Who is eligible to talk or teach philosophy?

[Walgekaaren]

Please post here your thoughts about who has the right to philosophise and on what terms. On Sokrates days it was thought that only the wealthy landowners are eligible because they are free and dont have to work like slaves. Because they have so much ample free time, they see life and the nature better than the common people who have to worry about theyr bellies and there to find shelter for the night.

The question arises: "How to create an environment, what supports philosophy and thinking? What should we do in our schools to achieve it? Do we need a democratic class-system or an autocratic communist system to allow free thought? What is freedom of thought and philosophy in itself?"

Your call.

[puto]

Well quoting Nietzsche, I know what you don't want because it killed God.

[Walgekaaren]

Well quoting Nietzsche, I know what you don't want because it killed God.

God is alive and well thanks for asking And so am I so humor me and make your approach.

[puto]

What is the philosophical concept of God?

[Walgekaaren]

What is the philosophical concept of God?

God - I am. Or 'He who Is'. Thats what Yahweh translates. Even the budist translate the secret name of God as 'I'...

So the philosophical consept of God is existance. All else is bound by this existense like a drawing cannot exist without the paper on what it was drawn.

When Descart sayd: Cogito, ergo sum- I think therefor I am. I presume: Ego te Cogitare, ergo sum - I am thought by, therefor I am.

[puto]

Buddhism is not a religion.

[puto]

I do not think you know what you are arguing, so 'good-bye'.

[Walgekaaren]

I do not think you know what you are arguing, so 'good-bye'.

Maybe your not thinking on the same level as I, and I'm not conserned wether or not buddhism is religion, for I am a Christian. I just mentioned that they have come up with a cimilar approach.

[puto]

Maybe you are having trouble expressing yourself in English? You are asserting differing philosophical views of God. I asked you, if you know, the concept of God? We should begin with this concept of God.

[JasonPalmer]

one can work part-time

[Walgekaaren]

Maybe you are having trouble expressing yourself in English? You are asserting differing philosophical views of God. I asked you, if you know, the concept of God? We should begin with this concept of God.

So because these wievs differ in your wiev and in most of other peoples views I am not allowed to use them in that thay? Most interesting and un-philosophical atitude. One step further and you are making your own cast-system.

For me all information in all philosophies and religions is usable to say something, mostly to proclaim the word of God. For to say something else, would lead to this sentence: "Only I am right and else is wrong." And since in a dialogue you cannot use such premise, else this conversation would cease to exist.

If someone sayd or experienced something I feel to know and recognise as such, then I am able to admit that without loosing my faith. I see no problem in my language and expression, but your understanding in the fields of Consept of God is too narrow to me. That is a problem for me.

Would you care to tell me what the Consept of God is not for you, so I might avoid such premises, in the future in order not to stumble and shock you too much... Oh my.

[puto]

Look I can understand you well enough to converse in English, so I could care less if some of the words are not spelled right. I asked you for the concept of God, not some diatribe about how you are not respected. I'm not sure that you either understand the words, or don't. and that is the problem. Philosophy, and religion are not the same thing. Look if you want to play some logic game with me, so be it. I know logic. I know the concept of God in many religions. You came to a philosophy board, and claimed you have faith. I asked you what the concept of God was. I could care less if you have faith, or not. I asked for the concept of God. This is not about I, as you came in here with a premise. I KNOW LOGIC, SO IF YOU WANT TO PLAY THE LOGIC GAME, SO BE IT!

[Walgekaaren]

Look I can understand you well enough to converse in English, so I could care less if some of the words are not spelled right. I asked you for the concept of God, not some diatribe about how you are not respected. I'm not sure that you either understand the words, or don't. and that is the problem. Philosophy, and religion are not the same thing. Look if you want to play some logic game with me, so be it. I know logic. I know the concept of God in many religions. You came to a philosophy board, and claimed you have faith. I asked you what the concept of God was. I could care less if you have faith, or not. I asked for the concept of God. This is not about I, as you came in here with a premise. I KNOW LOGIC, SO IF YOU WANT TO PLAY THE LOGIC GAME, SO BE IT!

The consept of God for me is my faith. If you ask it in philosophical terms I allready told what my gods name means and that is it. I am proclaiming the true existence. I am not playing games with you, you just dont get it.

You may know logic but this isnt about logic but about faith. The first philosophers believed that they there having an imortal soul what allowed them to think and be philosophers. So in that sence philosophy was also a kind of religion. It got changed after the 'Illumination period' then people shed of the shackels of faith and church. Then philosophy got rid of anything too faith oriented.

Because of this philosophy has the Descartes problem - they dont know what is thinking and therefore really being in them and there this being is. The only approach is to go back to the roots and get some knoledge about being before you can talk of philosophy. This is a question of metaphysics. What is truth? What is self? What is outside?

I say God is all that and that is my philosophy and consept of god. People are just mirror-images of that true greatness what Nietzsche called 'the overman' a diminished creature what can be called 'the latter man'. My use of words may confuse you, but that is how I normally talk, others have the same problem with me in estonia... The problem doesnt consist in english wording but in my self how I view myself an how I express myself. Please be patient and try to understand what I am telling you. I am not yanking your chain here.

[zexwiththeuniverse]

Specifically Philosophy of mind: To be most eligible to talk about philosophy one should have learned (studied) through an experience about a subject rather then being taught it. They have ideas and concepts that they came to conclusions about by going through the experience. The people that learn about that experience have difficulty feeling the raw emotion of why that experience exists or what causes it and especially how it feels.They can probably come to pretty good conclusions about certain things but not everything. An observer's perception can be off by a long shot. But why would the observed be off if they were well aware individuals. But who's mind knows more facts then the mind that experienced something.Theoretical question: Who can describe how cancer feels better, a cancer patient or a doctor that studied cancer but never had cancer? The cancer patient would be able to relay information in a much different way then the doctor. Which is more valuable? Is it more valuable to have a man who went to space to describe how a gravity free atmosphere feels or for a person to imagine how it feels and be philosophical about it? To teach philosophy I would hope that the person teaching the philosophy in question either went through certain experiences or situations for an extended period of time as to gain valuable personal knowledge on the experiences and/or studied the field rigorously.
So to talk about or teach philosophy about a certain subject, I would recommend that the subject has either been studied through years of experience or years of education.There are certain fields of philosophy that everyone has experiences with and some that are rare. I met a man that was diagnosed with every mental disorder out there. He also suffered from schizophrenia for as long as a doctor goes to school. He had great philosophical insight on the subject matter that I felt was invaluable making me believe that if a person has enough personal experience with something they can defiantly be philosophical about it.

[zinnat13]

Hi zexwiththeuniverse,

Fair enough.

But, my friend, this line of thinking would never be accepted by those, who have been spend a good part of their life learning philosophy in formal way; through books. As this notion will left them empty handed.

with love,
sanjay