Limitations

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 12247
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: Limitations

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

simplicity wrote: Wed Sep 15, 2021 4:04 pm
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed Sep 15, 2021 5:22 am
simplicity wrote: Tue Sep 14, 2021 4:07 pm I'm not sure too many folks out there would disagree that we live in a glutton-ous era...food, drugs and alcohol, sex, money, things of all sorts, but the king of all excess must be...thinking.
I disagree.
There are pros and cons to 'thinking' and so far its pros are progressively outweighing the cons, thus the history of human 'progress' since 200K years ago to the present.
Thinking [just like eating] is necessary for survival, but too much [of anything] leads to dys-equilibrium and dys-function. I don't believe it to be a stretch to consider the current plight of humanity as revealing characteristics of both.

Individual thinking can only create so much difficulty, but group thinking has repeatedly created Hell on Earth.
Nah!

Thinking has a very much higher tolerance limit for Marginal Diminishing Returns or Optimality than eating. The space in the stomach is not effective in comparing to the vast expanse and potential of the thinking-mind.
Its analogy is more like 'breathing' [proper to sophisticated] than to eating.

You may[?] not be aware, the mindfulness meditation [critical as one of the 8-Fold-Path] requires constant refine effective thinking while awake.

Group thinking produce synergy [wasted if this is not tapped] but subject to its pros and cons which must be weighed and balanced [this require thinking as well].
simplicity
Posts: 750
Joined: Thu May 20, 2021 5:23 pm

Re: Limitations

Post by simplicity »

RCSaunders wrote: Thu Sep 16, 2021 2:23 am Since you seem to be implying my thoughts are not my own, as though they were things everyone else thinks, why is it that almost everyone disagrees with my views, as you do. Since there are damn few others who think what I think, who are those one's you think I'm only emulating.
If you step down from your pulpit for a moment, you might discover although you believe you are really different [than "everybody else"], reality suggests that we are all 99.9% the same. It's just the tiniest bit that makes any of us different. I know that kind of blows your "I'm a super-radical thinker" meme out of the water...sorry. How different can any of us really be?

Let me give you an example. I am a physician. I practice "differently" most others in that I truly believe my job is to educate patients and allow them to make their own decisions [after all, doctor = teacher]. Many of my patients over the years have appreciated my approach and have told me how wonderful I am to do this but I have always told these folks that 90% of what I do is controlled by government and corporations so you still must act as your own advocate and do your homework, that is, I can only do so much to help you out. You must take primary responsibility for your own health.
simplicity wrote: Wed Sep 15, 2021 5:56 pm You are really caught up in your own way ...
RCSaunders wrote: Thu Sep 16, 2021 2:23 amWhose way are you caught up in?
Point taken. The difference is that I do not believe we can truly know anything. You seem to believe [like most] that you can know quite a bit.
simplicity wrote: Wed Sep 15, 2021 5:56 pm ... nobody else cares what you think.
RCSaunders wrote: Thu Sep 16, 2021 2:23 amWell, I would have thought so. What difference does make what I think? So it does bewilder me a bit that so many people seem to feel compelled to tell my how wrong I am and try to prove it and ask me all sorts of inane personal questions.

Am I not supposed to discuss my views with those who have so little interest in what I say, they must comment on it? When I see something on a philosophy site that defies all reason and truth, am I not supposed to comment?
Try chatting with people outside a forum like this. Nobody cares [and people here are simply looking to pass the time hoping to find somebody interesting with whom to discuss matters].
simplicity wrote: Wed Sep 15, 2021 5:56 pm We are all here to simply exchange views with other people who enjoy such [not to convince others that we have figured it out]. And believe me [although it's impossible], should "somebody "figure it out," everybody will know in five minutes.
RCSaunders wrote: Thu Sep 16, 2021 2:23 amThat's doubtful! There is hardly a single discovery in history that wasn't resisted, and those making them persecuted and vilified. The last thing most people want is the truth and they will go to almost any length to evade it.

Look how long it took, "everybody," to accept the discoveries of Kepler and Galileo and the persecution Galileo endured. It took twenty years for William Harvey's discovery that blood pumped out from heart, returns to heart to be accepted.

In 1902, Rear-Admiral George Melville, chief engineer of the US Navy, wrote in the North American Review, that attempting to fly was 'absurd'. In 1903, Simon Newcomb, professor of mathematics and astronomy at Johns Hopkins University published an article which showed scientifically that powered human flight was 'utterly impossible,' and would require the discovery of a new force in nature. A few weeks later, Wilbur and Orville Wright did the scientifically impossible.

For five years after the Wright brother's first successful flight, most American scientists, science editors, and science writers in the NewYork Herald, the North American Review, and the Scientific American dismissed the many demonstrations of powered human flight as a hoax.

Humphry Davy's demonstrated nitrous oxide anesthesia in 1830, and by 1842 chloroform and ether were being used to perform painless surgeries, but academia, especially the religious versions, and the medical establishment resisted and repudiated the use of anesthesia which was not fully accepted until after 1850.

Every electronic device or machine we use which is powered by electricity from the power grid, as well as, the power grid itself is proof Michael Faraday was not the charlatan his contemporaries accused him of being when he announced he could generate an electric current simply by moving a magnet in a coil of wire. The truth and significance of his discoveries were not recognized until after his death.
I am sure you would concur that information flows a bit quicker than in did in the 19th century.
simplicity
Posts: 750
Joined: Thu May 20, 2021 5:23 pm

Re: Limitations

Post by simplicity »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Thu Sep 16, 2021 4:52 am You may[?] not be aware, the mindfulness meditation [critical as one of the 8-Fold-Path] requires constant refine effective thinking while awake.
What happens upon transcendence?
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Thu Sep 16, 2021 4:52 amGroup thinking produce synergy [wasted if this is not tapped] but subject to its pros and cons which must be weighed and balanced [this require thinking as well].
Nietzsche had it right when he said...

“In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule.”
User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 4704
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Limitations

Post by RCSaunders »

simplicity wrote: Thu Sep 16, 2021 5:03 pm
RCSaunders wrote: Thu Sep 16, 2021 2:23 am Since you seem to be implying my thoughts are not my own, as though they were things everyone else thinks, why is it that almost everyone disagrees with my views, as you do. Since there are damn few others who think what I think, who are those one's you think I'm only emulating.
If you step down from your pulpit for a moment, you might discover although you believe you are really different [than "everybody else"], reality suggests that we are all 99.9% the same. It's just the tiniest bit that makes any of us different. I know that kind of blows your "I'm a super-radical thinker" meme out of the water...sorry. How different can any of us really be?
Good grief, I make no claims to any special kind of thinking. Perhaps what I think is the same as most people, but if it is, why does almost everyone with an ideology, philosophy, or religion want to change what I think?

As for how different individuals are from one another, every one is different. Except for the fundamentals of human nature, their essential biological nature, and the fact they are conscious rational volitional animals, every individual is unique. In every way, each individual is different, with different backgrounds, inherent abilities, and learning. No two people have exactly the same tastes, interests, desires and aspirations. Everyone has different natural abilities, talents, and capabilities. Even physiologically not two people are identical and one of the great defects of modern medicine is the belief that the same symptoms always indicate the same maladies and the same treatments are appropriate for all individuals.

This view that all human beings are pretty much the same defies the essential nature of a human being, the volitional nature. Unlike the instinctive animals who have no choice but to live exactly as their nature requires, human nature does not require any specific manner of living. The requirement for human life is unique--human beings are required to discover or learn what their life requires, and to use that knowledge to think and choose how to live.

Every individual is whoever and whatever they have made of themselves by their own chosen effort. The importance, significance, and value of every individual is determined solely by what that individual has chosen to do with their life, how they have chosen to develop it, what they have chosen to learn, what they aspire to, the work they have chosen to do, and what they have produced and achieved.

[I've addressed this in two short article: "Ten Mistakes—6. Everybody Is Different," (part of a short series), and "Sui Generis—If You're Not An Individualist, You're A Racist."]
simplicity wrote: Thu Sep 16, 2021 5:03 pm Let me give you an example. I am a physician. I practice "differently" most others in that I truly believe my job is to educate patients and allow them to make their own decisions [after all, doctor = teacher]. Many of my patients over the years have appreciated my approach and have told me how wonderful I am to do this but I have always told these folks that 90% of what I do is controlled by government and corporations so you still must act as your own advocate and do your homework, that is, I can only do so much to help you out. You must take primary responsibility for your own health.
That is both commendable and exceptional, especially today, when most doctors treat patients as, "subjects," and themselves as, "authorities." Well done.
simplicity wrote: Wed Sep 15, 2021 5:56 pm ... I do not believe we can truly know anything. You seem to believe [like most] that you can know quite a bit.
Most who have not had their minds corrupted by academia do know a great deal. In fact, without knowledge human life is not possible and all human success is directly proportional to knowledge and its use in productive effort.

[My short article here on PhilosophyNow, "Certain Knowledge," just suggests the innumerable things one knows for certain if they are still alive. My article, "The Only Path To Success And Happiness." explains why human life and success are totally dependent on knowledge.]
simplicity wrote: Wed Sep 15, 2021 5:56 pm We are all here to simply exchange views with other people who enjoy such [not to convince others that we have figured it out]. And believe me [although it's impossible], should "somebody "figure it out," everybody will know in five minutes.
RCSaunders wrote: Thu Sep 16, 2021 2:23 amThat's doubtful! There is hardly a single discovery in history that wasn't resisted, and those making them persecuted and vilified. The last thing most people want is the truth and they will go to almost any length to evade it.

Look how long it took, "everybody," to accept the discoveries of Kepler and Galileo and the persecution Galileo endured. It took twenty years for William Harvey's discovery that blood pumped out from heart, returns to heart to be accepted.

In 1902, Rear-Admiral George Melville, chief engineer of the US Navy, wrote in the North American Review, that attempting to fly was 'absurd'. In 1903, Simon Newcomb, professor of mathematics and astronomy at Johns Hopkins University published an article which showed scientifically that powered human flight was 'utterly impossible,' and would require the discovery of a new force in nature. A few weeks later, Wilbur and Orville Wright did the scientifically impossible.

For five years after the Wright brother's first successful flight, most American scientists, science editors, and science writers in the NewYork Herald, the North American Review, and the Scientific American dismissed the many demonstrations of powered human flight as a hoax.

Humphry Davy's demonstrated nitrous oxide anesthesia in 1830, and by 1842 chloroform and ether were being used to perform painless surgeries, but academia, especially the religious versions, and the medical establishment resisted and repudiated the use of anesthesia which was not fully accepted until after 1850.

Every electronic device or machine we use which is powered by electricity from the power grid, as well as, the power grid itself is proof Michael Faraday was not the charlatan his contemporaries accused him of being when he announced he could generate an electric current simply by moving a magnet in a coil of wire. The truth and significance of his discoveries were not recognized until after his death.
I am sure you would concur that information flows a bit quicker than in did in the 19th century.
[/quote]
I don't see what difference that makes. The world is still dominated by religions and superstitious Eastern philosophies. People still consult astrologists. Doesn't seem like the information highway has reached most people yet.
simplicity
Posts: 750
Joined: Thu May 20, 2021 5:23 pm

Re: Limitations

Post by simplicity »

RCSaunders wrote: Thu Sep 16, 2021 7:20 pm
simplicity wrote: Thu Sep 16, 2021 5:03 pm
RCSaunders wrote: Thu Sep 16, 2021 2:23 am Since you seem to be implying my thoughts are not my own, as though they were things everyone else thinks, why is it that almost everyone disagrees with my views, as you do. Since there are damn few others who think what I think, who are those one's you think I'm only emulating.
If you step down from your pulpit for a moment, you might discover although you believe you are really different [than "everybody else"], reality suggests that we are all 99.9% the same. It's just the tiniest bit that makes any of us different. I know that kind of blows your "I'm a super-radical thinker" meme out of the water...sorry. How different can any of us really be?
Good grief, I make no claims to any special kind of thinking. Perhaps what I think is the same as most people, but if it is, why does almost everyone with an ideology, philosophy, or religion want to change what I think?
It's not because of what you think, it's how you present yourself...belligerent and confrontational [you must bring out the best in everybody].
RCSaunders wrote: Thu Sep 16, 2021 7:20 pmAs for how different individuals are from one another, every one is different. Except for the fundamentals of human nature, their essential biological nature, and the fact they are conscious rational volitional animals, every individual is unique. In every way, each individual is different, with different backgrounds, inherent abilities, and learning. No two people have exactly the same tastes, interests, desires and aspirations. Everyone has different natural abilities, talents, and capabilities. Even physiologically not two people are identical and one of the great defects of modern medicine is the belief that the same symptoms always indicate the same maladies and the same treatments are appropriate for all individuals.
Everybody is different and the same [that's well established], but if you sat down with almost anybody, you would find that on most subjects, you most likely share a great deal in common. It's like the folks in power who are always attempting to pit one group against the other [although they share almost everything in common].
RCSaunders wrote: Thu Sep 16, 2021 7:20 pm Every individual is whoever and whatever they have made of themselves by their own chosen effort. The importance, significance, and value of every individual is determined solely by what that individual has chosen to do with their life, how they have chosen to develop it, what they have chosen to learn, what they aspire to, the work they have chosen to do, and what they have produced and achieved.
So you don't believe that people from Japan are different from people from Afghanistan [generally speaking]?
simplicity wrote: Thu Sep 16, 2021 5:03 pm Let me give you an example. I am a physician. I practice "differently" most others in that I truly believe my job is to educate patients and allow them to make their own decisions [after all, doctor = teacher]. Many of my patients over the years have appreciated my approach and have told me how wonderful I am to do this but I have always told these folks that 90% of what I do is controlled by government and corporations so you still must act as your own advocate and do your homework, that is, I can only do so much to help you out. You must take primary responsibility for your own health.
RCSaunders wrote: Thu Sep 16, 2021 7:20 pmThat is both commendable and exceptional, especially today, when most doctors treat patients as, "subjects," and themselves as, "authorities." Well done.
Thank you but there are many excellent health care providers of all stripes out there and if the system wasn't so screwed-up, my guess is that 90% would be pretty darn good. PA's and NP's seem to be on the leading edge of care these days.
simplicity wrote: Wed Sep 15, 2021 5:56 pm ... I do not believe we can truly know anything. You seem to believe [like most] that you can know quite a bit.
RCSaunders wrote: Thu Sep 16, 2021 7:20 pmMost who have not had their minds corrupted by academia do know a great deal. In fact, without knowledge human life is not possible and all human success is directly proportional to knowledge and its use in productive effort.
RCSaunders wrote: Thu Sep 16, 2021 7:20 pm[My short article here on PhilosophyNow, "Certain Knowledge," just suggests the innumerable things one knows for certain if they are still alive. My article, "The Only Path To Success And Happiness." explains why human life and success are totally dependent on knowledge.]
I am probably not going to read any articles, so please give me the condensed versions to make your points.
simplicity wrote: Wed Sep 15, 2021 5:56 pm We are all here to simply exchange views with other people who enjoy such [not to convince others that we have figured it out]. And believe me [although it's impossible], should "somebody "figure it out," everybody will know in five minutes.
RCSaunders wrote: Thu Sep 16, 2021 2:23 amThat's doubtful! There is hardly a single discovery in history that wasn't resisted, and those making them persecuted and vilified. The last thing most people want is the truth and they will go to almost any length to evade it.

Look how long it took, "everybody," to accept the discoveries of Kepler and Galileo and the persecution Galileo endured. It took twenty years for William Harvey's discovery that blood pumped out from heart, returns to heart to be accepted.

In 1902, Rear-Admiral George Melville, chief engineer of the US Navy, wrote in the North American Review, that attempting to fly was 'absurd'. In 1903, Simon Newcomb, professor of mathematics and astronomy at Johns Hopkins University published an article which showed scientifically that powered human flight was 'utterly impossible,' and would require the discovery of a new force in nature. A few weeks later, Wilbur and Orville Wright did the scientifically impossible.

For five years after the Wright brother's first successful flight, most American scientists, science editors, and science writers in the NewYork Herald, the North American Review, and the Scientific American dismissed the many demonstrations of powered human flight as a hoax.

Humphry Davy's demonstrated nitrous oxide anesthesia in 1830, and by 1842 chloroform and ether were being used to perform painless surgeries, but academia, especially the religious versions, and the medical establishment resisted and repudiated the use of anesthesia which was not fully accepted until after 1850.

Every electronic device or machine we use which is powered by electricity from the power grid, as well as, the power grid itself is proof Michael Faraday was not the charlatan his contemporaries accused him of being when he announced he could generate an electric current simply by moving a magnet in a coil of wire. The truth and significance of his discoveries were not recognized until after his death.
I am sure you would concur that information flows a bit quicker than in did in the 19th century.
[/quote]
RCSaunders wrote: Thu Sep 16, 2021 7:20 pmI don't see what difference that makes. The world is still dominated by religions and superstitious Eastern philosophies. People still consult astrologists. Doesn't seem like the information highway has reached most people yet.
I don't know for sure but it seems if somebody takes a shit after lunch in Bombay that everybody in LA knows about it in time for cocktail hour.
User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 4704
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Limitations

Post by RCSaunders »

simplicity wrote: Fri Sep 17, 2021 12:09 am So you don't believe that people from Japan are different from people from Afghanistan [generally speaking]?
I'm the one who says every individual is a unique human being, you're the one who says, "reality suggests that we are all 99.9% the same."

But then, since you said, "the human mind is simply incapable of accessing reality in any substantial manner," (and I assume you know your own mind) and, "I do not believe we can truly know anything," I'll take your word for it and regard all you've said in that light.
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 12247
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: Limitations

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

simplicity wrote: Thu Sep 16, 2021 5:09 pm
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Thu Sep 16, 2021 4:52 am You may[?] not be aware, the mindfulness meditation [critical as one of the 8-Fold-Path] requires constant refine effective thinking while awake.
What happens upon transcendence?
There are many levels of transcendence where 'thinking' is still active albeit very refine.

Even in a very deep meditative state, there is still a certain level of refine thinking [alertness] which is different from ordinary thinking.

I presume you are trying to present a state where there is a sudden loss of consciousness, thus 'thinking'. I believe there is such a thing but happened only during the transition from one type of consciousness to another. Such a period of no thinking is merely in a split or nano-seconds as far as it is by humanly awareness.

Even in the case of Satori or Kensho in Zen there is still some sort of thinking by definition, i.e.
  • Satori means the experience of awakening ("enlightenment") or apprehension of the true nature of reality.[3][6] It is often considered an experience which cannot be expressed in words.[6]
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satori
The point here is there is an alteration in the state of consciousness in a person during 'Satori' or any event similar to 'enlightenment' which is not a total "loss of consciousness" thus 'thinking' as with a person in deep coma.
There are even in cases of a person supposedly in coma, but when woken from their long period coma, reported they were aware and thinking inside their head.

However, I believe, in the future when humanity has the mapping of the full brain, then we will know whether there are core-thinking activities within a person in the various states of consciousness.
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Thu Sep 16, 2021 4:52 amGroup thinking produce synergy [wasted if this is not tapped] but subject to its pros and cons which must be weighed and balanced [this require thinking as well].
Nietzsche had it right when he said...

“In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule.”
As usual, you are throwing out quotes without taking into account of what is going on in reality.
It is ignorance to claim 'insanity' in individuals is rare. Do more research into psychiatry and psychology re insanity!

It is not that insanity of groups is the rule.
The insanity of groups is the culmination and thus preceded by the insanity of individuals.

The difference between the effects in insanity between individuals and groups is merely the degrees, since there a large number of individuals within a group and it is also amplified by its negative synergistic effects.

As I had stated, one has to consider and weigh the pros and cons, of groups in this case. That you had hastily jumped to conclusion exposed your low intellectual and rational competence, thus wisdom as well.
Note Wisdom is the optimal application of knowledge in practice.
Since you are so adverse to knowledge and thinking, thus also your lack of wisdom.
simplicity
Posts: 750
Joined: Thu May 20, 2021 5:23 pm

Re: Limitations

Post by simplicity »

RCSaunders wrote: Fri Sep 17, 2021 1:57 am
simplicity wrote: Fri Sep 17, 2021 12:09 am So you don't believe that people from Japan are different from people from Afghanistan [generally speaking]?
I'm the one who says every individual is a unique human being, you're the one who says, "reality suggests that we are all 99.9% the same."

But then, since you said, "the human mind is simply incapable of accessing reality in any substantial manner," (and I assume you know your own mind) and, "I do not believe we can truly know anything," I'll take your word for it and regard all you've said in that light.
Let's consider our Japanese and Afghani people once again. I am sure [given enough time] we could find one million things that these two people have in common. As well, we could find one thousand things they do not have in common. Therefore, they are both different and the same, but they are much more the same then different. This is how all things are.

And as far as the human mind being incapable of accessing reality, this is correct. We communicate with each other through a language which we both understand but holds no real truth. It's like we can both agree that the square root of 25 is 5, but this is meaningless in any real sense.

You have to understand The Relative and The Absolute.
simplicity
Posts: 750
Joined: Thu May 20, 2021 5:23 pm

Re: Limitations

Post by simplicity »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Fri Sep 17, 2021 8:10 am There are many levels of transcendence where 'thinking' is still active albeit very refine.

Even in a very deep meditative state, there is still a certain level of refine thinking [alertness] which is different from ordinary thinking.

I presume you are trying to present a state where there is a sudden loss of consciousness, thus 'thinking'. I believe there is such a thing but happened only during the transition from one type of consciousness to another. Such a period of no thinking is merely in a split or nano-seconds as far as it is by humanly awareness.

Even in the case of Satori or Kensho in Zen there is still some sort of thinking by definition, i.e.
  • Satori means the experience of awakening ("enlightenment") or apprehension of the true nature of reality.[3][6] It is often considered an experience which cannot be expressed in words.[6]
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satori
The point here is there is an alteration in the state of consciousness in a person during 'Satori' or any event similar to 'enlightenment' which is not a total "loss of consciousness" thus 'thinking' as with a person in deep coma.
There are even in cases of a person supposedly in coma, but when woken from their long period coma, reported they were aware and thinking inside their head.

However, I believe, in the future when humanity has the mapping of the full brain, then we will know whether there are core-thinking activities within a person in the various states of consciousness.
You have no idea what I am referring to as you can only speak out books you have read. You need to put the work in and realize that your words [no matter how eloquent you believe they are] are not getting you any closer to the truth.
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Thu Sep 16, 2021 4:52 amGroup thinking produce synergy [wasted if this is not tapped] but subject to its pros and cons which must be weighed and balanced [this require thinking as well].
Nietzsche had it right when he said...

“In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule.”
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Thu Sep 16, 2021 4:52 am As usual, you are throwing out quotes without taking into account of what is going on in reality.
It is ignorance to claim 'insanity' in individuals is rare. Do more research into psychiatry and psychology re insanity!

It is not that insanity of groups is the rule.
The insanity of groups is the culmination and thus preceded by the insanity of individuals.

The difference between the effects in insanity between individuals and groups is merely the degrees, since there a large number of individuals within a group and it is also amplified by its negative synergistic effects.

As I had stated, one has to consider and weigh the pros and cons, of groups in this case. That you had hastily jumped to conclusion exposed your low intellectual and rational competence, thus wisdom as well.
Note Wisdom is the optimal application of knowledge in practice.
Since you are so adverse to knowledge and thinking, thus also your lack of wisdom.
I am not adverse to anything...I am only suggesting that you must realize how you can use different tools. Wisdom comes from clarity, not knowledge.

Don't worry so much about me. Get busy with your own work.
Belinda
Posts: 8030
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: Limitations

Post by Belinda »

simplicity wrote: Tue Sep 14, 2021 4:43 pm
Vitruvius wrote: Tue Sep 14, 2021 4:17 pm Re: Quote of the day
Post by Vitruvius » Tue Sep 14, 2021 3:22 pm

There are two kinds of philosophy: one seeks clarity, the other intends obscurity!
If it is clarity you seek, the road down philosophy avenue is a dead-end.

Clarity stands before you...accept it and free yourself from the ball and chain that is "understanding."
Fatalism of the embittered is a dead end.
simplicity
Posts: 750
Joined: Thu May 20, 2021 5:23 pm

Re: Limitations

Post by simplicity »

Belinda wrote: Fri Sep 17, 2021 4:37 pm
simplicity wrote: Tue Sep 14, 2021 4:43 pm
Vitruvius wrote: Tue Sep 14, 2021 4:17 pm Re: Quote of the day
Post by Vitruvius » Tue Sep 14, 2021 3:22 pm

There are two kinds of philosophy: one seeks clarity, the other intends obscurity!
If it is clarity you seek, the road down philosophy avenue is a dead-end.

Clarity stands before you...accept it and free yourself from the ball and chain that is "understanding."
Fatalism of the embittered is a dead end.
Embittered people are those who do what they want...successful people are those who do what they must.

Seeing things as close to what they are is the greatest skill one can cultivate.
User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 4704
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Limitations

Post by RCSaunders »

simplicity wrote: Fri Sep 17, 2021 5:00 pm Embittered people are those who do what they want...successful people are those who do what they must.
That's a bit insulting to those whose lives are not a failures, isn't it? With what epithet do you label those who desire to do what they must to be the best human beings they can be?
simplicity wrote: Fri Sep 17, 2021 5:00 pm Seeing things as close to what they are is the greatest skill one can cultivate.
That's going to be a little difficult isn't it? If, "the human mind is simply incapable of accessing reality in any substantial manner," and, you do not believe, "we can truly know anything," how, "close," to seeing things as they actually are can total ignorance (which is what not knowing anything is) be?

You don't have to answer if you regard that is belligerent and antagonistic. It's hardly an issue I'd consider that important. I just like pointing out absurdities.
simplicity
Posts: 750
Joined: Thu May 20, 2021 5:23 pm

Re: Limitations

Post by simplicity »

RCSaunders wrote: Fri Sep 17, 2021 10:00 pm
simplicity wrote: Fri Sep 17, 2021 5:00 pm Embittered people are those who do what they want...successful people are those who do what they must.
That's a bit insulting to those whose lives are not a failures, isn't it? With what epithet do you label those who desire to do what they must to be the best human beings they can be?
I don't believe so. People who fail do so [most of the time] because they do what they wish instead of what needs to be done. If it's failure through misinterpretation, that's another story [absence of clarity].

To answer your second question, I guess you would have to define what, "being the best human beings they can be," means.
simplicity wrote: Fri Sep 17, 2021 5:00 pm Seeing things as close to what they are is the greatest skill one can cultivate.
RCSaunders wrote: Fri Sep 17, 2021 10:00 pmThat's going to be a little difficult isn't it? If, "the human mind is simply incapable of accessing reality in any substantial manner," and, you do not believe, "we can truly know anything," how, "close," to seeing things as they actually are can total ignorance (which is what not knowing anything is) be?
That's the first really interesting question you have asked!

The human mind is capable of some processing [but not a great deal]. Making the best of what we have at our disposal is the best we can do. I believe the most effective way to do this is through meditation, i.e., observing without discrimination.
RCSaunders wrote: Fri Sep 17, 2021 10:00 pmYou don't have to answer if you regard that is belligerent and antagonistic. It's hardly an issue I'd consider that important. I just like pointing out absurdities.
What's with the attitude? We're just having a conversation. Relax...I mean no harm. I am just trying to chat with somebody who is pretty darn intelligent. It's not about winning and losing.
Belinda
Posts: 8030
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: Limitations

Post by Belinda »

simplicity wrote: Fri Sep 17, 2021 5:00 pm
Belinda wrote: Fri Sep 17, 2021 4:37 pm
simplicity wrote: Tue Sep 14, 2021 4:43 pm
If it is clarity you seek, the road down philosophy avenue is a dead-end.

Clarity stands before you...accept it and free yourself from the ball and chain that is "understanding."
Fatalism of the embittered is a dead end.
Embittered people are those who do what they want...successful people are those who do what they must.

Seeing things as close to what they are is the greatest skill one can cultivate.
"Must" indeed! How inauthentic is that! Sartre would grind up and throw away that "must" .
simplicity
Posts: 750
Joined: Thu May 20, 2021 5:23 pm

Re: Limitations

Post by simplicity »

Belinda wrote: Sat Sep 18, 2021 1:30 pm
simplicity wrote: Fri Sep 17, 2021 5:00 pm
Belinda wrote: Fri Sep 17, 2021 4:37 pm

Fatalism of the embittered is a dead end.
Embittered people are those who do what they want...successful people are those who do what they must.

Seeing things as close to what they are is the greatest skill one can cultivate.
"Must" indeed! How inauthentic is that! Sartre would grind up and throw away that "must" .
Inauthentic. What exactly does that mean?
Post Reply