The Free Talk Live BBS
Free Talk Live => The Polling Pit => Topic started by: Brian Wolf on December 31, 2006, 04:38:56 AM
-
My idea is that much like Psychologists get interested in Psychology because of some disorder of their own that they want to fix, Philosophers don't really understand the point of life, they can't 'deal' well with people and they need to understand some deeper order to the universe that makes sense to them in order to live 'normal' lives.
One examples is the idea of isolating oneself in a cave completely away from mundane society until they become 'enlightened'. In other words, until the world makes sense to them again.
'Normal' people already know how to 'deal' and don't need to spend much time thinking about the meaning of life.
The great Philosophers actually make progress in understanding the world simply by obsessing over the great questions until they make some sort of sense, in order for them to feel like they are a useful part of society.
What do you guys think?
-
As in they smoke crack?
-
Always.
-
Always.
You still sound a little scared. Try to take a deep, deep breath before you call in. It helps.
-
That's a really interesting theory, and I'm sure that in some cases it's true. Some philosophers, though, I feel were motivated by a genuine desire for truth rather than a coping mechanism for themselves. I would be wary of saying "always" to just about anything.
-
I would say no, only because most that I do know tend to be down to earth people. It's just they're the kind of people that can analyze complex situations and give you easy answers to them, insomuch that their answers are about the universal/unparticular nature of the situations themselves.
-- Bridget
-
My idea is that much like Psychologists get interested in Psychology because of some disorder of their own that they want to fix, Philosophers don't really understand the point of life, they can't 'deal' well with people and they need to understand some deeper order to the universe that makes sense to them in order to live 'normal' lives.
I will agree to the vast generalization, but specifics wreck the argument.
That sounded kinda retarded, but I'll leave it.
Its like saying doctors want to cure illness because they are sick, or carpenters want to build nice houses because their own houses are shambles.
I've had some experience with Psychiatrists and their kind. They are doctors. Psychologists are not. Whatever, its a good profession, and the ones that are good are really good. Thats the way the cookie crumbles in the medical profession.
Why they do it? Thats a case by case scenario. Some are just assholes who enjoy fat paychecks. Some are wonderful people who want to help people and are trained properly, they spend their whole life seeking knowledge and applying it to problems. I wont badmouth the profession, just the ones who suck at it.
Philosophers are a little different. Its difficult to determine the good that can come out of the philosophers work. Maybe its a noble cause to dissect the reasons people do what they do, but most of them dont matter. All they can do is teach the next breed to think in their own fashion if they themselves are not spectacular participants in the philosophy game.
Peters Principle applies to the philosophy game. People rise to the level of their incompetence. They can go no further. I think when they reach that point, they owe it to the student to admit their flaws but most scholars wont ever do that.
-
I need some more spumante.
-
I dislike wine. Champagne. All that stuff.
Not that I wouldnt drink it. I'm an uncultured prick.
Its like giving Glenfiddich to someone who drinks Yukon Jack.
It should be noted I'm wrecked on Blackbush.
-
Bill, the first alcoholic drinks were beer. Even in Sumeria, beer recipes were considered so sacred, that they were kept secret under pain of death. :shock:
-- Bridget
-
I did not mean to say that all psychologists were disturbed prior to their taking up that profession, but I do know that a lot of them do get interested in the field for that reason. There is nothing at all wrong with that. I myself suffer from a mental illness.
And I did not mean to come off as disrespecting philosophers in any way.
In tribal societies the 'shaman', who was the tribal equivalent to a Philosopher/Psychiatrist, would often be a person who suffered though some great illness themselves.
In some tribes, Shamans were referred to as the "Wounded Healers", and it was believed that having gone through illness themselves that the Shamans had a better perspective how their patients were feeling.
Also I think that part of my point has been lost, I have not been very clear.
I am not saying that the great philosophers were crazy when they wrote their defining works. I am saying that they started out that way, and once they learned the secret of how to live their own lives, the healed themselves, and then shared with the rest of the world their stories.
-
That's a really interesting theory, and I'm sure that in some cases it's true. Some philosophers, though, I feel were motivated by a genuine desire for truth rather than a coping mechanism for themselves. I would be wary of saying "always" to just about anything.
Just about anything eh? Generalizations are fun.
-
Hey I've been drinking Yukon Jack all week!
-
That sucks
-
My idea is that much like Psychologists get interested in Psychology because of some disorder of their own that they want to fix,
....or somebody else's disorder that they want to fix. Or maybe they want to know why people believe certain things. Or why they act certain ways. Or maybe they want to make people happier by understanding themselves better. Or maybe all of the above.
Philosophers don't really understand the point of life, they can't 'deal' well with people and they need to understand some deeper order to the universe that makes sense to them in order to live 'normal' lives.
That implies that non-philosophers do understand the meaning of life, as opposed to wandering through their existence not bothering to think about it. Not to mention that there is a meaning in life, not even to mention the meaning of life.
Maybe psychologists and philosophers are people who actually wouldn't mind figuring out something about why people think and act the way they do before they die. And get paid for it. Just a thought.
-
No, philosophers are more interested in making themselves look clever. I think that a lot of them, especially political philsophers are simply attempting to justify their own opinions as present it as the ultimate truth. Their philsophy, ideology or whatever you want to call it is simply an abstract excuse to justify a course of action which otherwise wouldn't be looked upon favorably. No one wants to be wrong or immoral but many people also are in positions which require them to do just that. They are doing something wrong but they don't want to stop doing it, so they come up with some convoluted reason why what they are doing is right.
"We are not stealing from you poor subjects because we are a band of thugs but because we are noble government and we are protecting you and establishing justice" It is a way for bad people to feel good about themselves and to sleep at night.
-
No, philosophers are more interested in making themselves look clever. I think that a lot of them, especially political philsophers are simply attempting to justify their own opinions as present it as the ultimate truth. Their philsophy, ideology or whatever you want to call it is simply an abstract excuse to justify a course of action which otherwise wouldn't be looked upon favorably. No one wants to be wrong or immoral but many people also are in positions which require them to do just that. They are doing something wrong but they don't want to stop doing it, so they come up with some convoluted reason why what they are doing is right.
"We are not stealing from you poor subjects because we are a band of thugs but because we are noble government and we are protecting you and establishing justice" It is a way for bad people to feel good about themselves and to sleep at night.
I agree, they want attention. Also many quips and quotes are taken and fit to a situation that has no link to one another in an attempt to be smart. Its all about what people define the words in the quotes and how they apply them to their situation.
-
I guess you never talked to Dennett then. o.O He tends to be a down to earth dude. Hell, he has a farm if memory serves. o.O
Then there's Quentin Smith (*drools*) and his work in Quantum Mind theory and what not. ^.^ And a fellow evil Atheist! MUAHAHAHA!
-- Bridget
-
No, philosophers are more interested in making themselves look clever. I think that a lot of them, especially political philsophers are simply attempting to justify their own opinions as present it as the ultimate truth. Their philsophy, ideology or whatever you want to call it is simply an abstract excuse to justify a course of action which otherwise wouldn't be looked upon favorably. No one wants to be wrong or immoral but many people also are in positions which require them to do just that. They are doing something wrong but they don't want to stop doing it, so they come up with some convoluted reason why what they are doing is right.
"We are not stealing from you poor subjects because we are a band of thugs but because we are noble government and we are protecting you and establishing justice" It is a way for bad people to feel good about themselves and to sleep at night.
I agree, they want attention. Also many quips and quotes are taken and fit to a situation that has no link to one another in an attempt to be smart. Its all about what people define the words in the quotes and how they apply them to their situation.
How well can you play that thing?
-
No, philosophers are more interested in making themselves look clever. I think that a lot of them, especially political philsophers are simply attempting to justify their own opinions as present it as the ultimate truth. Their philsophy, ideology or whatever you want to call it is simply an abstract excuse to justify a course of action which otherwise wouldn't be looked upon favorably. No one wants to be wrong or immoral but many people also are in positions which require them to do just that. They are doing something wrong but they don't want to stop doing it, so they come up with some convoluted reason why what they are doing is right.
"We are not stealing from you poor subjects because we are a band of thugs but because we are noble government and we are protecting you and establishing justice" It is a way for bad people to feel good about themselves and to sleep at night.
I agree, they want attention. Also many quips and quotes are taken and fit to a situation that has no link to one another in an attempt to be smart. Its all about what people define the words in the quotes and how they apply them to their situation.
How well can you play that thing?
talking bout my guitar? i can shred very well
-
Studying philosophy (not in a college class or some other structured environment) is an amazing experience. Truly understanding a given theory, thinking about it, comparing and contrasting it with others, etc, can (and for me, did) cause a profound change in one's worldview.
And once you start getting into it, you realize that we as humans don't understand anything. Even the philosophers know this. Things like truth, right or wrong, morality, words, ideas; all these things we take for granted as a constant, when they may not be. What is an idea? How can you know that someone understands the idea that you have? What is time? Anyone who's tripped knows that how we perceive time isn't even constant: our consciousness can be altered to make minutes feel like hours with a mere chemical. So then what is our mind? If it's a mere chemical process, why are we self-aware? Where does that awareness come from? If it's all chemicals, do we have free will? If it is just a chemical reaction, than we are just infinitely complex robots who, at the lowest level, cannot be any more responsible for our own actions than water is for turning to ice, yet if we do have conscious free will, than there's something beyond a mere complex chemical reaction going on up there in your noggin.
These are all extremely basic, yet never-endingly debatable, philosophical questions. To dismiss anyone trying to seek the truth to those questions as looney is, well, telling of the person doing the condemning. Don't get me wrong: I'm just as skeptical toward anyone who claims to have the answer to those questions and refuses to change their opinion (religious people, for example), but to close one's ears and skip through life ignoring these questions is no way to live, IMO.
Besides, it's fun to be able to blow your own mind trying to fathom all of existance, and what would exist if the universe was never created (and the paradox of existence without existence).
-
Studying philosophy (not in a college class or some other structured environment) is an amazing experience. Truly understanding a given theory, thinking about it, comparing and contrasting it with others, etc, can (and for me, did) cause a profound change in one's worldview.
And once you start getting into it, you realize that we as humans don't understand anything. Even the philosophers know this. Things like truth, right or wrong, morality, words, ideas; all these things we take for granted as a constant, when they may not be. What is an idea? How can you know that someone understands the idea that you have? What is time? Anyone who's tripped knows that how we perceive time isn't even constant: our consciousness can be altered to make minutes feel like hours with a mere chemical. So then what is our mind? If it's a mere chemical process, why are we self-aware? Where does that awareness come from? If it's all chemicals, do we have free will? If it is just a chemical reaction, than we are just infinitely complex robots who, at the lowest level, cannot be any more responsible for our own actions than water is for turning to ice, yet if we do have conscious free will, than there's something beyond a mere complex chemical reaction going on up there in your noggin.
These are all extremely basic, yet never-endingly debatable, philosophical questions. To dismiss anyone trying to seek the truth to those questions as looney is, well, telling of the person doing the condemning. Don't get me wrong: I'm just as skeptical toward anyone who claims to have the answer to those questions and refuses to change their opinion (religious people, for example), but to close one's ears and skip through life ignoring these questions is no way to live, IMO.
Besides, it's fun to be able to blow your own mind trying to fathom all of existance, and what would exist if the universe was never created (and the paradox of existence without existence).
I totally agree with you.
I guess I stated my point the wrong way.
I am not trying to dismiss anyone as looney. Part of what makes me think that way is that I myself have what some describe as a "mental illness" even though others would call it a hormonal imbalance. At any rate, I have struggled myself with many of the questions that you list. I do not dismiss myself or my ideas just because of my motivations behind being interested in it. That would be absurd. "Mental illnesses" can be cured. People can overcome them. In fact a lot of people who do overcome their handicaps end up being stronger people for it.
Many "great" people throughout history were 'eccentric' in certain ways. I am sure you have all heard the old myth of the person who is a genius but has no 'common sense'.
A example people like to use is how Einstein used to leave the house without shoes sometimes or without combing his hair.
I don't know about the shoes part, but he did not seem like he was extremely concerned with keeping his hair meticulously combed.
(http://www.fabrica.it/blog/uploads/silvia/einstein.jpg)
Maybe it takes a person who is a little bit 'crazy' to see things from a different perspective? Or maybe simply having a strong incentive to understand the world around you is enough to give you a slight advantage over 'normal' people?