Christianity

[Alexis Jacobi]

I'm just attempting to drag out of him his own rendition of "walking the talk".

You should stop that procedure. It is far too crude. You really are only revealing the 'walk' that you prefer to 'talk' but you will end up doing very little for larger understanding of the issues that play out.

[Immanuel Can]

Salvation as a sort of commodity exchange. I like it! Very Jewish.

Well, a "commodity exchange" supposes that both parties have something, some "commodity" to give to each other.

What have you got, that the Righteous God should want? I'll be interested to know.

...our soul (within the Story you work within) is certainly a commodity.

Really? You think so?

Exactly what does God "get" from a soul, do you think?

A pure and good soul among we humans — especially if we are loved by one, if even we know one — is the absolute finest gift that life can give, no?

Point me to one.

If the soul is “part of god” then it is reasonable to assume he would wish to, perhaps even need, to re-assimilate all he could. (Granted this is a sort of kabbalistic idea).

That's Pantheism. It has nothing to do with the Jewish or Christian ideas about God. In Judeo-Christian understandings, God creates, but is not HIs creation. So there are no "parts of god" for Him to "reassimilate."

But you point to a serious problem with all forms of Pantheism: all have to presume that "god" is a divided entity. And since, according to the Pantheist tale, he's divided "in order to exist" and "in order to contemplate himself," then any dissolving of that division is a working-against-the-god.

There are all kinds of ironies in that story. But that's a big one.

[phyllo]

In the issue of France (which we had been -- sort of -- discussing) the question appears more complex than a simple legal definition. What has come about (in France specifically) is that the legal definition has become problematic to a notion of French identity. And identity of this sort is more than legal citizenship.

I see no practical way of handling French identity aside from citizenship.

Who would define it and on what basis?

So in your case -- and your definition of legal citizenship is the limit of your concern, and I accept this -- you can look into and examine how those who have concerns (as does Renaud Camus and a significant sector of French society) present their case.

I see their solution is that some French citizens would be declared "not French".

I think that's not acceptable to a large segment of French society. Which is why Le Pen drew a hard line at citizenship. She realizes that taking away the rights of citizenship would not go over well and would make her un-electable.

[Alexis Jacobi]

After all, that's why philosophy is deemed important to many. Using the tools at their disposal, philosophers attempt to "think through" things like this and arrive at the optimal frame of mind. The "wisest" conclusions. I'm just here to make sure they don't ever and always remain "up in the clouds".

And if AJ here is not the quintessential didactic pedant, he'll do until an even more ponderous one shows up.

But actually, and as it plays out, your approach is ultimately more didactic. What I do (theorize) is what I am inclined to do by nature and by my situation. You can label it didactic pedantry if you wish. Your terms will not, I do not think, have any effect on the sensible choices I have made.

I do not accept your division between up in the clouds and on the ground. You are only applying judgmental terms that serve your facile argument. But if that works for you keep it up. I really do not mind particularly. But it is tedious to argue against your extraordinary judgments and bias.

[iambiguous]

Well that excludes Harbal.

Please be more inclusive.

Just out of curiosity, what's your take on Southern European white folks? White, maybe, but not white like you?

Waaaay too much garlic.

No, seriously, you are the one who keeps making reference to Northern Europeans. How are they different from Southern Europeans?

And, in your view, do these differences revolve around things that some Northern Europeans might construe to be more reasonable or more virtuous behaviors? Does superior/inferior enter into it at all?

Would you be okay with Northern Europeans producing children with Southern Europeans? Would both be construed as entirely equal in regard to educational and employment opportunities? Would you treat Southern Europeans exactly the same as you would Northern Europeans? Would you be just as comfortable living in a Southern European community as in a Northern one?

[Alexis Jacobi]

I see no practical way of handling French identity aside from citizenship.

Who would define it and on what basis?

Don't pepper me with *questions* you have no interest in genuinely considering Phyllo.

If you are interested in how those in French culture now and today are confronting those questions then begin to read those who are theorists.

You are not here for that purpose though. You are here to bicker because it tweaks your sensibilities that I have the ideas I do.

This fits into dynamics that are prevalent today that do not interest me.

This means of pursuing conversation never gets anywhere but to impasse.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Would you be okay with Northern Europeans producing children with Southern Europeans?

I would be open to your proposal if I could be the inseminator. And of course if the girls were really really attractive. And around 17 (we'd have to find a place where the age of consent allows such). I'd agree to inseminate one a night for an long as you'd care to present me with them.

You are making me feel like Humbert Humbert!



"Check! She'll do. Prepare the bed I've got to finish this post..."

[iambiguous]

Just out of curiosity, what's your take on Southern European white folks? White, maybe, but not white like you?

You are asking me to offer you judgmental statement about people and concerns that I do not personally have. But I can refer you to ideas and arguments that I have read. For example Madison Grant and Lothrop Stoddard -- both very strongly Protestant -- did have articulated issues with Southern Europeans (and German Catholics as well). But their idea was that America was a 'Protestant nation' and should remain so.

This would fit within my stated belief that the people of a region or nation have the 'right' to define themselves. I have read both of them and I understand how they constructed their platform. But Madison Grant and Lothrop Stoddard's recommendations were not heeded. They were superseded by more powerful currents. And those currents have continued up to today. And the nation has been brought into various levels of social and cultural (and political) conflict that have yet to be resolved -- if they will be resolved.

Northern Europe was conquered, tamed and *civilized* by a Mediterranean people and culture. But there also came a time when that people began to resent or perhaps rebel against Mediterranean culture. The Northern 'type' and the Mediterranean (Southern) 'type' are different.

If I read you right I believe you are trying to embroil me in another controversy that you believe you can finesse? Your methods are predictable but I admit that they do surprise me.

There you go again!

Anything to keep it all up in the clouds!!

Instead of noting your own personal reaction to Southern Europeans given particular sets of circumstances involving particular behaviors, you yank in more "scholars" to "explain" the differences.

Whereas, again, I'm more interested in this part...

...you are the one who keeps making reference to Northern Europeans. How are they different from Southern Europeans?

And, in your view, do these differences revolve around things that some Northern Europeans might construe to be more reasonable or more virtuous behaviors? Does superior/inferior enter into it at all?

Would you be okay with Northern Europeans producing children with Southern Europeans? Would both be construed as entirely equal in regard to educational and employment opportunities? Would you treat Southern Europeans exactly the same as you would Northern Europeans? Would you be just as comfortable living in a Southern European community as in a Northern one?

[Alexis Jacobi]

Would you be just as comfortable living in a Southern European community as in a Northern one?

So let me get this right: You are promising me more pussy than Frank Sinatra and my own Italian cook?!?

"Rinuncio a tutte le mie idee sgradevoli. Accetto di credere a ciò in cui credi senza dubbio. Forza le ragazze! Porta la pasta!"

I love Philosophy Now Forum!

[iambiguous]

I'm just attempting to drag out of him his own rendition of "walking the talk".

You should stop that procedure. It is far too crude. You really are only revealing the 'walk' that you prefer to 'talk' but you will end up doing very little for larger understanding of the issues that play out.

Well, I suspect that any number of black, brown and red folks would be considerably more interested in exploring with you what they might expect from you in day-to-day interactions. And what their fate might be if those who think like you ever acquire the political power to "walk your talk" given those day-to-day interactions.

[phyllo]

phyllo wrote: ↑Mon Jan 09, 2023 3:08 pm
I see no practical way of handling French identity aside from citizenship.

Who would define it and on what basis?

Don't pepper me with *questions* you have no interest in genuinely considering Phyllo.

If you have a genuine answer then I will consider it.

If you are interested in how those in French culture now and today are confronting those questions then begin to read those who are theorists.

I'm interested in practical solutions, not "theorists".

You are not here for that purpose though. You are here to bicker because it tweaks your sensibilities that I have the ideas I do.

You have no idea why I'm here.

I haven't "bickered" with you.

You don't have a clue about my sensibilities.

[Alexis Jacobi]

I'm interested in practical solutions, not "theorists".

You are not here for that purpose though. You are here to bicker because it tweaks your sensibilities that I have the ideas I do.

You have no idea why I'm here.

I haven't "bickered" with you.

You don't have a clue about my sensibilities.

There are no practical solutions because the issues are still being defined. They are political and social problems of consequence.

I do know about your sensibilities by the nature of your questions, your presuppositions, and your lack of engagement.

In any case: reveal what these are. Write about that. And describe why you are here.

[iambiguous]

After all, that's why philosophy is deemed important to many. Using the tools at their disposal, philosophers attempt to "think through" things like this and arrive at the optimal frame of mind. The "wisest" conclusions. I'm just here to make sure they don't ever and always remain "up in the clouds".

And if AJ here is not the quintessential didactic pedant, he'll do until an even more ponderous one shows up.

But actually, and as it plays out, your approach is ultimately more didactic. What I do (theorize) is what I am inclined to do by nature and by my situation. You can label it didactic pedantry if you wish. Your terms will not, I do not think, have any effect on the sensible choices I have made.

What sensible choices? In regard to your own interactions with men and women who are not of Northern European stock, what would you construe to be sensible behaviors? Can you cite examples of behaviors that you deemed not to be sensible? Behaviors more common to those of races other than your own?

I do not accept your division between up in the clouds and on the ground. You are only applying judgmental terms that serve your facile argument. But if that works for you keep it up. I really do not mind particularly. But it is tedious to argue against your extraordinary judgments and bias.

My extraordinary judgments and biases? I don't make any essential distinctions between the races in regard to intelligence or culture or morality or political correctness. That's all rooted existentially in all of the many different historical, cultural and interpersonal contexts. And out in a world bursting at the seams with "contingency, chance and change". On the contrary, my own judgments in regard to value judgments out in the is/ought world are basically "fractured and fragmented" given the manner in which I construe the nature of human identity in these threads:

https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=176529
https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=194382
https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 5&t=185296

Anytime you wish to explore this with me given a particular context, just say the word and I'll start a new thread.

[iambiguous]

Would you be okay with Northern Europeans producing children with Southern Europeans?

I would be open to your proposal if I could be the inseminator. And of course if the girls were really really attractive. And around 17 (we'd have to find a place where the age of consent allows such). I'd agree to inseminate one a night for an long as you'd care to present me with them.

You are making me feel like Humbert Humbert!



"Check! She'll do. Prepare the bed I've got to finish this post..."

Note to others:

How pathetic is this?!!!

You know, if it is pathetic.

[phyllo]

I'm interested in practical solutions, not "theorists".

You are not here for that purpose though. You are here to bicker because it tweaks your sensibilities that I have the ideas I do.

You have no idea why I'm here.

I haven't "bickered" with you.

You don't have a clue about my sensibilities.

There are no practical solutions because the issues are still being defined. They are political and social problems of consequence.

I do know about your sensibilities by the nature of your questions, your presuppositions, and your lack of engagement.

In any case: reveal what these are. Write about that. And describe why you are here.

Every moment requires a practical solution.

I'm not engaged because I don't see much value in engagement.

I'm here to learn something and in the process someone may learn something from me. Bowden for example.

Talk to Harbal or Lacewing or IC or Biggus if you prefer.