Philosophy Now Forum

Nick_A wrote: ↑Tue Nov 24, 2020 8:02 pm

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Tue Nov 24, 2020 8:53 am Protagoras' "man is the measure of all things" is most realistic and tenable.

Man is part and parcel of reality, i.e. all-there-is.
Therefore there is no way man can extricate himself from reality [all-there-is] and make himself independent of reality.
Whatever is a 'thing' within reality inevitably and imperatively is connected deterministically [not absolute sense] to 'man' and also via experiences or known via knowledge.

Since man is part and parcel of reality [all there is] the sense of internal_ness and external_ness are also spontaneous emergence which is part and parcel of reality.
Whatever is a 'thing of reality' is a spontaneous emergence and experience and not something that had pre-existed independently awaiting to be discovered.

The sense of external_ness and independent from oneself is crucial for survival, i.e. the need for food from the external, the spouse from external, enemies and threats are external, etc.

Because this sense of externalness is so critical for survival and thus ingrained within human consciousness, humans simply accept absolute external_ness and independence as given but remained ignorant that externalness is an emergence whereby man is part and parcel of reality.

As such what is taken as external and independent are pseudo in one perspective whereas what is reality is man is part and parcel of reality [all there is].

Since man is part and parcel of reality [all there is] which comprised of all things,
"man is the measure of all things."

Note 'measure' is not literal but indicate 'conditioning' or 'interrelated' to.

Since man is part and parcel of reality [all there is] the sense of internal_ness and external_ness are also spontaneous emergence which is part and parcel of reality.
Whatever is a 'thing of reality' is a spontaneous emergence and experience and not something that had pre-existed independently awaiting to be discovered.


Are you saying that the universe as we know it emerges from Man so Man on did not exist before the universe? Suppose the earth was destroyed and everything on it including Man no longer existed, would anything happen to the universe?

If Man no longer exists, there would be no man to suppose 'the earth or Universe' is destroyed.

As Wittgenstein asserted,
“That of which we cannot speak, we must pass over in silence”

The above literally mean one must just 'shut-up' and suppressed the impulse of speculate.
The point is the majority cannot suppressed the very strong impulse to 'suppose' and speculate; this is why the issue is psychological.

This is why man can only deal with what is really real on the basis of the empirical and the philosophical.

Nick_A wrote: ↑Wed Nov 25, 2020 4:33 am V A

If Man no longer exists, there would be no man to suppose 'the earth or Universe' is destroyed.

As Wittgenstein asserted,
“That of which we cannot speak, we must pass over in silence”

The above literally mean one must just 'shut-up' and suppressed the impulse of speculate.
The point is the majority cannot suppressed the very strong impulse to 'suppose' and speculate; this is why the issue is psychological.

This is why man can only deal with what is really real on the basis of the empirical and the philosophical.

According to your explanation we cannot know if Man, the universe , or even if God exists since we are limited to sensory impressions. I'll stick with Plato on these cognitive states

noesis (immediate intuition, apprehension, or mental 'seeing' of principles)
dianoia (discursive thought)
pistis (belief or confidence)
eikasia (delusion or sheer conjecture)

You stop at dianoia. I prefer to open myself to contemplation in order to experience noesis. There is no reason to shut-up and avoid questions or speculation. Noesis is the only path that transcends Protagoras' and invites the experience of forms originating with our Source or the Good

Nick_A wrote: ↑Wed Nov 25, 2020 3:20 am EOD

An absence of universality, where all grades are accepted as part of the whole, is grounded in extremism with this extremism being an absence of balance.

Justice is balance, discussions/debates/fights over justice require balance. Balance is wholism, thus justice is an approach to taking things as a whole.

You seem to be saying that if people on all sides of the justice debate express themselves it will produce justice because they have created balance. But this doesn't answer the question: what justice is?


The process of defining justice is in itself subject to justice thus the form of justice occurs through the debate of justice. Justice, as a universal form, manifests itself under the debate of justice which defines it.

Is the Wheel of Samsara justice even though though the suffering it produces has no known cause?

All suffering has a cause given it is an absence of balance. Extremism is the cause of suffering with this absence of balance originating through the individuation of one phenomenon into another.

Dependent Origination (pratītyasamutpadā/ paṭiccasmuppāda) is the Buddhist doctrine of causality. This system of thought maintains that everything has been caused into existence. Nothing has been created ex nihilo. This is useful in understanding how there can be rebirth without a belief in a soul.

This would necessitate being as occuring through a series of causes that necessitate the original cause as uncaused.

Are the results and the sufferings of dependent origination justice? If so how can we define justice if there is no one to blame?

We are what we reflect upon, the act of reflection in itself is justice as it acts as a form of balance where an individual phenomenon is mirrored and stabilized through a counterpart.

Justice can be defined but this act of definition would require further and further definition until all phenomenon are connected as part of these subset definitions. Justice, through the same means of defining it, is thus connectivity with connectivity being balance given one part is defined through another. It is the manifestation of connection, through parts, which necessitates an equilibrium occuring with this equilibrium being the leveling of a phenomenon to a point zero state from which it originates.

You can speculate on anything you like.
If you speculate, then you must qualify whatever is speculated is a speculation.

In the Church, considered as a social organism, the mysteries inevitably degenerate into beliefs. Simone Weil

The mysteries of faith are degraded if they are made into an object of affirmation and negation, when in reality they should be an object of contemplation. Simone Weil

The process of defining justice is in itself subject to justice thus the form of justice occurs through the debate of justice. Justice, as a universal form, manifests itself under the debate of justice which defines it.

Plato's Theory of Forms asserts that the physical realm is only a shadow, or image, of the true reality of the Realm of Forms. So what are these Forms, according to Plato? The Forms are abstract, perfect, unchanging concepts or ideals that transcend time and space; they exist in the Realm of Forms.

Nick_A wrote: ↑Wed Nov 25, 2020 10:47 pm Eod

The process of defining justice is in itself subject to justice thus the form of justice occurs through the debate of justice. Justice, as a universal form, manifests itself under the debate of justice which defines it.

I previously posted a definition of Plato’s forms:

Plato's Theory of Forms asserts that the physical realm is only a shadow, or image, of the true reality of the Realm of Forms. So what are these Forms, according to Plato? The Forms are abstract, perfect, unchanging concepts or ideals that transcend time and space; they exist in the Realm of Forms.

The forms then are unchanging concepts or ideals that transcend time and space. This is not the same as discussing ever changing interpretations within time and space taking place within creation.

And these forms are reflected through "shadows". The one is approximated through the many.

Creation occurs as a lawful process within time and space taking place within NOW.

Creation is the perpetual renewal of the forms.

Does Man have the conscious potential to experience forms rather than becoming lost in interpretations?

An experience is a subjective angle of observation thus is an interpretation.Socrates would say yes while Protagoras would call it ridiculous speculation. You can't make buck at it and there is nothing more important. .

Nick_A wrote: ↑Tue Nov 24, 2020 8:06 pm What does it mean to be in the image of God?

Nick_A wrote: ↑Tue Nov 24, 2020 8:06 pm If Man is made in the image of God, what prevents us from being gods?

And these forms are reflected through "shadows". The one is approximated through the many.

Creation is the perpetual renewal of the forms.

Time in Buddhist cosmology is measured in kalpas. Originally, a kalpa was considered to be 4,320,000 years. Buddhist scholars expanded it with a metaphor: rub a one-mile cube of rock once every hundred years with a piece of silk, until the rock is worn away -- and a kalpa still hasn’t passed! During a kalpa, the world comes into being, exists, is destroyed, and a period of emptiness ensues. Then it all starts again.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Thu Nov 26, 2020 4:59 pm

Nick_A wrote: ↑Tue Nov 24, 2020 8:06 pm What does it mean to be in the image of God?

Looks like a duck. Quacks like a duck, but it's not a duck.

Has aspirations to be an actual duck one day...

Nick_A wrote: ↑Tue Nov 24, 2020 8:06 pm If Man is made in the image of God, what prevents us from being gods?

At least the lack of omnipotence, omnipresence and omniscience.

Nick_A wrote: ↑Thu Nov 26, 2020 6:27 pm

Skepdick wrote: ↑Thu Nov 26, 2020 4:59 pm

Nick_A wrote: ↑Tue Nov 24, 2020 8:06 pm What does it mean to be in the image of God?

Looks like a duck. Quacks like a duck, but it's not a duck.

Has aspirations to be an actual duck one day...

Nick_A wrote: ↑Tue Nov 24, 2020 8:06 pm If Man is made in the image of God, what prevents us from being gods?

At least the lack of omnipotence, omnipresence and omniscience.

Then Man cannot be made in the image of God

Nick_A wrote: ↑Thu Nov 26, 2020 6:25 pm Eod

And these forms are reflected through "shadows". The one is approximated through the many.

Aristotle said that, “The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.” To me this means that the meaning of justice as a form beyond the limits of time and space, transcends the multitude of human interpretations within time and space.

The whole is the sum of its parts as a whole is summation.

Bill kills tom and says justice is done. Alice kills Mary and says justice is done. Jerry kills both Alice and Bill and proclaims justice has been done. Socrates asks what is justice so the people are outraged and kill him in the name of justice. So what is objective justice?

In killing Socrates man lost a perpetrator of wisdom. In seeking to avoid wisdom man created the circumstances where he no longer receives wisdom, thus justice is done.

Creation is the perpetual renewal of the forms.

Are forms renewed or are interpretations of the forms remembered?

The forms are renewed through their variation this variation occurs through memory where the form is observed and renewed through a new angle of observation.

Time in Buddhist cosmology is measured in kalpas. Originally, a kalpa was considered to be 4,320,000 years. Buddhist scholars expanded it with a metaphor: rub a one-mile cube of rock once every hundred years with a piece of silk, until the rock is worn away -- and a kalpa still hasn’t passed! During a kalpa, the world comes into being, exists, is destroyed, and a period of emptiness ensues. Then it all starts again.

In Hinduism this is the breath of Brahma. Brahma exhales the universe and inhales it again. Interpretations are within the breath of Brahma. Forms are unchangeable. The breath is renewed.

In killing Socrates man lost a perpetrator of wisdom. In seeking to avoid wisdom man created the circumstances where he no longer receives wisdom, thus justice is done.

Nick_A wrote: ↑Wed Nov 25, 2020 10:27 pm V A

You can speculate on anything you like.
If you speculate, then you must qualify whatever is speculated is a speculation.

But the inner search for our source is a response to a psychological need rather than speculation. Much like a moth is attracted to the light, there is something in our collective presence which is attracted to the light of our Source.

• 1. all humans are "programmed" with a very strong drive not to die prematurely but
  2. yet with self-awareness, all human know for a fact they will die.

In the Church, considered as a social organism, the mysteries inevitably degenerate into beliefs. Simone Weil

The mysteries of faith are degraded if they are made into an object of affirmation and negation, when in reality they should be an object of contemplation. Simone Weil

Protagoras speculated. Most modern philosophy is based on speculation. Socrates spoke to “needs” that have been forgotten. That is why he was considered a danger to the youth of Athens and a divisive influence. Only the state can tell you what you deserve rather than what you need

How many in these times of the diminished attention span are capable of contemplation of the mysteries much less being capable of contemplation.

Nick_A wrote: ↑Fri Nov 27, 2020 5:43 am Eod

In killing Socrates man lost a perpetrator of wisdom. In seeking to avoid wisdom man created the circumstances where he no longer receives wisdom, thus justice is done.

Is it really justice for the death of one man to be called justice since his death deprives the world of justice? I don't see the logic in it.

The world did not want his wisdom therefore they recieved what they desired.

At the same time was Jesus' crucifixion justice? It was to many Romans and Jews. who wanted to be rid of him. For his followers the crucifixion was a gross injustice. Yet from a universal perspective it could be considered justice since it was the only way to enable the Resurrection.

Do you define justice by the opinions from subjective human standards or knowledge of objective universal standards? When Socrates said "I know that I know nothing," Protagoras would never have understood what he meant.

Objectivity is the observation of a phenomenon from multiple angles. It is group agreement. This is objective.