some more thoughts....

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Post Reply
Peter Kropotkin
Posts: 1505
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2022 5:11 am

some more thoughts....

Post by Peter Kropotkin »

As I have been busy of late, I have been unable to write here..
but I have had time to study.. and of late, I have been studying
German Idealism...and I am thinking about that subject in terms
of where we are now....and finally having two days in a row off from work,
I can get into this subject...a quick look into the past will make
this project of mine actually make some sense in regard to
to what is happening right now, right here....

the first thing to note is that Idealism is a response to something
else...as all philosophy is a response to something else...
and here the question of Idealism is simple, what is reason?
and why is that important? that leads us to the Enlightenment...
and the Enlightenment is the question that leads us to idealism...

and what is the principle idea behind the Enlightenment? that
reason is the basis for our actions and thoughts...if one were
to reduce the entire Enlightenment to a phrase, it would be this,
"sapere aude" dare to know...that dare is based upon reason...
don't take the word of the authorities or the word of books
like the bible or accept what the state or religions tell us about
what it means to be human....seek out its meaning yourself by
the use of reason and logic...don't trust anyone but yourself in
understanding what it means to be human...

and that reason that was so highly rated in the Enlightenment,
was the point of idealism...what is reason, what is it form, shape
and limits.. which is exactly the same question asked about
epistemology... which is defined as "the theory of knowledge"
especially with regard to its method, validity and scope..
just replace the word epistemology with reason and you have the
question of idealism...and the first shot fired in this battle over
reason was surprisingly not by Kant, but by Goethe...in his world
famous book, which in English is called, "The Sorrows of young Werther"
and note it published date, 1774... several years before Kant's first
critique...thus the actual beginning of Romantism was several
years before the beginning of idealism...and we are still living
in "Romantism" as a period....and thus we discover part of
the modern discontentment... in this debate/fight between
two conflicting ideas, that of which is better, reason or feelings?
a debate now over 200 years old...and with no clear winner...

so we have the Enlightenment in which reason was the primary
goal and we have idealism in which they try to understand
what reason was and why should we follow reason and then we
have Romantism, in which feelings are king...

From Kant to Hegel, we have reason as being the primary goal
of philosophy.. what is reason and why it matters...

and to give some context to this debate, we turn to our
modern battle between reason and feelings... IQ45 has repeatedly
stated that he follows "his gut" over reason...and the entire MAGA movement
is based on feelings, not on reason...and much of what drives our modern
discourse is based on feelings and not on reason...the clash over
abortion is a reason vs emotions debate... pro-choice is based
on science and "pro-life" is not...(in fact, the entire MAGA movement
is anti-science, anti-reason and anti-education.. they say so every
chance they get... Desantis assault on education is based on
anti-education beliefs and IQ45 spend 4 years trying to dismantling
the entire education department in the US government)

anyway, this debate between reason and emotions/feelings dominate
our political and social discourse today...and where do we see this
debate most focused on, ethics/morality... the culture wars of
the last 40 years has been a battle of reason vs emotions/feelings...

so, what is ethical/moral in our modern age? many on the right claim
that homosexuality and being "trans" is unethical, immoral, unnatural...
but what is that based upon? the entire underlying theme of the right,
whether they admit it or not, is religious...they have freely stated,
that they want a "Christian nation" one that follows religion as
its basis, and not the laws of human beings...or said another way,
turning America into Iran west....a theocratic state.. one in which
the system of government is religious based...and that certainly is not
a reason-based government....

and we turn to the next aspect of the modern world, the fact that
we are and all aspects of our society and its beliefs are fractured...
shattered into a million pieces...the fact is that we are no longer
a monolithic society.. where we share uniform beliefs about existence
and what it means to be human...in America, it history has been
one where everyone, until now, has accepted the idea of the
for government, now the debate wasn't about if government was
necessary, it was, but how big or small government should be..
it was about the size of government that the debate has been about
in our history....
the idea that we should have a government small enough to drown in
a bathtub is a recent idea.. created within my lifetime.. (Grover Norquist
was the one who said this in 2001 but the idea that the government is
the enemy was created by one of the worst presidents in US history..
Ronald Raygun in the 1980's) It was inconceivable during the 1960's
or 70's, that the government was the enemy.. the battle was over
how large the government should be, but never over the
existence of the government..... part of the mental picture everyone
had was that the government was necessary...

anyway, back to ethics/morals... since Hume, ethics/morality
had been in question... recall his basic argument, that our
belief in cause and effect are based on habits, superstitions..
for example, there is no way to hold the belief that the sun will
rise tomorrow...we have no right to hold the belief
that the sun will rise tomorrow... it has no basis in fact..
we certainly hope it will rise tomorrow, but we have no reason
to hold that belief as fact...and if we carry this understanding
of cause and effect into ethics/morals.. there are no facts that
we can point to that justifies any, ANY, belief in ethics/morals...
every single system of morality/ethics is subject to the exact
same qualification, on what basis is this ethical/moral system based on?
On religion, which religion or which god? on reason? Reason
was attacked as wanting under Kant and his successors.. and we
see this today.... on what basis are we going to base our ethics/moral on?
One the basis of the prejudice of our prior generation that
Christianity is the best ethical system around... the Muslims would
argue that their system of ethics is best and the Jews would argue
that their system is best and the Buddhist would argue that their
system is the best ethical/moral system every create... and they
are all right and they are all wrong.... but how do we know?
Hume destroyed any possibility of us "knowing" which ethical/moral
system is actually the best for us? What ethical/moral system is
best for us has been debated in the philosophical circles since
Nietzsche.. for whom the entire debate was about this question
of ethics and morals...

In a no-god world, what system of ethics/morals are in fact,
the ethical/moral system we should be following?
can we discover an ethical/moral system based on
reason or must all ethical morals systems be based on
a god or a religion? can we reason ourselves into an ethical/moral
system? One that holds a universal consent for all involved?
and this exploration of ethics/morals has been the basis of modern
philosophy... even Wittgenstein called himself an "ethical" philosopher
and he wasn't alone.. every major philosopher of the 20th century
has investigated and commented on ethics/morals...from Nietzsche to
Wittgenstein to Heidegger to Sartre, every single one of them
wrote extensively about morals and ethics... trying to find a "firm"
basis for ethics/morals in a no-god world...the fact that very few
actually work on this today, suggests to me that they are trying
to "bury" this line of investigation.. instead they are focused on crap or
specialized studies that leave the big questions off to the side...
small scale studies about what specific thought a philosopher
had, about a specific topic... but not an engagement with the "big"
topics, of who we are and what it means to be human?.....and what
beliefs we should hold and why? and using the only tool a philosopher
has, which is reason....why these beliefs, and not other beliefs?

Hume and later Kant, removed the possibility of using reason to
explain what beliefs we should be holding and why those beliefs,
and not other beliefs....recall the name of Kant book,
"The Critique of Reason" forget the word pure, it doesn't move
the needle for us...Kant himself said that he wanted to remove/reduce
reason to make room for faith... almost a direct quote...

"I had to remove knowledge in order to make room for faith"

faith that was destroyed by Hume and his skepticism....
so we ask, as Kant once asked, "what should I/we believe in?"
and why those beliefs and not other beliefs?

why believe in a large government as opposed to a small government,
or what values should we hold, positive values like love, hope, justice,
freedom or negative values like hate, anger, lust, greed, violence, and
of course, why these values and not other values?
and on what basis should we hold our beliefs? reason/logic or emotions/feelings?

and that shall be the next post....

Kropotkin
Peter Kropotkin
Posts: 1505
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2022 5:11 am

Re: some more thoughts....

Post by Peter Kropotkin »

we can follow this argument between reason and
emotions/feelings in political terms... the monarchy
vs democracy... we can use King Louis XIV, 14 as an example...
he said and meant, "L'etat, c'est moi," "I am the state"...
for most of its history, the monarchy was an absolute monarchy...
there were virtually no rules or restrictions on the monarchy...
which is why the "Magna Carta" is so significant.. it placed rules
on the monarchy...and it was virtually the only time and place
that did in some way, restrict the monarch until the French
Revolution...

But where the problems came in the monarchy was in the fact it
was rule by a human being, that one day an action was banned
and the next day that same action was allowed... the state was
ruled by the whims and fancy of a single person with no restrictions...
for example, the prince could in fact decide the state religion with
a single decree...as granted by the Augsburg Settlement...
it ended the religious struggle between the two groups, (Catholic
and protestant) made the legal division of Christianity permanent
within the Holy Roman Empire, allowing rulers to choose either
Lutheranism or Roman Catholicism as the official confession
of their state... the Monarchy decided the official state religion...
and quite often, as in England, the official state religion
changed from Catholic to Protestant and back again...
what was true today, wasn't true yesterday and may not be true
tomorrow... this is in part one of the major drawbacks of the monarchy...
whereas the goal, one of anyway, was the elimination of rule by
one person which can change daily to rule by the laws of men....
which is more permanent... we can create laws but we can, with
some effort, change those laws into something else....
this change was based on the notion that human beings can
decide what is best for themselves.. but that is predicated on
the principle that people can only know what is best if,
if they are educated... hence the value of education..
and the basis for public education around the world...
if people remained illiterate, uneducated, uninformed,
how can they make the best choices for themselves and others?

and on this basis lays an understanding of human beings...
that for most of our existence, the mass majority of human beings,
were barely a step above animals.... it was education that turned
people from basically being animals to being human...and on this
basis was the drive to make education universal... and one this basis
is the reason that conservatives want to end universal education...
to end people's attempt to rise above being animal.... conservatives
want people to remain uneducated, uninformed, illiterate...
it makes it easier to rule if the people are uneducated and uninformed.
it is, as always with conservatives about the drive to keeping and holding
power...and to be educated is to be informed about our choices
and what it means to make this choice over another choice...
anyway, democracy vs monarchy means the choice between
one person deciding and all of us deciding....

(and one of the problems facing us today is the overthrow of democracy
by large corporations that have bought our system of government,
the Koch brothers for example buying the entire political apparatus
of several states, from Kansas, Wisconsin, Florida and Texas....
states that have severe issues with falling education standards,
infrastructure issues, increase rates of mortality in babies and children,
an increasing rate of violence, and an increase in the "brain drain" leaving
''red'' states and moving to "blue" states...and we can see the
''red'' states being the states that favor dictatorships of IQ45
and Desantis)

(wife came home and I totally lost my train of thought, which
is why I try to get my writing done before she gets home, I shall try
to pick it up here)

the value behind a democracy is to eliminate the whims that drive
a single human being into for this today and against the same thing tomorrow....
it is thought that a democracy will have more consistency than
a monarchy will, because of the diverse voices within a democracy......
a democracy can't move that fast... and that slowness, prevents
rash actions from happening...and for the most part, democracy
does prevent countries from acting rashly or too fast... but that
is also its major problem.. it can't react fast to any given situation...
take Covid, the US had one of the slowest reaction time of any major
country to Covid... the checks and balances of democracy also
means democracy simple can't respond quickly to an emergency...
one of the major pluses of a democracy is also its greatest weakness....
and one of the salient points of reason is that it too, is not
fast or well situated to act quickly.. for reason to work, it
needs information... the more information reason has, the
better choices it will make...

I just can't get my train of thought back and thus ends this post....

Kropotkinin
Last edited by Peter Kropotkin on Mon Mar 20, 2023 10:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
promethean75
Posts: 4932
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 10:29 pm

Re: some more thoughts....

Post by promethean75 »

Noted, and thank u.
Walker
Posts: 14280
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: some more thoughts....

Post by Walker »

Peter Kropotkin wrote: Mon Mar 20, 2023 7:00 pm and to give some context to this debate, we turn to our
modern battle between reason and feelings... IQ45 has repeatedly
stated that he follows "his gut" over reason...and the entire MAGA movement
is based on feelings, not on reason...and much of what drives our modern
discourse is based on feelings and not on reason...the clash over
abortion is a reason vs emotions debate... pro-choice is based
on science and "pro-life" is not...(in fact, the entire MAGA movement
is anti-science, anti-reason and anti-education.. they say so every
chance they get... Desantis assault on education is based on
anti-education beliefs and IQ45 spend 4 years trying to dismantling
the entire education department in the US government)
Pee Yew

- I can see why you buried the lede. It's a pile, a pile of crap. You're either uninformed or a propagandist.
- My gut tells me it's the latter, based on the facts that refute this smelly pile of buried lede.
- I have no need to dance. No need to inform you of the facts you twist, and the truth, and implications of the facts that you twist.
- The cost/benefit doesn't add up. I have no need to hear you defend lies, and such obvious lies they are, to those who are informed and find truth to be a priority, rather than propaganda being the priority.
- It's so wrong it's like a joke posting. It smells like Brandon, the joke president.
- It's enough to highlight the entirety of this pile of yours as a long, curling, smelly whopper of propaganda.
- You are anti-truth, thus anti-philosopher.
Peter Kropotkin
Posts: 1505
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2022 5:11 am

Re: some more thoughts....

Post by Peter Kropotkin »

Walker wrote: Tue Mar 21, 2023 12:44 pm
Peter Kropotkin wrote: Mon Mar 20, 2023 7:00 pm and to give some context to this debate, we turn to our
modern battle between reason and feelings... IQ45 has repeatedly
stated that he follows "his gut" over reason...and the entire MAGA movement
is based on feelings, not on reason...and much of what drives our modern
discourse is based on feelings and not on reason...the clash over
abortion is a reason vs emotions debate... pro-choice is based
on science and "pro-life" is not...(in fact, the entire MAGA movement
is anti-science, anti-reason and anti-education.. they say so every
chance they get... Desantis assault on education is based on
anti-education beliefs and IQ45 spend 4 years trying to dismantling
the entire education department in the US government)
Pee Yew

- I can see why you buried the lede. It's a pile, a pile of crap. You're either uninformed or a propagandist.
- My gut tells me it's the latter, based on the facts that refute this smelly pile of buried lede.
- I have no need to dance. No need to inform you of the facts you twist, and the truth, and implications of the facts that you twist.
- The cost/benefit doesn't add up. I have no need to hear you defend lies, and such obvious lies they are, to those who are informed and find truth to be a priority, rather than propaganda being the priority.
- It's so wrong it's like a joke posting. It smells like Brandon, the joke president.
- It's enough to highlight the entirety of this pile of yours as a long, curling, smelly whopper of propaganda.
- You are anti-truth, thus anti-philosopher.

K: my apologies for upsetting you.. I suggest you take a mental
health day and spend it thinking about daisies and puppy dogs...
I know that reality hurt those of you on the right...
it can be traumatic to learn that facts have a liberal
slant...so once again, I apologize for upsetting you and all
the other right-wing snowflakes...my bad...

Kropotkin
Walker
Posts: 14280
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: some more thoughts....

Post by Walker »

- There's no upset, and you're a passive-aggressive asshole for making the assertion.
- I'm just making an observation of your smelly lies. Call it, speaking Truth to Evil, if you like.
- To knowingly apply the powers of reason to a false premise in order to grow a tainted fruit is a definition in search of a word. It's also the waste of a life.
- What is that word?

For example, the notion that DeSantis is anti-education is of course a ridiculous false premise aimed to fit reality into the frame of a political narrative. Stinky and crude.

Let Ron speak for himself:
Governor Ron DeSantis Debunks Book Ban Hoax

TAMPA, Fla. — Today, Governor Ron DeSantis further set the record straight, debunking the mainstream media, unions and leftist activists’ hoax of empty library bookshelves and political theater pretending that Florida’s schools cannot teach about topics like African American History, including topics like slavery. Governor DeSantis touted Florida’s high quality standards for required instruction of African American History, extensive African American History educational requirements in state law that Governor DeSantis has successfully helped expand in recent years. Governor DeSantis also displayed examples of books that have been found in libraries and classrooms in 23 school districts across the state that contained pornographic content and other types of violent and age-inappropriate content. For more information, click here.

“Exposing the ‘book ban’ hoax is important because it reveals that some are attempting to use our schools for indoctrination,” said Governor Ron DeSantis. “In Florida, pornographic and inappropriate materials that have been snuck into our classrooms and libraries to sexualize our students violate our state education standards. Florida is the education state and that means providing students with a quality education free from sexualization and harmful materials that are not age appropriate.”

“Education is about the pursuit of truth, not woke indoctrination,” said Florida Commissioner of Education Manny Diaz, Jr. “Under Governor DeSantis, Florida is committed to rigorous academic content and high standards so that students learn how to think and receive the tools necessary to go forth and make great decisions.”

For more
https://www.flgov.com/2023/03/08/govern ... -ban-hoax/
Walker
Posts: 14280
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: some more thoughts....

Post by Walker »

Cut and paste doesn’t require much bother or waste much of my precious time to prove your wrongness.
Here is some more of what disqualifies your premise.
This information was easily available to you, as it is to everyone who is interested in the truth rather than spreading lies.

Continued ...
Myth: Florida teachers could be committing a 3rd-degree felony by having books on “certain topics” within their classrooms.

Fact: Florida has taken a stand against pornography and sexual material in the classroom. HB 1557 and HB 1467 further solidify Florida’s commitment to ensuring that content available in our schools is appropriate for students.

Statute 847.012 has been in law for many years and carries a felony penalty for the distribution of pornographic material to children.



Following the 2022 Legislative Session, Governor DeSantis signed House Bill (HB) 7, to protect students from woke indoctrination in schools. The bill requires instruction, instructional materials, and professional development in public schools to adhere to principles of individual freedom including that no person is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive just by virtue of his or her race or sex and meritocracy or hard work ethic are not racist but fundamental to the right to pursue success.

HB 7 also expanded instruction of African American History to develop students’ understanding of the ramifications of prejudice and racism. Classroom instruction must educate students on what it means to be a respectful and responsible citizen and encourage tolerance of diversity to protect democratic principles that our country is founded on. Schools are required to teach factual information on topics including African American History and the Holocaust instead of subjective indoctrination that pushes collective guilt.

Governor DeSantis also signed HB 1557, Parental Rights in Education, which reinforced parents’ fundamental rights to make decisions regarding the upbringing of their children. The bill prohibits classroom instruction on sexual orientation or gender identity in kindergarten through 3rd grade and prohibits instruction that is not age appropriate for students. During the upcoming 2023 Legislative Session, the Governor is in support of legislation which would expand these restrictions through the 8th grade.

Additionally in 2022, the Governor signed HB 1467, which requires school districts to be transparent in the selection of instructional materials, including library and reading materials. As a part of the Year of the Parent, this legislation aims to preserve the rights of parents to make decisions about what materials their children are exposed to in school.
Walker
Posts: 14280
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: some more thoughts....

Post by Walker »

Some more facts ... upon which to base some more thoughts, same link, same source ... the governor of the state.
Myth: Florida schools have been directed to “empty libraries” and “cover classroom books.”

Fact: School districts are required to report the number of books removed from schools based on legislation passed in 2022. Of the 23 districts that reported removing materials, the most removed were tied at 19 in Duval and St. Johns Counties — not even close to a whole classroom library.

Of the 175 books removed across the state, 164 (94%) were removed from media centers, and 153 (87%) were identified as pornographic, violent, or inappropriate for their grade level.

Myth: Florida is banning children’s books about Hank Aaron and Roberto Clemente.

Fact: Books found by parents in Florida schools:
Gender Queer: A Memoir – an explicit, pornographic book showing sex acts.
Flamer – a graphic book about young boys performing sexual acts at a summer camp.
This Book Is Gay – a book containing instructions on “the ins and outs of gay sex.”
Let’s Talk About It – a book that contains graphic depictions about how to masturbate for males and females.

Myth: Florida has banned the instruction of African American History, including the discussion of slavery and the aftermath of slavery.

Fact: Under Governor DeSantis, instruction on African American History has only expanded. The Governor has signed legislation that ensures that Florida’s students learn about the 1920 Ocoee Election Day Riots in addition to requiring instruction on slavery, the Civil War, and Jim Crow laws.

Additionally, the following is required instruction on the history of African Americans in Florida statute:

The history of African peoples before the political conflicts that led to the development of slavery
The passage to America
The enslavement experience
Abolition
The history and contributions of Americans of the African diaspora to society
HB 7, signed in 2022, further expanded instruction of African American History to develop students’ understanding of the ramifications of prejudice and racism.

Myth: Florida teachers could be committing a 3rd-degree felony by having books on “certain topics” within their classrooms.
Fact: Florida has taken a stand against pornography and sexual material in the classroom. HB 1557 and HB 1467 further solidify Florida’s commitment to ensuring that content available in our schools is appropriate for students.
Statute 847.012 has been in law for many years and carries a felony penalty for the distribution of pornographic material to children.
Peter Kropotkin
Posts: 1505
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2022 5:11 am

Re: some more thoughts....

Post by Peter Kropotkin »

anyway, back to the topic at hand,
which is the nature of the rules and games we play...
for example, capitalism is wildly defended as the
only economic system that ''delivers the good" unlike
communism and yet, that depends on how you define
the economic system of capitalism... in fact, I have said
previously that within capitalism lies one of the great
problems of our age which is income inequality.....
why do so few have so much and so many people live
with virtually nothing... it has been said that roughly
500 people have as much wealth as half the world's population,
or 4 billion people.... and how is that just or equal?

"We hold these truth to be self-evident, that all men are created equal
that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights,
that among these are Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness"

that all men are created equal... we define that right politically as
the right to vote, one man one vote... and we define that legally
within the concept of how "justice is blind" that we are judge equally
within the law... that no one is treated differently legally by their
wealth, power, titles or material possessions...( and we know this not
to be true, as IQ45 still hasn't been indicted for crimes committed
before, during and after his presidency)
but why don't we accept the idea that all men/persons are equal,
within the economic sphere? Economically, why aren't all persons
considered to be equal? why does Bill Gates or Musk have billions
and the vast majority of people have to struggle week to week
to pay bills and stay out of debt? a financial survey has stated that
59% of all Americans are just one paycheck from being homeless..
which is roughly 200 million Americans, give or take a few million....

how can we say that capitalism is the "best" choice for an economic
system if half of all Americans are only one paycheck from economic
ruin? one can make a strong argument that the vast number of homeless
in America is the result of capitalism and that violence within America
is also caused by capitalism...and the number of drugs addicts
and addicts in general is caused by the stress and unequalness of
capitalism...and as we all know, the number one killer of people
worldwide is stress.. I point out Japan as being one place
where this is true.. they even have a word for people who work
themselves to death, "Karoshi" and 1 in 5 of all Japanese people
are at risk of "Karoshi"...if Japan has roughly 125 million people, that is
roughly 25 million people, again give or take a few million...

so what would a defense of the ''game" of capitalism be?
and what rules are considered to be fair in capitalism?
and just as important, what aspect of life is deemed
to be unnecessary and even wasteful in capitalism?

for example, capitalism has no interest in such abstract
things as love, peace, hope, charity, forgiveness..
and why? for these things do not create profits..
human values that are some of the most important values
we have as human beings are considered to be of no value
in a capitalistic system.. for example, seeking love, has no
value in capitalism because it doesn't create profits/money...
same with peace... or honor or justice or equality....are
denied in capitalism because they don't create profits...
and what is nihilism? the devaluation of human beings
and their values.... thus capitalism promotes nihilism..
as the primary value of capitalism... if capitalism is
willing as it has shown itself to be, willing to kill people
for profits, then people have no value within a capitalistic
system... the only value is the creation of profits,
and all other values are devalued.. and that is
nihilism....

so why should we play the game of capitalism if the only
thing create is the nihilism of devaluing people? if money is
the only thing of value, then why play the game of capitalism?

other economic systems don't practice the devaluation
of people as a standard operating procedure...
other economic systems don't practice nihilism as capitalism does...

why don't we play that game? or at best, create rules that prevent
capitalism from the standard practice of devaluing human beings
and their values? This devaluing is nihilism.. and why should
we practice nihilism in our economic system but not practice
nihilism in our political or social system?

''That all men are created equal"

Kropotkin
Peter Kropotkin
Posts: 1505
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2022 5:11 am

Re: some more thoughts....

Post by Peter Kropotkin »

if we are to understand that philosophy is simply
the act of understanding the rules we play by,
it ought to be understood that philosophy and politics
and economics, to name a few disciplines, can also
be understood to be a way of understanding how the rules
should or ought to be....we can understand what are the rules
and we can explore what rules we ought to be playing under...

we can explore what means to be human under this set of rules
as oppose to another set of rules... changing the rules to
better benefit the game at hand is a common practice...
for example, Baseball has changed the rules recently to sped up
the game... there is now a time clock in baseball... the pitcher
has 20 seconds to make his pitch and the batter must be in
the batter box within that same 20 second time period...
for me personally, part of the charm of baseball is the lack
of time within the game....for example, football/soccer game
must be done within 90 minutes, baseball doesn't have that timer
within it...the game will last as long as the game will last...the rules
were changed to make the game better... but why can't we change
the rules within life to make the game better for all of us?

we can know what rules are but we can also explore what rules ought to be....
in terms of the rules we have that govern our lives, our economic
and political systems... why can't we be equal in our economic
lives as we are, supposedly in the political as well as the judicial
system... you tell me...

Kropotkin
Peter Kropotkin
Posts: 1505
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2022 5:11 am

Re: some more thoughts....

Post by Peter Kropotkin »

so let us apply this thinking about rules in regards to
morality/ethics.....

Given the reality of today, that we live in a no-god world,
what rules should we abide in regards to ethics/morality?
Philosophy since Nietzsche has struggled over this problem...
every major philosopher since Nietzsche has written
about what ethical/moral means given our no-god world....

if there is no god, then on what do we base our ethics/morals on?
if we say, we cannot harm another, but we hold to an economic
system that is based on harming others.. capitalism survives by
specifically harming others by allowing income inequality within society,
the state.... income inequality is the specific act of harming others
by allowing a few people to hold more wealth than half the worlds
population... as mentioned, 59% of all Americans are within one week
of no paycheck from being homeless.. and how is that specific fact
not harmful to others? how do we justify allowing millions to barely
holding on avoiding being homeless or going hungry,
as millions are going hungry in America, as being fair or just or equal?

if our political, social, economic and judicial systems harm people
as they do, every single day, then that makes a lie out of the
basic and fundamental assertion of the Declaration of Independence...

"THAT ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL"

Every single sentence of the Declaration depends on the one
sentence, which is "all men are created equal"...
if we deny that sentence, then the entire declaration of Independence
and the US constitution, are based on lies....and we must, must
discard both the constitution and the declaration... as being a lie.....

Those on the right will have no problem discarding the declaration
and the constitution.. they have always had problems with both...
and they would have many parades and fireworks if the declaration
and constitution were ended... for they believe and say so often,
that "all men are not created equal" and those who are superior should
be rewarded by wealth, titles, fame and material possessions...
but once again, how do we know who is or who isn't superior?
the wealthy by definition are the superior ones, or so claims
the conservative...wealth is the defining feature of who is
superior and a lack of wealth is proof of being inferior...
but how does that explain such people as Jesus, MLK, Gandhi,
the Buddha, Einstein or Lincoln?

so, how do we know how is superior and who isn't?

and so what does that question have to do with the declaration
of independence, in which the statement is,

"all men are created equal"

how do you square the circle?

Kropotkin
Peter Kropotkin
Posts: 1505
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2022 5:11 am

Re: some more thoughts....

Post by Peter Kropotkin »

ok, conservatives hold that the most important
aspect of existence lies in securing safety/security....
and they say so all the time....look at how they talk
about the danger of BLM running wild in the streets,
listen to IQ45 and you would think that a city like Portland Or,
was entirely burned down... (not true at all, but hay, never
let the truth interfere with a politically beneficial lie)
and this fear of rampant destruction litter the landscape
of GOP/MAGA rhetoric...the only way you can be safe is to
vote GOP/MAGA... that is one of the major selling points of
the GOP/MAGA rhetoric... fear sells in America today....

but secondarily the GOP/MAGA rhetoric talks about freedom..
you can't be free with the current makeup of the government...
you have to surrender your freedoms if you listen to the white house,
the CDC, the IRS, any government institution, the media,
or liberals.... and yet, they must lie to make this work....
but the primary lie is that the democrats/liberals are trying to
take away your freedom...
but the question before us is this, is freedom really all its
cracked up to be? Our freedom is inherently limited by the forces
of nature.... we are limited by the laws of gravity, the laws of physics,
the laws of evolution, that there are various forces at work in nature
that define us and limit us..

how do we hold to freedom given that much of what we can do,
is limited by such ''laws'' as gravity and physics?

I am, as some might say, determined by the forces of gravity,
of physics and evolution, (to name a few forces that determine
how we live and how we die... for example humans, all life is
slowly ended by entropy, whether we want it to or not)
we cannot escape those forces and so how can we declare ourselves
free if we cannot escape such forces as entropy or gravity?

the Kantian question of "what am I to do?" is limited by those forces
of nature... I cannot fly like a bird, I cannot live at sea like the fish,
I cannot live underground like ants or worms..... I cannot hunt
like a lion and I cannot be a dog..... but that is our programming..
we are programmed by evolution to have certain traits.. just
as dogs are programmed to be dogs and only dogs, and cows
can only be cows and birds can only be birds...
I am limited to being a human being.. I can be nothing else...
so where is my freedom?

we have freedom within the possibilities allow to us by the forces
of nature, of gravity and of evolution and of entropy....
we have freedom in the limited spaces of those forces...
I can choose to be catholic or choose to be a democrat
or I can be an atheist or I can live as an stoic..
my choices are limited to what ism's and ideologies I can
choose...I can be choose to be some aspect of an ism..
I was an anarchist for over a decade, I made that choice...
and I lived that life entirely... I didn't have a bank account or
paid taxes or lived in an apartment or house... I lived off the
grid... and that was my choice... and today, I choose to live
differently... not as an anarchist but as a liberal democrat...
and that is my choice... that is how I choose freedom..
by picking and choosing what ism/ideology I live by....
picking freedom means picking out what ism/ideologies
I am going to live by.. I can't choose to avoid the pains of
being human, I will suffer by growing old and having illness
and breaking bones and finally I will die.. curtesy of entropy...
a force I have no control or power over...so I can't worry about that....
I can only focus on who I am as a person, am I a good person or
am I bad person? Am I a philosophical person, or do I just watch TV to
deaden my soul, like most people in America......

is wearing a mask a sign of freedom? I would say no, and the reason
for that is simple, we are human beings and as such, we are social
creatures that live within a society/state... that is a part of being
human that we have no control over.. it is part of being human...
among our basic needs is the need for love, for belonging, for esteem,
and each of these needs require for us to live within a society/state...
the need for these needs of love, belonging, esteem is as necessary
as our need for food, water, shelter, education, health care...
we cannot survive as human beings without meeting our need of
love or esteem or food or water or shelter.... we cannot survive
without other human beings... and that is a biological fact...
one we cannot escape from... just like we cannot escape from
gravity or evolution or physics...freedom must be worked on
within the confines of our biological needs, regardless of that
those needs are physical or emotional or psychological....
we must meet our needs, all of them or we are or become
damaged human beings...

and no matter how much we demand freedom, freedom is limited
by our basic biological necessities of the physical, emotional,
and psychological needs we have....just like we cannot escape
our being determined by forces outside of our control like gravity
or physics, we cannot escape our being controlled by our needs of
the body and/or soul....

what is freedom? that which is left over once we have
understood our basic and fundamental needs like gravity
and physics.. that we cannot escape......

Kropotkin
Post Reply