I am pleased to see this thread back on track. I agree with Caesar, good reading here.
But then you havent found it, trust me I am older than you. :smile5:Quote:
Originally Posted by caesar
Printable View
I am pleased to see this thread back on track. I agree with Caesar, good reading here.
But then you havent found it, trust me I am older than you. :smile5:Quote:
Originally Posted by caesar
Law is an excellent example of useful philosophy.
Another purpose would just be to satisfy curiosity. I mentioned thinking about consciousness as one example, and 'the Atheist' dismissed it a bit easily as 'being explainable by science'. Can science really answer all the thought experiments?
Assume for example you could replicate the exact position and energy level of each atom in a complete human body. Build a completely identical clone, including state of mind and memories. Then kill the 'old' human. Did 'something' die?
But questions like 'what is the meaning of life (or one's own life) make no sense. I might as well as what is the meaning of a tree, or even a stone or a nitrogen atom. The right way to phrase the question is 'what should I do with my life?'
I don't know Dodo. I get the objection to the increasingly esoteric nature of specializing, but I think most everyone should have some notion of history and who the major players were, and why, and what philosophy is, and why Kant is so important and what role his work had in creating the systems we live under today.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dodo25
Wittgenstein would probably look at the paradox of your questions themselves, rather than caring what answers are provided; his studies on language are important for modern linguistics and post-structuralism.
*Meaning* in very great degree is a game each individual mind plays.
I didn't say anyting against knowing what Kant is about, as I said I think ethics and law are useful products of philosophy.
In a way, it is even important to know what i.e. Plato said about essentialism, even though it is complete nonsense it has influenced Western culture for centuries and it is still used to illustrate misunderstandings about things.
Yet I'll say it again, the whole field of metaphysics is pretty much nonsense, and most philosophers who lived before Darwin didn't even have a chance to 'get it right'.
This is where I should insert a "QFT" or some emoticon to show my 100% concurrence with your post, but I'll settle for:Quote:
Originally Posted by Dodo25
Bravo!
I believe in knowledge Dodo, and not a chip on my shoulder in delightful belligerence declaring that everything but engineering and biology is necessary. I'm not a philosopher and I'm never going to be, but I realize the value in challenging concepts to lay the ground for new ones, and biology is never going to fully explain why atoms bound in such a way to create chemical sequencing in such a way leads to a mind, and not just a central processing unit. I feel sorry for people who vomit on humanities and the arts, because they make aesthetic choices every day of their lives, and seem to feel threatened by enriching on that--the years I have spent listening to people debate Wittgenstein and Kant were valuable to me, and I am going to return to that.
I am tired of the chip on the shoulder attitude so prevalent in this community about disparaging intellect. I happen to like thinking, and like striving towards a thesis and their various constructs, and I will continue to learn as long as I live.
You are misrepresenting my posts. Again, I think Kant is great, he is one of my favorite philosophers. I haven't really read Wittgenstein but I've heard good things about him. And I didn't say art is useless, I was talking about metaphysics. Whether art is useless is another question.
I am sure you are right. The deeper I delve and the farther I see, I discover there is a greater truth than what I knew previously. Someone has very beautifully said, "The older and wiser I become, the more ignorant I know I am." By the way, how can you be so sure that you are older than me? Is it my youthful writing? :smilewinkgrin:Quote:
Originally Posted by dizzydoll
But before I ask myself the question "What should I do with my life?", I will have to find an answer to the question, "Why should I do anything with my life?" or "Why should I live?". This question is not as simple as it seems if you are an agnostic. Nobody asked me if I wanted to be born. If there is a God and He created me, I would want to ask him to switch places with me, because I don't want to be human, I want to be God. But this is not a topic for discussion here. All I meant in my previous post was that the philosophical questions that were relevant to my ancestors are still important to me today. And I asked that question to Satan because s/he has stated (in post #46) that “philosophy is very much irrelevant today”, but has in the same post acknowledged the importance of the question “What is the meaning of life?” I was curious because Satan’s arguments in favor of philosophy are brilliant.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dodo25
Yes its fresh... and btw that quote is true. :thumbsup: The disparity between a weed and a flower is judgment.Quote:
Originally Posted by caesar
Indeed, nobody asked you, but as of now, you happen to be alive. I like to think of it the following way: Out of all possible sets of DNA, it is ME that is alive right now at this very moment some 13.7 billion years after the big bang, in the 21st century CE. I think it's a priviledge, and I am deeply fascinated by the fact that matter self-organized itself over time to form a structure of sufficient complexity to gain consciousness. I'm talking about humans and their brain of course.Quote:
Originally Posted by caesar
For that reason, I feel the need to understand why I am here, that's why I researched cosmology and evolution. I now understand why humans are the way they are and why we have the kind of feelings we have, it all makes sense once you look at it through the eye of evolution. And I must say the resulting understanding is much deeper and more satisfying than any religious dogma. I don't 'believe', I understand.
So one thing I like to do in my life is understanding as much as possible. It is absolutely mind-boggling how far science has come in the past few centuries. I wish someone could bring back say Darwin or Newton and explain them what we now know. They would be thrilled beyond anything imaginable. Some people don't really care about that stuff and just live their lifes without thinking about it. Others are satisfied by 'God just did it', which explains nothing at all. I don't understand how either of them do it, but it's their right to think that way, as long as they are happy they shall believe what they want (altough that doesn't mean I let their wrong or unsupported beliefs pass unchallenged when they present it in a discussion).
And finally for the last thing, life's fun, and since there most likely is only one life, why not try to make the best out of it? Have fun, enjoy time with firends and loved one's, achieve something... That's just how I see it, maybe it helps you, maybe you think it's a stupid view.
Post #46 was just a parody of the general opinion on the matter to outline its ostensive asininity; the flaw was, it wasn't exaggerated enough, as many would agree with every single word (without knowing a single thing about Satre or Camus), and some, such as yourself perhaps, would get annoyed by it.Quote:
Originally Posted by caesar
See Satan, Post #48: 'Well, you didn't get the sarcasm; but that's because it wasn't quite apparent.'
As some have already noted, Pragmatism too is a philosophical position, as is Instrumentalism, as is Positivism, as is the stance of the OP; I've always found it difficult to understand how so many can dog on the usefulness of philosophy for society and for the individual, yet can still spend so much of their time watching television and movies and reading magazines and pondering whether a monochromatic de Brogile's wave amplitude can be represented by an expression just like that of classical running waves, if matter can indeed behave like waves as conjectured from the conclusions of the photoelectric effect--or are the latter just a more endearing class of drivel?
Yeah post #46 was pretty funny to read. I only got the sarcasm after he mentioned lobotomy :) But then it was quite apparent. Funny how one person is being sarcastic and others agree with it, makes it interesting.
Or, in most cases, cultural constructs.Quote:
Originally Posted by dizzydoll
Quite right.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dodo25
Given the size of the universe, the odds of being alive right now, communicating on a computer are so astronomical as to be almost infinite.
You should write a book - isn't the entire history of philosophy about understanding those questions?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dodo25
Sounds pretty sensible to me!Quote:
Originally Posted by Dodo25
You could even call it a philosophy.
Dodo, I do not believe the study of metaphysics is itself a waste, and I will return to this later as I am in a rare stable window and want to work today, only to add, I respect science, even as advances in neurology and robotics makes me uneasy, but science cannot answer everything that satisfies the nature of reality and ontology. Even the failures of metaphysical inquiries are useful, and I'll start a thread on this in the near future.
Sounds interesting, please post a link or notice here once you start that thread. Because I don't have enough time to check the whole forum, I only pick a few threads I find interesting and focus on them. I'll then explain why I think metaphysics is incapable of producing anything useful.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jozanny