Philosophy Now Forum

Arising_uk wrote: ↑Fri Feb 16, 2018 4:23 pm

Dontaskme wrote:...
Have you seen your death? ..that's what I'm talking about. I'm not talking about someone else's death, I'm talking about your death...you will never know death. ...

Well obviously not as you'll be dead.

Find out who or where is the believer before making false truth statements about knowing what death is.

Are you claiming you know about death, if so your statement at the begining is false then? Otherwise of course it is trivially true that one cannot know what being dead is like as you're dead.

Arising_uk wrote: ↑Fri Feb 16, 2018 4:19 pm

Dontaskme wrote:...
You do not even know if someone else has died...you would have to be there in that persons death to confirm it to be true...truth is you have no idea what death is...it's just an idea...it's a belief. ...

Sure we do, it's a body that is not breathing or moving and after a while is stone-cold, a dead parrot so to speak. Have you never seen or touched a dead body?

SpheresOfBalance wrote: ↑Fri Feb 16, 2018 4:43 pm

Arising_uk wrote: ↑Fri Feb 16, 2018 4:19 pm

Dontaskme wrote:...
You do not even know if someone else has died...you would have to be there in that persons death to confirm it to be true...truth is you have no idea what death is...it's just an idea...it's a belief. ...

Sure we do, it's a body that is not breathing or moving and after a while is stone-cold, a dead parrot so to speak. Have you never seen or touched a dead body?

I second arising point, I've even seen the rot in the aftermath. I used to work at a cemetery as a kid, used to dig graves with a spade, either the earth moved in all the years, or one of the graves was miss marked, anyway her skull rolled out, then I ran for the hills until the adult that I was working for assured me her head was back in her wooden coffin where it belonged. The smell, oh that smell. Rot!! The body returning from whence it came, not a pleasurable experience to witness. I can guarantee you that she wasn't going to tell me how beautiful the day was. That's all I needed to know. My many pets that I've buried over the years, another testament to my understanding at least a portion of death. Personally I prefer to smell the flowers than pushing them to the surface, but in death at least I take some comfort in that. So I'll not be embalmed, so that the food I provide to the flowers and trees is not tainted with mankind’s fears. My consciousness that you falsely believe is eternal out of your fear of ending, shall most probably end such that it shall be as before I began. Anyone that says otherwise I believe to be full of shite, as I, like they, began as they did, there was nothing before that I can recollect and there shall probably be nothing after that I'll sense either. Such proof there seems to be! Anything more from the likes of Dontaskme is most probably just their fear and denial talking. To be expected from mere mortals.

SpheresOfBalance wrote: ↑Fri Feb 16, 2018 3:54 pm Just to show you how much humans didn't know about themselves, let alone the universe. As it turns out, the word eternal is probably a falsehood unless of course entropy is a falsehood instead. But then it's currently up for grabs. Certainly, nothing we currently know of is infinite. So largely the word eternal is a falsehood until there's proof to the contrary. I'd say that it's highly improbable.

Arising_uk wrote: ↑Fri Feb 16, 2018 12:04 pm

Nick_A wrote:... Only the modern educated western mind will call it shit. Others not so educated can appreciate how the ancients understood the reality and importance of eternal values.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions ... ts_1.shtml

Atman
Atman means 'eternal self'. The atman refers to the real self beyond ego or false self. It is often referred to as 'spirit' or 'soul' and indicates our true self or essence which underlies our existence.
There are many interesting perspectives on the self in Hinduism ranging from the self as eternal servant of God to the self as being identified with God. The understanding of the self as eternal supports the idea of reincarnation in that the same eternal being can inhabit temporary bodies.
The idea of atman entails the idea of the self as a spiritual rather than material being and thus there is a strong dimension of Hinduism which emphasises detachment from the material world and promotes practices such as asceticism. Thus it could be said that in this world, a spiritual being, the atman, has a human experience rather than a human being having a spiritual experience.


Dharma
Dharma is an important term in Indian religions. In Hinduism it means 'duty', 'virtue', 'morality', even 'religion' and it refers to the power which upholds the universe and society. Hindus generally believe that dharma was revealed in the Vedas although a more common word there for 'universal law' or 'righteousness' is rita. Dharma is the power that maintains society, it makes the grass grow, the sun shine, and makes us moral people or rather gives humans the opportunity to act virtuously…………………………...

I think there're a few reasons why such stuff is pooh-poohed Nick_A, one, because it meets Socrates criteria of talking about what one doesn't know, two, it fails Kant's criteria in that it talks about what one cannot know, three, such 'eternal values' still appear to allow one to ignore the plight of one's fellows and four, there's bugger all evidence for any of it and we in the 'West' have discovered that, whilst fun, ontological logical metaphysics does not discover eternal truths whilst the natural philosophers appear to have at least found a way to talk about what's outside the cave with, if not total veracity, at least some benficial consequences for the rest of us.

Nick_A wrote: ↑Fri Feb 16, 2018 5:59 pm

Arising_uk wrote: ↑Fri Feb 16, 2018 12:04 pm

Nick_A wrote:... Only the modern educated western mind will call it shit. Others not so educated can appreciate how the ancients understood the reality and importance of eternal values.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions ... ts_1.shtml

I think there're a few reasons why such stuff is pooh-poohed Nick_A, one, because it meets Socrates criteria of talking about what one doesn't know, two, it fails Kant's criteria in that it talks about what one cannot know, three, such 'eternal values' still appear to allow one to ignore the plight of one's fellows and four, there's bugger all evidence for any of it and we in the 'West' have discovered that, whilst fun, ontological logical metaphysics does not discover eternal truths whilst the natural philosophers appear to have at least found a way to talk about what's outside the cave with, if not total veracity, at least some benficial consequences for the rest of us.

So you believe that since we cannot know the dharma which produces eternal values scientifically, it doesn’t exist. This is the modern educated approach – the complete reliance on sensory or scientific proofs and the denial of all that opposes its dominance. It is what I call secular bigotry and what leads to spirit killing in the young.

We understand what it means to be bigoted against whites, blacks, Jews, Christians etc. Lots to be bigoted against. But somehow bigotry against the desire to understand with the whole of oneself is considered not only acceptable but necessary for indoctrination. Where modern secular bigotry teaches what to know, the old ways teach how to understand.. Where modern secular bigotry is concerned with learning new facts, the Ways are concerned with how to remember what has been forgotten or what Plato called anamnesis, and those like Einstein refer to as a product of intuition.

Nothing can be more offensive to the secular bigot than questioning the superiority of literal thinking and its reliance on the senses for revealing human meaning and purpose. Those who are not so bigoted know that human “understanding" requires not only intellectual verification but impartial emotional and sensory verification as well. In short, unless a person experiences the external world intellectually, with emotional detachment, and sensory discrimination simultaneously, they may know some facts but do not understand their significance. They cannot truly understand. That is what is so dangerous about the secular bigot. They deny the ability for intuition and anamnesis with the whole of oneself in favor of the interpretations of the literal mind. It easily results in lost souls starved for meaning and even spirit killing. It is the modern way that practices idolatry of the Great Beast. I’ll stick with the old fashioned way with awakening to eternal values and objective human meaning and purpose as its goal

The secular bigot only recognizes existence below Plato's divided line. It denies the process of existence above the line and is opposed to what enables a person to "remember". It is a shame but welcome to the human condition.

No one is bigoted here, NICK. We could care less what you believe in. As a matter of FACT, at least I will fight for your right to believe in any sort of faery tale you want to believe in. That's your right as a child of the cosmos. The star dust that we all are. But it's your kind that are harming children by force feeding them fantasies. Best for no one to suggest any sort of religion to children and let them choose for themselves what is and is not true for them and them alone.

The need to poo and piss would get you moving even if you tried not moving or doing, you can't, simply because it's not you doing anything, you are the doing, the done. Life moves as one unitary action...known as a re-act-ion...the play of opposites in progress...aka realtime.

-1- wrote: ↑Fri Feb 16, 2018 11:38 am

A_Seagull wrote: ↑Thu Feb 15, 2018 8:52 pm Given the choice of having dinner with a prostitute or a moralist, I would choose the prostitute every time.

I have no doubt the conversation would be more entertaining and honest.

Dinner with moralist:

Moralist: "So I told her that she still short changed me, because I gave her a twenty. But I said, one of the deadliest virtues is charity, so I will exercise my virtue, and leave her the extra change that she could do with as she wished."
Moralist (takes a bite of brisket.)
I: "This chicken is tough."
Moralist: "Yes, the cook was immoral in cooking it too long."
I: "And the potatoes are made of powder, not of real potatoes. The mashed potatoes."
Moralist: "Yes, and therefore the chef will burn in eternal hellfire for doing so and destroying the culinary experience of such vast huge large amount of people on a daily basis."
I: "Seen any good movies lately?"
Moralist: "Yes, I'd say. One of the best movies I've ever seen was a new one last week, "The Eternal Unsolvability Principle and Its Ramification in Goeddel's Eschenbau und Heimatsfruhe" You gotta go and see it."
I: "O...ooookay."

Prostitute: "I am hungry. Buy me some food."
I: "Okay, you want the chicken, or the garlic butter-soaked oversalted shrimp, semi-cooked for your salmonella-laden culinary pleasure?"
Prostitute: "Whichever is more expensive."
I: "So, I mean earm, ize, it's a nice day we are having, aren't we?"
Prostitute: "Waiter, there is a fucking fly in my soup."
Waiter: (Oxford Ph.D. in philosophy) Hm. (He gives himself to great thought. Finally:) Ma'm, it's impossible.
Prostitute: "What do you mean?"
Waiter: "A fly all by itself alone, can't be fucking. That's copulation, and by definition, it needs two flies of opposite sexes. Maybe the Mademoiselle meant to say that the fly is self-engaged in autoerotica."
Prostitute: "Whatever. I fell asleep somewhere in the middle of your monologue there. Repeat?"
I: "Waiter, please bring another fly so the one in the soup is not so lonely."
Waiter: "Right away, sir. You want a blonde one, a brunette, or a read-head?"
I: "Read-head?"
Waiter: "Yes, a fly with a well-rounded reading list below her belt, from Faulkner to Boussireaivedaicissime, to Sommerset Maugham, to Tante Dante."
I: "Will we have time to eat the soup between sentences of the literary fly?"
Waiter: "if that's a concern, sir, I'll bring a deaf and mute one. Or if we out of those, can I bring the ma'm a dead and mute one?"
Prositute: "I need a hit. Anyone has any crack?"
I: "Buth Thelma! Not in public!?"
Prostitute: (in singing voice) "I'll go down on yo-o-ou first!"
I:

A_Seagull wrote: ↑Fri Feb 16, 2018 9:27 pm
ROFL

Belinda wrote: ↑Fri Feb 16, 2018 8:17 pm Dontaskme wrote:

The need to poo and piss would get you moving even if you tried not moving or doing, you can't, simply because it's not you doing anything, you are the doing, the done. Life moves as one unitary action...known as a re-act-ion...the play of opposites in progress...aka realtime.

I understand that pooing and pissing are good examples of "not you doing anything" or in other words reacting to necessity.I also understand that all actions including philosophising are "not doing anything" in other words reacting to necessity. I understand how "one unitary action " is necessity.

Where we part intellectual company is where we disagree that "one unitary action" is all that there is. Reality can be viewed as "one unitary action" or alternatively as myriad separate actions. Neither view is inconsistent with the other view ; each view is valid .
However the validity of the "one unitary action " view implies that there is no self who is not a necessary component of the one unitary action.In other words all that happens is the one unitary action. The one unitary action must also include whatever values can be claimed for prostitution without blame or evaluation.

Belinda wrote: ↑Sat Feb 17, 2018 12:29 pm Dontaskme, what you name "the one unitary action" is what Spinoza named "from the aspect of the eternal".

The eternal is known not only to Eastern philosophy but also to Western philosophy, serious art, and some Western religion.

Reality is viewed not only from the aspect of the eternal which you do, but also from the aspect of the temporal and transient. The temporal and transient is the aspect under which we view ourselves as selves, and under which we evaluate good and evil.
I hope that you don't deceive yourself that you have the same vision as Nick, who is a literalist.