with you about the need for the return to a full Arts, Science and Humanities education but in my case it would be for all, a la Plato, unlike your selective approach to education provision. Although I do differ from you as I won't be punting a singular religious metaphysic.
You remind me of the ones who have learned a lttle bit of everything resulting in a lot of nothing. This is why you will struggle against the one aspect of learning which leads to the experience of objective meaning. Without this attribute a person remains a slave of indoctrination.
No, no, Nick, with the belief of the 'Prince of Darkness' as the ruler of this world you are a Gnostic and as such a HERETIC.
The Prince of Darkness is a man made mindset; a collective result of the fallen human condition. We do create our own demons and society as a whole follows them blindly. It is the nature of the Beast.
Must it? Do you consider wine a drug?
Yes but like any drug a person must know how to accept it. It requires the ability for conscious moderation which only a few want or have. At one time the purpose of a toast was to increase the power to wish. Now it can easily lead to self destruction
I know, I know, as a Samaritan all I do is love my neighbour and help my brother in distress, abominable behaviour from your Christian point of few.
This is all well and good but if you don’t know what a Christian is, why attack what you don’t understand? You have some weird idea of what a Christian is and fight against that with the same prejudice racists use against the races. I know it is the natural result of PC education but must people be so gullible?

You’ve inspired me to begin a thread: “What is a Christian” using Kierkegaards assertion of a distinction between Christianity and Christendom. Kierkegard asserts that Christianity has to be put back into man made Christendom raising the the obvious question of what the difference is.

User avatar
Greta
Posts: 4391
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:10 am

Re: Principles vs Pragmatism

Post by Greta » Tue Feb 19, 2019 10:45 pm

Nick_A wrote:
Tue Feb 19, 2019 2:02 am
Greta
Individuals, of course, can achieve balanced views and exercise good judgement, and a person does not necessarily need the ancient laws of Bronze Age Arabs to achieve balance, rather, they will ideally jettison such baggage and observe situations as clearly and objectively as possible. This most certainly allows for intuition, but recognises intuition's fallibilities. If intuition was reliable no one would have bothered with the scientific method.
Intuition reveals the value of conscious recognition of the big picture or universal purpose and becomes the domain of a human perspective connecting above and below. Intuition reveals the value of principles. In contrast science reveals the mechanics and details of materiality increasing pragmatic possibilities. The faculty of objective conscience is opened through the emotional depth of intuition not science.
You have not addressed the fact that intuitions are unreliable and often wrong. That is exactly why the scientific method came about - to break deadlocks between competing people's intuitions and to expose those claiming false intuitions for gain and influence.

What would you propose in lieu of science? A return to theism's "might is right, don't argue"?

Nick_A wrote:
Tue Feb 19, 2019 2:02 am
This "know nothing" business is catchy hyperbole but factually incorrect. We all most certainly know many things. That our knowledge is just a drop in the ocean is of no concern - the universe is large so tiny, short-lived, mobile, watery dimples on the surface of the Earth cannot be expected to understand broader reality.
You know details but not the forms from which they arise. What is objective justice? If you don’t know and are limited to subjective conceptions of justice, then like Socrates, you know nothing.
Stop being hyperbolic. What is objective justice? Obviously justice meted out without bias. Humans do their best but most of us understand human fallibility and that nothing is perfect in this life. The Easterners will refer to karma, cause and affect.

"Forms" looks like a nod towards Plato. You won't be aware of this but I've long been fine with the idea of forms being set by the initial states into which physical things flow (and the related concept of personality archetypes as per Jung - the ideas broadly but not all of the details). The details of the forms, both Plato's and Jung's are, if we are being realistic, just educated guesses. Like the rest of us, they knew something, just not everything.

Re: your post generally. You think too small, always in anthropomorphic terms. We are part of, and subject to, much larger non-human systems. While our current large colonies now have a broadly transformative effect on the Earth's surface, this situation will change too.

Nick_A wrote:
Tue Feb 19, 2019 2:02 am
You define human progress as increased awareness of more facts and their relationships. I define human progress by the quality of objective emotional awareness connecting above and below. Where factual awareness has increased, emotional awareness and the awareness of objective values has remained the same. In fact a sound argument could be made that as scientific factual awareness has increased, emotional awareness leading to the inner perception of objective values has decreased. A sure sign of catastrophe not many will survive. The emotional quality required to support recognition of the value of principles will perish in favor of increased demands for pragmatic satisfaction. We cannot survive living with this imbalance.
The issue again is you are thinking small. Human progress is a continuing fact. Russia, China and India ensure that there will be no retreat into romantic evangelism lead by the US, as hoped by you Pentacostals. The reality is a group of superpowers playing hardball over the reducing bounty of nature. If the US gets lost in an Abrahamic dream world they will continue to be outmanoeuvred and railroaded by the others.

Many are fooled by the broad impressions of media. Humans are not getting more dull, amoral or stupid. Rather, they are separating into those who are progressing in most areas while the larger proportion is being left behind, falling into despair and vapidity. This is what the system wants - dumb obedient people. As a musician you can see the greatly reduced harmonic complexity, physical adroitness required and literacy of modern pop music as compared with the past.

Yet, statistical record achievements are being surpassed in every area - tech, productivity, sport, the arts. Heck, there are damn three year-olds on YouTube doing things that this musician of many decades can't manage :lol: That's evolution via artificial selection in action. One more old fart outclassed by a brilliant next generation - by only in part. Most will just be drones - The Proles. At this stage most people are still smart (many "boats have been lifted"), with only a smallish dumb rump. Alas, I think the ranks of stupid (eg. flat Earth, young Earth creationism, unquestioning belief in popular media) will grow as public education continues to be rationalised. I once expected broad progression of humanity, now I see an increasing split between two major classes.

Basically, we are breeding small stables of rapidly advancing übermeschen and large fields of drones who are subject to them. George Carlin's famous education rant describes the situation more clearly and succinctly than any else I've seen: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILQepXUhJ98. If much of the population are under-informed then this has serious implications for democracy, which has been looking increasingly imperilled of late.

The seeking of personal balance, however, is (or can be) entirely unrelated to any of this. That's just a matter of taking time out to be still and looking within - anyone can do it. In that there is no class divide - all people are capable of goodness (barring the very most damaged).

Nick_A wrote:
Tue Feb 19, 2019 2:02 am
The "higher values" are clear enough to anyone paying attention. Ultimately wisdom is the goal - a balancing of love and strategy. Again, I see the Abrahamic gods as antithetical to wisdom, handing down simplistic rules that cannot be questioned and thus end up infantilising minds in its thrall.
What is hope as a higher value and how does it compare to hope as a lower value? Why isn’t the distinction clear? It has to be for a person to be considered wise.
What's hope got to do with it? I just think it's better yo use our judgement today than to rely unbendingly on the guesswork of 2,000 year-old Abrahamic notions. It's been tried before, eg. the Dark Ages, the Inquisition. Dominant theism was a disaster, even worse than today's confused and overpopulated mayhem.

I don't see any "solutions" to the world's problems. What I see is humans reaching a point where Mother Nature royally whoops our behinds. I am guessing that the brutalisation of that process will have some chastening effects on the minds of those who escape. The lessons should last at least a generation or two before they are largely forgotten and short-sighted dodginess returns :lol:

Yet, despite all this, while the lessons of the past keep being largely forgotten, each time I think they are slightly less forgotten. For instance, if a western nation starts sliding towards autocracy and fascism, today people can counter the drift with "Remember Hitler", a lesson not available for Germans in the 1930s. Ditto the nuclear attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki - they stand as fading lessons that have somewhat tempered subsequent nuclear threats ("somewhat tempered" isn't much, but better than nothing).

The point I'm labouring over here is that global cultural change is very slow and some backwards steps are inevitable, either locally or globally. To the perspective of a human lifespan, it might look as if things are going backwards or that nothing ever changes, but that is a perspective effect. Remember, only half a billion years ago the greatest complexity and highest intelligence on the planet (aside from the planet in total itself) were found in trilobites.

There are many millions of years yet to run in this race. Humanity is simply another step on the road to an unknown destination. That is why it's so important to maintain a sense of humour - we are very little and there's an awful lot we don't know and will never know.

User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 11735
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: Principles vs Pragmatism

Post by Arising_uk » Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:40 am

Nick_A wrote:... Anyone supporting this invasion should be ashamed of themselves
Your country is 40 times bigger than mine and by equivalent population versus space my country should have about 6 to 7 million in it but we have 60 million. You could absorb vast numbers with no impact if you wished. You could make it a proviso that they have to work the land in the vast derelict areas of your country thereby making an attempt to regenerate your country and make it great again. Personally I'm never amazed at the hypocrisy of those that have benefited of being from immigrants denying that chance to others.
Some do. They are the ones remaining with religious and moral values who have respect for life. Those who have lost this love and respect in the cause of fear, greed, and hate of course are eager to cash in on young rump. ...
Do you do anything about it personally Nick_A? Are you involved in rape crisis centres, do you lobby your politicians to do something about it? Or are you just another armchair Christian using such things to to punt your own agenda?
Illegal aliens by definition are illegal. Of course they are attracted to a land in which the benefits of freedom are made possible. But if they have no interests in the ideals which have made freedom possible, they cannot be expected to support them. ...
How do you know they have no interest in such things? I'm pretty much betting they don't want to pay their taxes just like your founders.
You are one of these feelgooders who want to kill the goose which lays the golden eggs. It never dawns on you what happens after the goose is ded and the eggs are gone. ...
What are you babbling about? Your country was improved immeasurably by immigrants.
It doesn’t matter if I understand.

You attack a word but have no conception of its meaning. ...
Sure I do Nick, it just differs from yours.
You don’t know what it means to love your neighbor. You believe it is the same as helping your neighbor. Of course it may be a good thing to do but isn’t the definition of a Christian or christian love. ...
You mean it isn't your definition, yours is of the born-again godbotherer who wishes to 'save' his neighbour from 'sin' and of not believing in your version of Christianity, mine is of Christ's in showing mercy to one's injured fellows. In all your kissing lies I've never heard you mention Love, why is that Nick?
It is the secular progressives who violently prevent conservatives from speaking at universities. You simply have no appreciation for what it means to give to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s and what is lost from this PC ignorance. ...
Er!? If you're giving what is due to Caesar and you equate him with the Great Beast then you should be supporting the opposition to the far-right speaking to our youth. Still, having said that what you are actually looking at is the logical consequence of the American ideal of the right to individual happiness and as such your people really hate hearing anything that makes them unhappy.
You remind me of the ones who have learned a lttle bit of everything resulting in a lot of nothing. This is why you will struggle against the one aspect of learning which leads to the experience of objective meaning. Without this attribute a person remains a slave of indoctrination. ...
And you are just another common or garden born-again godbotherer with the need to proselytise.
The Prince of Darkness is a man made mindset; a collective result of the fallen human condition. We do create our own demons and society as a whole follows them blindly. It is the nature of the Beast. ...
Wow! What a slippery kissing liar you are Nick, :lol:
Yes but like any drug a person must know how to accept it. It requires the ability for conscious moderation which only a few want or have. At one time the purpose of a toast was to increase the power to wish. Now it can easily lead to self destruction
For sure.
This is all well and good but if you don’t know what a Christian is, why attack what you don’t understand? You have some weird idea of what a Christian is and fight against that with the same prejudice racists use against the races. I know it is the natural result of PC education but must people be so gullible? ...
Where have I attacked Christians? I've just pointed out that you wish to repeal an amendment that your founding fathers put in place so that religious freedom can be ensured, I've also pointed out that you conspicuously fail to show any of the teachings or ethics of Christ. Oh! And the greatest sin, that you've not actually read the philosophers you quote.
You’ve inspired me to begin a thread: “What is a Christian” using Kierkegaards assertion of a distinction between Christianity and Christendom. Kierkegard asserts that Christianity has to be put back into man made Christendom raising the the obvious question of what the difference is.
I think he just wanted Christians like you to actually start behaving as Jesus wanted and not as the Romans, et al wanted.

Nick_A
Posts: 3804
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: Principles vs Pragmatism

Post by Nick_A » Wed Feb 20, 2019 4:23 am

Greta
You have not addressed the fact that intuitions are unreliable and often wrong. That is exactly why the scientific method came about - to break deadlocks between competing people's intuitions and to expose those claiming false intuitions for gain and influence.

What would you propose in lieu of science? A return to theism's "might is right, don't argue"?
True intuition and revelation are remembered. They are soul knowledge so by definition are pure and can be remembered. You are referring to altered states of consciousness, flights of fantasy, and psychological interpretations by the lower parts of our collective human organism.

Science reveals and compares facts. This is a desirable human ability. However the scientific method cannot reveal objective meaning. It is limited to the how of the visible reality but closed to the why and appreciation of objective value.
Stop being hyperbolic. What is objective justice? Obviously justice meted out without bias. Humans do their best but most of us understand human fallibility and that nothing is perfect in this life. The Easterners will refer to karma, cause and affect.
Objective justice is what is taking place in the absence of human beings. If the earth were destroyed tomorrow objective justice would still be taking place within our universe.

Karma as you’ve suggested is an example of objective justice. But what it is and why this objective measure of quality takes place in our universe requires a quality of knowledge only remembered through intuition.
"Forms" looks like a nod towards Plato. You won't be aware of this but I've long been fine with the idea of forms being set by the initial states into which physical things flow (and the related concept of personality archetypes as per Jung - the ideas broadly but not all of the details). The details of the forms, both Plato's and Jung's are, if we are being realistic, just educated guesses. Like the rest of us, they knew something, just not everything.
Seekers of truth by definition are opposed by the majority seeking self justification. A seeker of truth desiring to pursue it intellectually needs a hypothesis which can be verified through efforts at self knowledge. As opposed to the bottom up technique of science the hypothesis which reveals universal meaning and consequently objective human meaning and purpose is top down. It begins with the ineffable ONE as described by Plotinus or the ineffable GOOD described by Plato. They are the source of meaning.

Before a guardian in Plato’s Republic could become a philosopher king they would have proven themselves worthy be becoming free of the normal attachments that deny the experience of truth and how it relates to the GOOD. In modern progressive society attachments to PC definitions of good rule the day so assure the search for meaning can only be a realistic need for a small minority willing to sacrifice their indoctrinated emotional attachments.
Re: your post generally. You think too small, always in anthropomorphic terms. We are part of, and subject to, much larger non-human systems. While our current large colonies now have a broadly transformative effect on the Earth's surface, this situation will change too.
As a contented resident of Plato’s cave you are by definition closed to the larger systems taking place above Plato’s divided line producing the lawful phenomena below the line. Conscious awareness of the vertical difference is the first step to freedom from the pyschological prison of cave life.
The issue again is you are thinking small. Human progress is a continuing fact. Russia, China and India ensure that there will be no retreat into romantic evangelism lead by the US, as hoped by you Pentacostals. The reality is a group of superpowers playing hardball over the reducing bounty of nature. If the US gets lost in an Abrahamic dream world they will continue to be outmanoeuvred and railroaded by the others.
You are describing the cyclical happenings of life on earth. Seekers of truth seek to awaken to what is an obvious absurdity for conscious beings. What is ptogress when humanity turns in circles?
Many are fooled by the broad impressions of media. Humans are not getting more dull, amoral or stupid. Rather, they are separating into those who are progressing in most areas while the larger proportion is being left behind, falling into despair and vapidity. This is what the system wants - dumb obedient people. As a musician you can see the greatly reduced harmonic complexity, physical adroitness required and literacy of modern pop music as compared with the past.
Objective human intelligence is not defined by complexity but rather by sensitivity to the source. Intelligence as it relates to music is experiential recognition of the vibratory relationship between notes in an octave. Intelligence also includes sensitivity to the vibration of a note.

Music has been dulled in the west. There are those in the East who can listen to the quarter tones in music provided by the musician. In modern times we are lucky to find those who can distinguish semi tones. This is a result of scattered complexity and volume attractive for cave life. You call it intelligence and I call it the loss of the ability to experience what music is capable of transmitting for the seeker of truth.
Yet, statistical record achievements are being surpassed in every area - tech, productivity, sport, the arts. Heck, there are damn three year-olds on YouTube doing things that this musician of many decades can't manage That's evolution via artificial selection in action. One more old fart outclassed by a brilliant next generation - by only in part. Most will just be drones - The Proles. At this stage most people are still smart (many "boats have been lifted"), with only a smallish dumb rump. Alas, I think the ranks of stupid (eg. flat Earth, young Earth creationism, unquestioning belief in popular media) will grow as public education continues to be rationalised. I once expected broad progression of humanity, now I see an increasing split between two major classes.
Technique is one thing and meaning is another. AI improves technique but what of meaning? Scott Hughes for example made the mistake of offering a book called the Fourth Age to discuss. But the site and its mods have eliminated all those who could question the value of AI from an esoteric perspective so there is no way to question AI. Philosophy has been eliminated from philosophy sites dominated by secularism and are content to remain that way.. This has become the norm in secular institutions. Secularism must struggle to eliminate the vertical esoteric awareness of human being that can appreciate the value of a person consciously uniting above and below in their psych and allowing the third dimension of thought to provide its value from a non-corrupted emotional awareness.
Basically, we are breeding small stables of rapidly advancing übermeschen and large fields of drones who are subject to them. George Carlin's famous education rant describes the situation more clearly and succinctly than any else I've seen: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILQepXUhJ98. If much of the population are under-informed then this has serious implications for democracy, which has been looking increasingly imperilled of late.
You are describing how a cancer reproduces and finally kills the host in accordance with how it has been programmed by nature.

The seeking of personal balance, however, is (or can be) entirely unrelated to any of this. That's just a matter of taking time out to be still and looking within - anyone can do it. In that there is no class divide - all people are capable of goodness (barring the very most damaged).

Suppose Suzy Shmidlap reads three books on meditation and decides to save the world by preaching meditation. Of course without instruction all that will happen will be the experience of imagination. People are capable of being still but who becomes capable of it without falling into self justifying imagination?

Your trouble is you do not respect how the human condition exists in you and are powerless to confront it, to consciously witness it without interpretation. It is unpleasant but essential for the seeker of truth.
What's hope got to do with it? I just think it's better yo use our judgement today than to rely unbendingly on the guesswork of 2,000 year-old Abrahamic notions. It's been tried before, eg. the Dark Ages, the Inquisition. Dominant theism was a disaster, even worse than today's confused and overpopulated mayhem.

I don't see any "solutions" to the world's problems. What I see is humans reaching a point where Mother Nature royally whoops our behinds. I am guessing that the brutalisation of that process will have some chastening effects on the minds of those who escape. The lessons should last at least a generation or two before they are largely forgotten and short-sighted dodginess returns
Life on earth moves in mechanical cycles as explained in Ecclesiastes 3. As long as we remain as we ARE, regardless of what we think we are doing, all will resolve in what preserves the cycle. It is nature’s way
The point I'm labouring over here is that global cultural change is very slow and some backwards steps are inevitable, either locally or globally. To the perspective of a human lifespan, it might look as if things are going backwards or that nothing ever changes, but that is a perspective effect. Remember, only half a billion years ago the greatest complexity and highest intelligence on the planet (aside from the planet in total itself) were found in trilobites.
The global culture will reach its potential in Plato's cave when the God of the Great Beast becomes lord. You seem to think that the Great Beast is the ultimate evolution for humanity. I maintain that as an absurd creation it must fall and how it falls will not be a pretty picture.
There are many millions of years yet to run in this race. Humanity is simply another step on the road to an unknown destination. That is why it's so important to maintain a sense of humour - we are very little and there's an awful lot we don't know and will never know.
A person falling off of a roof is making progress toward the ground but the question is if it is desired progress.

Humor and willingness to laugh at ourselves is a sure sign of the beginning of understanding. Knowing what to take seriously is real wisdom but who has it in these times where ad homs rule the day and ridiculing others seems far more satisfying in the cause of self justification?

Understanding the relationship between principles and pragmatism is real wisdom but again who is capable of it from an objective rather than a subjective perspective?

Nick_A
Posts: 3804
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: Principles vs Pragmatism

Post by Nick_A » Wed Feb 20, 2019 9:27 pm

Arising

You don’t value freedom. You seek to sacrifice the principles essential to sustain liberty for the sake of establishing statist slvery leading to tyranny. It is the modern way and the need for the God of the Great Beast to replace the source of our existence.

But for the sake of those still wondering what the fuss is about and why we should bother with principles, consider these quotes from America’s founding fathers. You may frown on them but others will wonder how and why such understanding has been lost so quickly in so many

https://www.insearchofliberty.com/found ... tionalism/

The defense of freedom requires recognition of the principles supporting it. Principles depend on voluntary obligations while rights only depend on the intensity of the demand and political connections. Simone Weil understood the relationship of rights to obligations. She is virtually alone in these times of the accelerated demand for rights but it is at least partial compensation if we can understand why liberty without the moral influence is impossible. She wrote:
“The notion of obligations comes before that of rights, which is subordinate and relative to the former. A right is not effectual by itself, but only in relation to the obligation to which it corresponds, the effective exercise of a right springing not from the individual who possesses it, but from other men who consider themselves as being under a certain obligation towards him. Recognition of an obligation makes it effectual. An obligation which goes unrecognized by anybody loses none of the full force of its existence. A right which goes unrecognized by anybody is not worth very much.

It makes nonsense to say that men have, on the one hand, rights, and on the other hand, obligations. Such words only express differences in point of view. The actual relationship between the two is as between object and subject. A man, considered in isolation, only has duties, amongst which are certain duties towards himself. A man left alone in the universe would have no rights whatever, but he would have obligations.”

― Simone Weil, The Need for Roots: Prelude to a Declaration of Duties towards Mankind
The golden goose providing the balance between rights and obligations has been killed. Its eggs are being eaten. When they are gone we will learn what we have lost and shudder.

User avatar
Greta
Posts: 4391
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:10 am

Re: Principles vs Pragmatism

Post by Greta » Thu Feb 21, 2019 6:53 am

Nick_A wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 4:23 am
Greta
You have not addressed the fact that intuitions are unreliable and often wrong. That is exactly why the scientific method came about - to break deadlocks between competing people's intuitions and to expose those claiming false intuitions for gain and influence.

What would you propose in lieu of science? A return to theism's "might is right, don't argue"?
True intuition and revelation are remembered.
As are true Scotsmen, but memory is notoriously unreliable. Why should I believe you when you claim to have a "true memory" that others don't have? Why are your memories more true than those of others? How did you come to be special?
Nick_A wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 4:23 am
They are soul knowledge so by definition are pure and can be remembered.
"Soul knowledge". I can play a fair few Aretha Franklin, Stevie Wonder and Marvin Gaye songs as one needs to at times when playing weddings, parties and anything.

Intuition might be soul knowledge or it might be a general reflection of one's peccadilloes. There is no way of knowing. If I am making public policy, why should I choose you and your "soul knowledge" over Seeda Crystal and her "soul knowledge" or Marvin Gaya's soul knowledge or Mustafa's soul knowledge or the soul knowledge of Wun Mo Vu?
Nick_A wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 4:23 am
However the scientific method cannot reveal objective meaning. It is limited to the how of the visible reality but closed to the why and appreciation of objective value.
Indeed, and neither can philosophy cook the dinner. Science started to test truth claims. So many people believed that they were inspired by God but said different things. The only answer was to test. However, all of the claims were found to be lacking in basis of fact. Note that this is not about meaning - the how and not the why.

Science provides the information so you can decide on these and other matters. Those who ignore that information are likely to waste a lot of time exploring philosophical cul-de-sacs.

Nick_A wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 4:23 am
"Forms" looks like a nod towards Plato. You won't be aware of this but I've long been fine with the idea of forms being set by the initial states into which physical things flow (and the related concept of personality archetypes as per Jung - the ideas broadly but not all of the details). The details of the forms, both Plato's and Jung's are, if we are being realistic, just educated guesses. Like the rest of us, they knew something, just not everything.
Seekers of truth by definition are opposed by the majority seeking self justification. A seeker of truth desiring to pursue it intellectually needs a hypothesis which can be verified through efforts at self knowledge. As opposed to the bottom up technique of science the hypothesis which reveals universal meaning and consequently objective human meaning and purpose is top down. It begins with the ineffable ONE as described by Plotinus or the ineffable GOOD described by Plato. They are the source of meaning.

Before a guardian in Plato’s Republic could become a philosopher king they would have proven themselves worthy be becoming free of the normal attachments that deny the experience of truth and how it relates to the GOOD. In modern progressive society attachments to PC definitions of good rule the day so assure the search for meaning can only be a realistic need for a small minority willing to sacrifice their indoctrinated emotional attachments.
A seeker of truth who starts with a top down hypothesis and never questions it is not seeking truth but self justification. You have to question your own ideas, Nick, if you really want to get closer to truth. You have to - that's a non negotiable, immutable rule of human nature.

I think we all have our own ideas about what is good and yours is not definitive. My idea of the good is if whatever is happening her on Earth manages to continue to story of evolution safely on other worlds. Otherwise, all moral gains are lost when the Earth's surface is rendered uninhabitable in the future.

I think that would be preferable to seeding other worlds with microbes to start the whole process again. The journey from insensate rocks to sensitive time-sensing humans so far has been marked by the incredible cruelties of a system. It's a system requires everyone to eat everyone else in a process of constant painful eversion, leading to more sophisticated forms. I think the next major milestone in this journey will be the removal of the need to cause harm to live and, thus, no need to suffer. Where things go from there is anyone's guess; I have no idea other than the long term need for any colonies, civilisations or major gestalt entities to keep progressing to avoid cosmic cataclysms (which are inevitable over time) and, in doing so, should become ever more empowered.

I am assuming a moral progression along the way, because that's what's been observed in the course of human history. It's subtle but, for instance, most here would find the idea of public executions barbaric and physically repugnant. Once people would bring their kids along. I understand the impatience for moral progress, but it's like waiting for the Titanic to do a U-turn. Slow going.

Nick_A wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 4:23 am
Re: your post generally. You think too small, always in anthropomorphic terms. We are part of, and subject to, much larger non-human systems. While our current large colonies now have a broadly transformative effect on the Earth's surface, this situation will change too.

The issue again is you are thinking small. Human progress is a continuing fact. Russia, China and India ensure that there will be no retreat into romantic evangelism lead by the US, as hoped by you Pentacostals. The reality is a group of superpowers playing hardball over the reducing bounty of nature. If the US gets lost in an Abrahamic dream world they will continue to be outmanoeuvred and railroaded by the others.
You are describing the cyclical happenings of life on earth. Seekers of truth seek to awaken to what is an obvious absurdity for conscious beings. What is ptogress when humanity turns in circles?
It's not a circle, Nicholas, but a vortex. A vortex moves from A to B however, as above, it's very slow. Thus, for those who only think in terms of human life spans, we appear to be simply moving in circles.
Nick_A wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 4:23 am
Many are fooled by the broad impressions of media. Humans are not getting more dull, amoral or stupid. Rather, they are separating into those who are progressing in most areas while the larger proportion is being left behind, falling into despair and vapidity. This is what the system wants - dumb obedient people. As a musician you can see the greatly reduced harmonic complexity, physical adroitness required and literacy of modern pop music as compared with the past.
Objective human intelligence is not defined by complexity but rather by sensitivity to the source. Intelligence as it relates to music is experiential recognition of the vibratory relationship between notes in an octave. Intelligence also includes sensitivity to the vibration of a note.

Music has been dulled in the west. There are those in the East who can listen to the quarter tones in music provided by the musician. In modern times we are lucky to find those who can distinguish semi tones. This is a result of scattered complexity and volume attractive for cave life. You call it intelligence and I call it the loss of the ability to experience what music is capable of transmitting for the seeker of truth.
You place far too much value on quarter tones. It's nothing special, just another musical system. Whatever, any musician who's ever bent or slurred a note is sensitive to quarter tones.

The issue to a fair extent is that music reflects society at large. If society is loud and crowded and competitive when it comes to volume, then you will end up with loud, over-compressed music. This is the new world. The "Proles" will be more likely to passively accept such cheapened musics while those of "The Party" will actively seek good music online. Good music, including music from the past, is actually more plentiful and available than it's ever been - just not via commercial radio or TV. Note that commercial radio and TV has always been full of crap. Just that, in the past one might uncover some gems, and today the music industry has efficiently filtered quality (and its commercial risks) from the playlists.

There's not much wrong with nations in the Anglosphere that a good thousand years of culture (or serious acknowledgement of indigenous culture) wouldn't fix. despite some very good qualities, we do live in relatively vapid, immature cultures with roots about as deep as a saucer compared with those of Africa, Europe, Asia and South America.
Nick_A wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 4:23 am
Basically, we are breeding small stables of rapidly advancing übermeschen and large fields of drones who are subject to them. George Carlin's famous education rant describes the situation more clearly and succinctly than any else I've seen: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILQepXUhJ98. If much of the population are under-informed then this has serious implications for democracy, which has been looking increasingly imperilled of late.
You are describing how a cancer reproduces and finally kills the host in accordance with how it has been programmed by nature.
Not at all. I am describing how colonial organisms spread.

This is actually where your old buddy, the Great Beast comes in. At the top people will be ever more technically enhanced and connected, less individualistic, more subject to total controls. They will still be immensely sophisticated in many ways but utterly subject and incapable of independence. This is akin to a eukaryotic cells (the cells of multicellular organisms) and the well-to-do, especially in China and Russia, appear to be on track to begetting descendants who will effectively be cells of their respective "Great Beasts". That will leave the simpler, but more independent, "bacteria" to operate separately. I think it possible that the super rich will largely operate in a separate economy, leaving "the plebs" the scrabble over any crumbs they leave.

Interesting times ahead. However, these Great Beasts have the potential to be as much more sophisticated than us morally as we are more morally advanced than bacteria. I see it as just another fractal layer on complexifying reality.
Nick_A wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 4:23 am
The point I'm labouring over here is that global cultural change is very slow and some backwards steps are inevitable, either locally or globally. To the perspective of a human lifespan, it might look as if things are going backwards or that nothing ever changes, but that is a perspective effect. Remember, only half a billion years ago the greatest complexity and highest intelligence on the planet (aside from the planet in total itself) were found in trilobites.
The global culture will reach its potential in Plato's cave when the God of the Great Beast becomes lord. You seem to think that the Great Beast is the ultimate evolution for humanity. I maintain that as an absurd creation it must fall and how it falls will not be a pretty picture.
I'm just your using your ancient words. I would say that humanity is the future of humans. Humanity en masse is The Great Beast. It doesn't much suit me personally because I've always naturally been a renegade, even when trying to conform, but I can recognise what's going on. It's fine, just nature's continued march of which we have been part.

Nick_A wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 4:23 am
There are many millions of years yet to run in this race. Humanity is simply another step on the road to an unknown destination.
A person falling off of a roof is making progress toward the ground but the question is if it is desired progress.
Cute quip, a person falling off a roof is not making progress. They are falling. Yet parts of society continue progress in all areas, including moral. It's nothing special because the alternative is stagnation, as seen in those societies unable to break away from their ancient theistic roots. They are intellectually eating themselves.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests