Dasein/dasein

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Post Reply
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22257
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Dasein/dasein

Post by Immanuel Can »

iambiguous wrote: Sat Mar 19, 2022 6:46 pm Now, given your own intellectual assessment of human identity derived from your own intellectual assessment of the Christian God,
I have to say here that I am very deeply amused by your continual attempts to get us to discuss any other topic but the main, which is "dasein." And to wave in front of me a topic that relates importantly to myself, but has nothing to do with "dasein," well, that's a marvelous attempt at red herring, I really have to say.

And it's as if you actually think I'll be fooled... but no such luck. :wink:

I say again: there is another thread on which I'm very active, and which deals specificaly with Christianity. If you've got a question, I invite you to go there and post it. It won't trouble me a bit. But I suspect you won't, because you really don't care about the issue; you only care about getting me not to press you any longer on your inability to deliver on "dasein."

But here, there is only your own topic, "dasein." And if you have nothing to offer on it, then that's that. I think we can wrap it up.
promethean75
Posts: 4931
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 10:29 pm

Re: Dasein/dasein

Post by promethean75 »

User avatar
Alexis Jacobi
Posts: 5144
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2021 3:00 am

Re: Dasein/dasein

Post by Alexis Jacobi »

Immanuel Can wrote: Sat Mar 19, 2022 6:57 pmBut that "something real" you mention would, of course, have to be objectively real. If it were just another subjective feeling and no more, then we've added nothing to the situation.
And with this we come to my core point: You will not ever be able to offer to Iambiguous, nor to any of the multitudes who do not believe and who cannot believe, what you attempt to communicate. There is no objective proof and of that sort that Iambiguous demands that you can refer to.

What is realized, perceived and understood subjectively cannot be, somehow, objectively presented. A spiritual epiphany is subjective.

Subjective feeling? That is not the right word. I do not think that what pertains to 'intellectus' is feeling-based. Again here is a definition I have submitted before:
Intellect: The faculty of thought. As understood in Catholic philosophical literature it signifies the higher, spiritual, cognitive power of the soul. It is in this view awakened to action by sense, but transcends the latter in range. Amongst its functions are attention, conception, judgment, reasoning, reflection, and self-consciousness. All these modes of activity exhibit a distinctly suprasensuous element, and reveal a cognitive faculty of a higher order than is required for mere sense-cognitions. In harmony, therefore, with Catholic usage, we reserve the terms intellect, intelligence, and intellectual to this higher power and its operations, although many modern psychologists are wont, with much resulting confusion, to extend the application of these terms so as to include sensuous forms of the cognitive process. By thus restricting the use of these terms, the inaccuracy of such phrases as "animal intelligence" is avoided. Before such language may be legitimately employed, it should be shown that the lower animals are endowed with genuinely rational faculties, fundamentally one in kind with those of man. Catholic philosophers, however they differ on minor points, as a general body have held that intellect is a spiritual faculty depending extrinsically, but not intrinsically, on the bodily organism. The importance of a right theory of intellect is twofold: on account of its bearing on epistemology, or the doctrine of knowledge; and because of its connexion with the question of the spirituality of the soul.
I would suggest, and it seems very true, that one does not come into the possibility of the subjective understanding unless one has been trained in it. And in the best sense this is what paideia does. However, I do recognize that high cultures (say Japanese, Vedic, Persian, Judaic) all have their paideia. This is why, at higher levels and among those with expansive minds, they can relatively easily see what is being communicated when they contemplate another metaphysics. It is *intelligible* to them.

One of the things I notice, and it concerns me, is when people are no longer being taught the *fundamentals*. They are no longer trained up in our paideia and, as it happens, they fall away from the capacity to even conceive of what has been referred to for so long in our Occidental cultures. What happens here? They seem to descend into what I might describe as intellectual barbarism. It involves the sacrifice of the higher for the immediacy of the lower.

I do not want to unfairly pick on Promethean yet this is a philosophy forum and we are duty bound to reveal what we really think about all things. The man pictured here, whoever it is, is an example of someone who had descended in the way I describe. The mind as a higher instrument becomes dulled.
promethean75 wrote: Wed Mar 16, 2022 7:22 pmEmpty promises, because god is empty just like me
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 9956
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: Dasein/dasein

Post by attofishpi »

Alexis Jacobi wrote: Sat Mar 19, 2022 7:57 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Sat Mar 19, 2022 6:57 pmBut that "something real" you mention would, of course, have to be objectively real. If it were just another subjective feeling and no more, then we've added nothing to the situation.
And with this we come to my core point: You will not ever be able to offer to Iambiguous, nor to any of the multitudes who do not believe and who cannot believe, what you attempt to communicate. There is no objective proof and of that sort that Iambiguous demands that you can refer to.
Catch 22?

To receive any 'objective proof' personally, requires the leap of faith.
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 9956
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: Dasein/dasein

Post by attofishpi »

promethean75 wrote: Wed Mar 16, 2022 7:22 pm
Alexis Jacobi wrote: Sat Mar 19, 2022 7:57 pm I do not want to unfairly pick on Promethean yet this is a philosophy forum and we are duty bound to reveal what we really think about all things. The man pictured here, whoever it is, is an example of someone who had descended in the way I describe. The mind as a higher instrument becomes dulled.


Empty promises, because god is empty just like me
A fantastic song by The Smashing Pumpkins - perhaps top 3 of my favourite bands - very deep music dealing A LOT with concepts of God and sin.
User avatar
Alexis Jacobi
Posts: 5144
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2021 3:00 am

Re: Dasein/dasein

Post by Alexis Jacobi »

attofishpi wrote: Sat Mar 19, 2022 8:23 pm A fantastic song by The Smashing Pumpkins - perhaps top 3 of my favourite bands - very deep music dealing A LOT with concepts of God and sin.
How interesting. So I am missing something through my snooty judgmental assessment?
User avatar
Alexis Jacobi
Posts: 5144
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2021 3:00 am

Re: Dasein/dasein

Post by Alexis Jacobi »

attofishpi wrote: Sat Mar 19, 2022 8:12 pmTo receive any 'objective proof' personally, requires the leap of faith.
A personal objective truth is subjectivity!

There is no ‘objective truth’ and if there were there would be no doubt, no controversy, no difficulty. It would be plainly visible.
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 9956
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: Dasein/dasein

Post by attofishpi »

Alexis Jacobi wrote: Sat Mar 19, 2022 8:33 pm
attofishpi wrote: Sat Mar 19, 2022 8:12 pmTo receive any 'objective proof' personally, requires the leap of faith.
A personal objective truth is subjectivity!

There is no ‘objective truth’ and if there were there would be no doubt, no controversy, no difficulty. It would be plainly visible.
If someone asked you to pour a glass of water and then asked would you prefer wine or whiskey - what would you answer? Indeed what would you answer when the water was changed to your preference? - me thinks you'd prefer to stick with water.

Is that objective in anyway?
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 9956
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: Dasein/dasein

Post by attofishpi »

Alexis Jacobi wrote: Sat Mar 19, 2022 8:29 pm
attofishpi wrote: Sat Mar 19, 2022 8:23 pm A fantastic song by The Smashing Pumpkins - perhaps top 3 of my favourite bands - very deep music dealing A LOT with concepts of God and sin.
How interesting. So I am missing something through my snooty judgmental assessment?
Absolutely.

ps. I think the chap in the video is promethean75 :D
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22257
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Dasein/dasein

Post by Immanuel Can »

Alexis Jacobi wrote: Sat Mar 19, 2022 7:57 pm There is no objective proof and of that sort that Iambiguous demands that you can refer to.
I always find this a puzzling claim, whenever anybody advances it.

Of course there's evidence. That's not really the question: the question is whether or not the evidence available should incline one to the conclusion or not.

The natural world is evidence for God. So is the intelligibilty of reality. So is the moral realm. So is the historical record, and the literary record of the Bible itself. Further evidence is available from cosmology, from the philosophy of mind, from conceptual arguments, and from the testimony of a myriad of personal witnesses. There's plenty of evidence.

The only remaining question is, what does it add up to? For the Atheist, the answer has to be "nothing." For the agnostic, perhaps "not enough to convince me completely yet," and for the Theist, "sufficient warrant."

Who's right about that? Well, weigh the evidence, is the answer.
A spiritual epiphany is subjective.
It can be. It can also be objective -- that's the point to be contested.
One of the things I notice, and it concerns me, is when people are no longer being taught the *fundamentals*. They are no longer trained up in our paideia and, as it happens, they fall away from the capacity to even conceive of what has been referred to for so long in our Occidental cultures. What happens here? They seem to descend into what I might describe as intellectual barbarism. It involves the sacrifice of the higher for the immediacy of the lower.
Well, yes...I think it certainly does. And even a raw Atheist would have to admit that something would be seriously lost if we dropped the Christian moral tradition and just embraced the nihilism that Atheism implies. That's why so few of them are amoralists, even though that's what Atheism invites them to become.

But you cannot sustain a legacy like Judeo-Christian morality on falsehoods. If people stop believing the Judeo-Christian narrative is actually true, what incentive do they have for persisting to act as if it's true? That's just "bad faith." Rather, honesty takest the side of nihilism, then.

And it's not simply that people don't like falsehoods, because honestly, many would rather have falsehoods than truth -- look at our current media, for example. No, the real problem is that falsehoods are themselves not durable. People can persist for some time on the moral habits of the past; but eventually, their inclination to corruption tests the strength of their beliefs in particular ways; and absent a conviction of the deep truth of the grounding of those moral practices, they find they have no reason left to cling to them. So they don't.

Look, for example, at our concept of "woman." Even that has proved insufficiently durable once our social corruption has reached the present levels. We are now even afraid to define the term, since doing so would necessarily exclude something ... and at the cost of losing the concept completely, we have refused to think it through. Nothing could illustrate this more clearly than the ridiculous spectacle of a biological man sweeping women aside to claim a national swim title, while society celebrates it as a liberation for "women," a concept they have demonstrated they no longer believe even has an objective reality.

How can "women" triumph when there are no more "women"? :shock: It's absurd.
I do not want to unfairly pick on Promethean
Prometheus stole fire from "the gods," it is said. But today's so-called "Prometheans" steal nothingness from what you call "paiediea." At least Prometheus is said to have done the human race some benefit...but these Prometheans bring man only to the abyss of his own vacuity. They aren't heroes...not every rebel is a hero. Some are just rebels-without-a-point.
yet this is a philosophy forum and we are duty bound to reveal what we really think about all things. The man pictured here, whoever it is, is an example of someone who had descended in the way I describe. The mind as a higher instrument becomes dulled.
Yes, he really is at least pretending to be a marvel of thoughtlessness. And if he says he's "empty," then I believe him. He must find that he is.
promethean75
Posts: 4931
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 10:29 pm

Re: Dasein/dasein

Post by promethean75 »

"I do not want to unfairly pick on Promethean"

Don't be such a wuss, man.

That vich doesn't keel me vil only make me sdronga.
User avatar
Alexis Jacobi
Posts: 5144
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2021 3:00 am

Re: Dasein/dasein

Post by Alexis Jacobi »

Immanuel Can wrote: Sat Mar 19, 2022 9:01 pm I always find this a puzzling claim, whenever anybody advances it.

Of course there's evidence.
Oh it most certainly is the question.

Those things which you determine are *evidence* are in no sense really evidences. If they really were evidence -- as we understand evidence to be -- there would be no questions, no problems. Those who oppose your Christian orientation say "The evidences you present are false-evidences*.

What I find puzzling is that you do not seem to see that this is so. I wonder why that is?
That's not really the question: the question is whether or not the evidence available should incline one to the conclusion or not.
What 'inclines one to the conclusion' is an array of motivations. On one hand, and at the 'higher' level, it is sympathy with the core messages. This could be because it is really understood to be *true* but also as Uwot says because the story is aesthetically pleasing.

But there are other levels too and they are of a lower level.

There is no evidence as the sort of evidence in, say, a chemist's lab or a court of law requires. End of story. And that is precisely why there is so much controversy and why you constantly receive opposition.
The natural world is evidence for God. So is the intelligibilty of reality. So is the moral realm. So is the historical record, and the literary record of the Bible itself. Further evidence is available from cosmology, from the philosophy of mind, from conceptual arguments, and from the testimony of a myriad of personal witnesses. There's plenty of evidence.
While I agree that *existence* (that things exist) must be evidence of a creative spirit and intelligence, those that argue against you do not and cannot see things as you do. Because that is not enough evidence, nor is it the sort of evidence, they demand. But that is the issue: they demand a scientist's evidence. And they demand that Jesus Christ stop playing games with them and either appear before all people and assert authority and dominion, and certainly stop the cruel death of innocent children toot sweet, or remain in a ridiculed, disproved state.

To understand the existence of God, in the manner that you describe it, requires a mind prepared to receive and entertain the idea, or one inclined in that direction just by inner prompting or any number of different motives, not all of them the right ones or good ones.

The literary record of the Bible is not evidence, for those who see differently, of any sort at all. In fact it is evidence that fails. It is bad evidence!

"Myriad of personal witnesses' is 'hearsay' to use a legal term. They suppose that all those who testify were drunk on themselves, or duped, or who self-deceived themselves to what they wanted, painfully, to believe. They see this belief as tied up with self-deception.

Everything that you mention is not evidence. It might suggest certain conclusions but it is not 'evidence' in the strict, modern sense.

I am really surprised that you do not seem to grasp this.
User avatar
Alexis Jacobi
Posts: 5144
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2021 3:00 am

Re: Dasein/dasein

Post by Alexis Jacobi »

Immanuel Can wrote: Sat Mar 19, 2022 9:01 pmPrometheus stole fire from "the gods," it is said. But today's so-called "Prometheans" steal nothingness from what you call "paideia." At least Prometheus is said to have done the human race some benefit...but these Prometheans bring man only to the abyss of his own vacuity. They aren't heroes...not every rebel is a hero. Some are just rebels-without-a-point.
I guess this is my conclusion as well. I tried to look for some value in Smashing Pumpkins and other such bands (like Cobain). I just don't find it. I find the ultimate and nearly absolute tiredness and exhaustion of people who have literally run out of steam. They presage death.
User avatar
Alexis Jacobi
Posts: 5144
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2021 3:00 am

Re: Dasein/dasein

Post by Alexis Jacobi »

attofishpi wrote: Sat Mar 19, 2022 8:36 pm If someone asked you to pour a glass of water and then asked would you prefer wine or whiskey - what would you answer? Indeed what would you answer when the water was changed to your preference? - me thinks you'd prefer to stick with water.
I do not understand what you are getting at. Can you restate it?

If someone asked that I pour a glass of water I'd assume they wanted water. If they asked me "Would you prefer wine or whisky?" I'd merely be puzzled.
User avatar
Alexis Jacobi
Posts: 5144
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2021 3:00 am

Re: Dasein/dasein

Post by Alexis Jacobi »

promethean75 wrote: Sun Mar 20, 2022 12:04 am That vich doesn't keel me vil only make me sdronga.
But that is not quite so given that you have said your economic condition -- your wage-slavery -- is killing you (if I am remembering some of your statements correctly). You cannot really be or become what you want to be. Are you saying that your condition is in fact making you stronger, better?
Post Reply