The Cult of Philosophy

[simplicity]

You folks are really too much. I participate in this forum because I enjoy writing. And of course I am no more correct than anybody else [in general], but within a particular area of interest [say, economics], most folks are poorly informed. This doesn't mean I am more right [in the absolute] but in the relative, I have a better grasp of the subject-matter.

If I can make a suggestion, free yourselves from having to "know." Knowing that you can not really know anything [again, in the absolute] is the most liberating thing that can happen to a person. Imagine the amount of energy you can free from the constant need to figure everything out. No need to be angry or disappointed or anything else. Just free.

[Atla]

You folks are really too much. I participate in this forum because I enjoy writing. And of course I am no more correct than anybody else [in general], but within a particular area of interest [say, economics], most folks are poorly informed. This doesn't mean I am more right [in the absolute] but in the relative, I have a better grasp of the subject-matter.

If I can make a suggestion, free yourselves from having to "know." Knowing that you can not really know anything [again, in the absolute] is the most liberating thing that can happen to a person. Imagine the amount of energy you can free from the constant need to figure everything out. No need to be angry or disappointed or anything else. Just free.

Anyone with half a brain knows that we can never be sure of anything / never "know" anything in the absolute, that's where philosophy begins. Hmm okay it's true though that quite a lot of folks here have less than a half.

[Age]

Why do you keep commenting here, when the value of any contribution including yours is ZERO?

This appears to be an EXTREMELY FUNNY thing to say. Especially considering the Fact that you have just commented here, when, SUPPOSEDLY, the value of absolutely ANY contribution at all (including YOUR OWN) will be ZERO as well. So, WHY did you comment here?

Learn to read

What you WROTE is CRYSTAL CLEAR. And, how I REPLIED SHOWS just how STUPID your question REALLY IS.

If you think I have NOT read your question correctly, then SHOW WHY.

Let us SEE, CLEARLY, what you are 'trying to' CLAIM here is true.

[Age]

Until you learnto write properly I am not going to read or respond to your posts, especially when my comments were not directed at you in the first place.

And, if I am NOT MISTAKEN you have SAID this PREVIOUSLY. YET here you are, ONCE MORE, reading AND responding to my posts, ONCE AGAIN.

Also, are you at all CAPABLE of EXPLAIN what 'write properly' MEANS or REFERS TO, EXACTLY?

Your reply or NON reply will SHOW and EXPLAIN how much or how little you REALLY KNOW.

Also, just saying, "Until you learn to write properly BEFORE you just answer and CLARIFY some REALLY very SIMPLE and very EASY CLARIFYING questions", can be SEEN as the Truly WEAKEST EXCUSE for being TOTALLY INCAPABLE of being CHALLENGED or QUESTIONED over your OWN CLAIMS here.

I suggest getting at least SOME COURAGE and START answering Honestly. Otherwise, you WILL be SEEN as the TOTALLY WEAK or TOTALLY INCAPABLE one that 'you' Truly ARE here.

Until you learn to write properly I am not going to read or respond to your posts, especially when my comments were not directed at you in the first place.

I SEE that you have 'now' LEARNED how to copy and paste 'properly'.

AND, I do NOT care one iota if you reply or NOT.

Also, did you CLAIM you were going to put me on your ignore list?

Furthermore, you are INCAPABLE of EXPLAINING what 'write properly' even ENTAILS.

[Age]

You folks are really too much. I participate in this forum because I enjoy writing. And of course I am no more correct than anybody else [in general], but within a particular area of interest [say, economics], most folks are poorly informed. This doesn't mean I am more right [in the absolute] but in the relative, I have a better grasp of the subject-matter.

BUT, EVERY one would be so-called 'more correct' than anyone else, in the relative sense, correct?

If I can make a suggestion, free yourselves from having to "know."

But where is this ASSUMPTION coming from that there is a 'having to know' ANYWHERE.

Absolutely NO one 'has to know' absolutely ANY thing. So, WHY do you ASSUME there are some people with this 'having to know' syndrome?

Do 'you', "yourself", have this 'having to know' attitude?

Or, do you just have the 'have to TELL others what to do' attitude and syndrome?

Knowing that you can not really know anything [again, in the absolute] is the most liberating thing that can happen to a person.

How do you 'know' this?

And, can you YET SEE the CONTRADICTION and HYPOCRISY in CLAIMING: " 'knowing' that you can not really 'know' anything (in the absolute) is the MOST liberating thing that can happen to a person "?

Firstly, you OBVIOUSLY could NOT 'know' this, that is; If your CLAIM here was true.

Secondly, what you CLAIM here OBVIOUSLY could NOT be absolutely true. Therefore, it could be completely and utterly False, Wrong, AND Incorrect.

Thirdly, to just CLAIM that this is true is HYPOCRITICAL, because it is OBVIOUSLY self-contradictory.

By the way, what does the word 'know' even mean or refer to, to you?

Imagine the amount of energy you can free from the constant need to figure everything out.

I do NOT 'know' ANY one who has a 'constant need' to figure EVERY thing out.

And, if you 'know' of ANY one with this alleged and supposed 'need', then inform us of who they are, EXACTLY, so then we can go and ask them for CLARIFICATION.

No need to be angry or disappointed or anything else. Just free.

Maybe if you STOP TELLING "others" what they SHOULD 'know', like you keep doing above, then 'you' will ACTUALLY be MORE FREE, "yourself".

WHY do you appear to have this 'constant need' to keep TELLING "others" what to 'know'?

[Age]

You folks are really too much. I participate in this forum because I enjoy writing. And of course I am no more correct than anybody else [in general], but within a particular area of interest [say, economics], most folks are poorly informed. This doesn't mean I am more right [in the absolute] but in the relative, I have a better grasp of the subject-matter.

If I can make a suggestion, free yourselves from having to "know." Knowing that you can not really know anything [again, in the absolute] is the most liberating thing that can happen to a person. Imagine the amount of energy you can free from the constant need to figure everything out. No need to be angry or disappointed or anything else. Just free.

Anyone with half a brain knows that we can never be sure of anything / never "know" anything in the absolute, that's where philosophy begins. Hmm okay it's true though that quite a lot of folks here have less than a half.

But there is One 'thing' we can 'know', FOR SURE. And, by the way 'it' is the ONLY 'thing'.

WHY do some of 'you', human beings, BELIEVE that there is NOTHING that 'you' can 'know'?

To CLAIM that 'you' can NEVER be sure of absolutely ANY 'thing', that is; NEVER 'know' ANY 'thing' in the absolute, sounds like 'you' REALLY do BELIEVE that 'you' 'know' 'this', in the absolute sense.

SEE, if you do NOT 'know' 'that', in the absolute sense, then 'it' could just be False, Wrong, and/or Incorrect anyway.

So, WHY 'try' to CLAIM some 'thing' is true if you do NOT even 'know' FOR SURE that 'it' is true?

Doing so seems like just ANOTHER one of the ABSURD and RIDICULOUS 'things' that 'you', human beings, in the days when this was being written, SAID and DID.

[Sculptor]

And, if I am NOT MISTAKEN you have SAID this PREVIOUSLY. YET here you are, ONCE MORE, reading AND responding to my posts, ONCE AGAIN.

Also, are you at all CAPABLE of EXPLAIN what 'write properly' MEANS or REFERS TO, EXACTLY?

Your reply or NON reply will SHOW and EXPLAIN how much or how little you REALLY KNOW.

Also, just saying, "Until you learn to write properly BEFORE you just answer and CLARIFY some REALLY very SIMPLE and very EASY CLARIFYING questions", can be SEEN as the Truly WEAKEST EXCUSE for being TOTALLY INCAPABLE of being CHALLENGED or QUESTIONED over your OWN CLAIMS here.

I suggest getting at least SOME COURAGE and START answering Honestly. Otherwise, you WILL be SEEN as the TOTALLY WEAK or TOTALLY INCAPABLE one that 'you' Truly ARE here.

Until you learn to write properly I am not going to read or respond to your posts, especially when my comments were not directed at you in the first place.

I SEE that you have 'now' LEARNED how to copy and paste 'properly'.

AND, I do NOT care one iota if you reply or NOT.

Also, did you CLAIM you were going to put me on your ignore list?

Furthermore, you are INCAPABLE of EXPLAINING what 'write properly' even ENTAILS.

Until you learn to write properly I am not going to read or respond to your posts, especially when my comments were not directed at you in the first place.

[Veganman]

I agree Simplicity. Philosophy has its place, but if people spent more time working on developing their empathy, the world would be a better place than it will ever be by ruminating on philosophy.

[Atla]

To CLAIM that 'you' can NEVER be sure of absolutely ANY 'thing', that is; NEVER 'know' ANY 'thing' in the absolute, sounds like 'you' REALLY do BELIEVE that 'you' 'know' 'this', in the absolute sense.

Yes, "sounds like", to people with less than half.

[Atla]

This appears to be an EXTREMELY FUNNY thing to say. Especially considering the Fact that you have just commented here, when, SUPPOSEDLY, the value of absolutely ANY contribution at all (including YOUR OWN) will be ZERO as well. So, WHY did you comment here?

Learn to read

What you WROTE is CRYSTAL CLEAR. And, how I REPLIED SHOWS just how STUPID your question REALLY IS.

If you think I have NOT read your question correctly, then SHOW WHY.

Let us SEE, CLEARLY, what you are 'trying to' CLAIM here is true.

Try harder

[Age]

I agree Simplicity. Philosophy has its place,

WHERE is that 'place', EXACTLY? And,

WHAT is 'philosophy', to you, EXACTLY?

but if people spent more time working on developing their empathy, the world would be a better place than it will ever be by ruminating on philosophy.

VERY, VERY True.

[Age]

To CLAIM that 'you' can NEVER be sure of absolutely ANY 'thing', that is; NEVER 'know' ANY 'thing' in the absolute, sounds like 'you' REALLY do BELIEVE that 'you' 'know' 'this', in the absolute sense.

Yes, "sounds like", to people with less than half.

So, how about 'you' SHOW 'us' what 'you' ACTUALLY MEANT?

That is; if you are ACTUALLY CAPABLE of doing so.

OBVIOUSLY, if you do NOT SHOW 'us' what 'you' ACTUALLY MEAN, then some would consider who is the one who IS with so-called "less than half".

[Age]

Learn to read

What you WROTE is CRYSTAL CLEAR. And, how I REPLIED SHOWS just how STUPID your question REALLY IS.

If you think I have NOT read your question correctly, then SHOW WHY.

Let us SEE, CLEARLY, what you are 'trying to' CLAIM here is true.

Try harder

HERE is MORE and FURTHER ACTUAL and IRREFUTABLE PROOF of just how Truly INCAPABLE the adult human being WAS, back in the days when this was being written.

They would make all these ASSERTIONS and CLAIMS, but when 'pushed' for CLARITY, through questioning or challenging, they would on MOST OCCASIONS FAIL, CRUMBLE, and FALL TO PIECES. As, ONCE AGAIN, PROVED True AGAIN HERE.

And, in the case with this one here known as "atla", the HYPOCRISY and CONTRADICTIONS are ONCE AGAIN so BLINDINGLY OBVIOUS.

One would WONDER WHY "atla" could NOT even SEE the CONTRADICTION BEFORE 'it' was EXPRESSED, let alone STILL NOT being ABLE to SEE 'this' AFTER the Fact has been CLEARLY POINTED OUT and SHOWN?

Or, are the words "try harder" just ANOTHER ATTEMPT at DIVERSION and DECEIT?

[Veganman]

I think the "place" is when something needs to be questioned or studied philosophically in order to determine some form of truth. Philosophy to me is probably also best defined in this way. However, many things can be self evident truths without having to apply a philosophical frame of mind. I recall a professor of philosophy who mainly lectured on ethics. His idea of lecturing was to punctuate with little anecdotes, like how he was looking forward to getting home and having a nice steak for his dinner. Professor of philosophy he may well have been, but his idea of ethics was a little confused. Personally, I'd rather take my ethical philosophy lessons from a relatively uneducated but kind, compassionate vegan, than a hypocritical professor of philosophy.

[RCSaunders]

I agree Simplicity. Philosophy has its place, but if people spent more time working on developing their empathy, the world would be a better place than it will ever be by ruminating on philosophy.

When people abandon reason, and depend on the irrational feelings and emotions to make their decisions it is a disaster for both those individuals and whatever society they are part of. There is no more deceptive forms of sentimentality than those that go by names, empathy, sympathy, and compassion, and there is no limit to the amount of human depravity and oppression that those lies have been used to justify. Just any evil can be put over so long as one has the, "right feelings."