Philosophy Now Forum

Yes, fear is an emotion, but it is also an ism/an ideology,
a way of life.... take a look at old people, not all old people,
but enough of them allow fear to run their lives...and
conservatives also allow fear to run their lives... listen to conservatives..
really listen.. and one can see the fear that run their lives... an example
is when conservatives claim that BLM has destroyed cities... really?
At most, a small part of Portland OR, this vast destruction of American
cities never happened... I listened to both the 2016 and 2020 GOP
convention and listening to them, one would have thought that America
was on fire and burning from coast to coast...and yet it wasn't true...
that was the fear driving conservatives to "see" the "vast" destruction...
that never was....for most people fear is a value... because it isn't just
a part time emotion, but a way of life... a value that determines their
actions... just like one in love, a value, acts upon the value of love....
in love we send flowers and writes bad poetry, been there done that...

Fear is an value if it is used as a way of life..

Don't make the mistake of thinking that emotions are a small part of existence
and comes and goes at a whim.... We act upon emotions all day, every day..
it is a value because it, emotions, does determine our understanding, our values
and our understanding of what it means to be human.....

Kropotkin

Peter Kropotkin wrote: ↑Wed Jul 06, 2022 5:06 pm Some here noticed that I didn't spell out those ''values''
and some thought I should back to the beginning and note
the point of values, to survive for example..

So let think about values.. The person who is engaged in surviving,
the act of obtaining food, water, shelter, the bodily necessities of
surviving, has no need or desire to engage in a search for values,
if one is hungry what is the point of values? What does the value
of hope, to name one such value, mean if one is hungry or struggling
to find shelter for the night?

Food itself is of value especially to one who is hungry.
You deny that?

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Thu Jul 07, 2022 3:30 am

Peter Kropotkin wrote: ↑Wed Jul 06, 2022 5:06 pm Some here noticed that I didn't spell out those ''values''
and some thought I should back to the beginning and note
the point of values, to survive for example..

So let think about values.. The person who is engaged in surviving,
the act of obtaining food, water, shelter, the bodily necessities of
surviving, has no need or desire to engage in a search for values,
if one is hungry what is the point of values? What does the value
of hope, to name one such value, mean if one is hungry or struggling
to find shelter for the night?

Food itself is of value especially to one who is hungry.
You deny that?

K: Once many years ago, I had to survive three weeks with a single jar of
peanut butter and no money....I couldn't eat peanut butter for 10 years after that...

food is of value but it isn't a value... for eating, sleeping, shelter, water are all
matters that are required by the human being to survive... we die without those
things... and thus they are of value, but is not a value like love or hope or peace...
those values are values that carry us past a single meal or a single night sleep...

When I engage with values like love or peace or hope, I engage with them for
a length of time.. a meal is a meal is a meal... and has no significance past that meal..
whereas a value is a value today and tomorrow... a value has duration, mere food
is to fulfill a biological need and it is important to note the difference..

Kropotkin

Peter Kropotkin wrote: ↑Thu Jul 07, 2022 12:22 am Yes, fear is an emotion, but it is also an ism/an ideology,

I can see fear undergirding one value system more than another, but not as a value.

a way of life.... take a look at old people, not all old people,
but enough of them allow fear to run their lives...and
conservatives also allow fear to run their lives... listen to conservatives..
really listen.. and one can see the fear that run their lives... an example
is when conservatives claim that BLM has destroyed cities... really?

or young people's fear of conformism or the current left's fear of anyone not beling allowed to do anything (unless it is someone doing something they don't want) or liberals fear of Trump or the right's fear of hillary or the liberal terror of Putin or the rights fear of globalizations and so on. I see fear and rage undergirding everything these days.

Fear is an value if it is used as a way of life..

I can work with the idea, but I think it is an unloving way to couch your opponents. IOW if love is the value you are advocating, then putting your opponents values in the perjorative, calling their emotions negative and yours positive might not be a loving start. Because even if driven by fear more, and I think this is not clear, there are specific values or things that they value that they feel are threatened. If they, under the pandemic, see that BLM groups are allowed to march but other gatherings, concervative ones, are not allowed to, they can have the same kinds of slippery slope fears that the liberals bring out on other topics. So, my suggesting is instead of being insulting by in a psychoanalytical and subtler way - condescending - present their values in a positive light, but show how even seen in a positive light they cause problems NOW and HERE.

Saying one has the value of love while mindreading one's opponents and essentially talking down to them is, I think, actually worse than yelling and directly insulting. Because those who are condescended to by someone who is at the same time claiming to take the loving ground, to be loving, are vastly more likely to think this is a mere facade. That the same hate and fear linger underneath but are not being expressed.

Don't make the mistake of thinking that emotions are a small part of existence
and comes and goes at a whim....

Yeah, that's not a mistak I make.

We act upon emotions all day, every day..

Right and condescension is driven by emotions.

it is a value because it, emotions, does determine our understanding, our values
and our understanding of what it means to be human....

.It drives them, but it does not determine them. That is the point I am making. Fear can drive concern for the oppressed and hate can. Fear can drive conservative policies or liberal ones and certainly left and right ones. Rage can, affection can. Look at any demonstration/counterdemonstration event and both sides will be driven by both emotions, usually. Gun control, abortion rights, global warming, trans issues, I see rage and fear on all sides.

So, it is much better, if one wants to claim 'I have the value of love and you don't' to role model that by focusing on what conservatives actually want. The facets of life they value, what they would call their values. Otherwise it's just another knife attack with a smile.

And by the way, science backs up disgust as the difference between conservatives and liberals. Show a conservative an image of rotten meat, they will react with more disgust than a liberal. It's not fear or anger, it's disgust. Now one can then label digust a negative emotion and be condescending about it, but it relates to health.
https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... n_Liberals
too much is a problem, too little is a problem, misplaced disgust is a problem, ignored disgust is a problem.

Peter Kropotkin wrote: ↑Tue Jul 05, 2022 5:05 pm For me, the question of philosophy has been a question
of values... what values should we be pursuing and why those
values and not other values? Of course this question of values
derives from Nietzsche... who I did follow in my youth as youth
are wont to do... Nietzsche of course, suggested following
the "hard" values of, the morality of the "aristocracy".. the so called
"masters" of Nietzsche...vs, the masses, the slave morality of the "common"
man....Nietzche wasn't interested in the "soft" values of Christianity...
but this is already known...

Kropotkin

So, what you are saying, that you are totally innocent of the obvious? Tell me, is a product of a life form a biological product?
And, as noted as the theme of both the Bible, end to end, and Plato, and every real philosopher, behavior is the product of judgment, the actual job of a mind brought into existence by a physical brain. Who would not deny every word of what you are saying.
Show me that the human mind does not read information, called perception from your own body, process that information in accordance with your intelligence, and writes that information back to your own body? Show me, that you are aware of the distinction between the intelligible which is not perceptible, and the perceptible is not intelligible, Plato explains it, very well i.e. in semantics the map is not the territory, or the virtual is not the real. And that, as Plato noted, words in of themselves cannot possibly have any meaning, they are memory addressing system, meaning is from the perceptions you have made, which is not the words of anyone, but biological and physical fact?
Your perceptions are meaning, while your judgments are in regard to that meaning, and judgment is what you mean, how you decide what to do about the reality you life in.

Really, quoting Nietche? as the source for biological fact. Man, you are confused. Every metaphor of the Bible and Plato resolve to biological fact. Which means you cannot even read metaphor.

it, in this context is an ostensive, a pointer to something intelligible or perceptible, might be nice to know just what this it is. For all anyone knows, you are pointing to a pooka.

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Fri Jul 08, 2022 10:04 pm

Peter Kropotkin wrote: ↑Tue Jul 05, 2022 5:05 pm For me, the question of philosophy has been a question
of values... what values should we be pursuing and why those
values and not other values? Of course this question of values
derives from Nietzsche... who I did follow in my youth as youth
are wont to do... Nietzsche of course, suggested following
the "hard" values of, the morality of the "aristocracy".. the so called
"masters" of Nietzsche...vs, the masses, the slave morality of the "common"
man....Nietzche wasn't interested in the "soft" values of Christianity...
but this is already known...

Kropotkin

So, what you are saying, that you are totally innocent of the obvious? Tell me, is a product of a life form a biological product?
And, as noted as the theme of both the Bible, end to end, and Plato, and every real philosopher, behavior is the product of judgment, the actual job of a mind brought into existence by a physical brain. Who would not deny every word of what you are saying.
Show me that the human mind does not read information, called perception from your own body, process that information in accordance with your intelligence, and writes that information back to your own body? Show me, that you are aware of the distinction between the intelligible which is not perceptible, and the perceptible is not intelligible, Plato explains it, very well i.e. in semantics the map is not the territory, or the virtual is not the real. And that, as Plato noted, words in of themselves cannot possibly have any meaning, they are memory addressing system, meaning is from the perceptions you have made, which is not the words of anyone, but biological and physical fact?
Your perceptions are meaning, while your judgments are in regard to that meaning, and judgment is what you mean, how you decide what to do about the reality you life in.

Really, quoting Nietche? as the source for biological fact. Man, you are confused. Every metaphor of the Bible and Plato resolve to biological fact. Which means you cannot even read metaphor.

it, in this context is an ostensive, a pointer to something intelligible or perceptible, might be nice to know just what this it is. For all anyone knows, you are pointing to a pooka.

K: I see you love your Plato and the " Bible" but frankly, I have no use for either...
so, if you want to ''love'' the ''bible'' or Plato, go for it...just don't expect other
people to have the same ''faith'' in them as you do... and I certainly don't
''believe'' or have ''faith'' in them as you do...

Kropotkin

And what you are saying is you prefer fantasy to provable fact. But that is not Philosophy,.

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 11, 2022 11:26 pm And what you are saying is you prefer fantasy to provable fact. But that is not Philosophy,.

K: what is one's man fantasy is another man's reality....and I must ask, what facts are
actually provable? IS the bible provable? IS philosophy even provable?
is knowledge even provable? I have my doubts.. but hay, as they say,

"different strokes for different folks"

Kropotkin

Peter Kropotkin wrote: ↑Tue Jul 12, 2022 12:07 am

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 11, 2022 11:26 pm And what you are saying is you prefer fantasy to provable fact. But that is not Philosophy,.

K: what is one's man fantasy is another man's reality....and I must ask, what facts are
actually provable? IS the bible provable? IS philosophy even provable?
is knowledge even provable? I have my doubts.. but hay, as they say,

"different strokes for different folks"

Kropotkin

No, absolutely not, to someone who is illiterate as you are. What is proof, by the way, if you cannot even manage the concept that every possible grammar system functions by a standard of behavior, or a unit, recursively applied, and you cannot even imagine what that means.

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 12, 2022 12:10 am

Peter Kropotkin wrote: ↑Tue Jul 12, 2022 12:07 am

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 11, 2022 11:26 pm And what you are saying is you prefer fantasy to provable fact. But that is not Philosophy,.

K: what is one's man fantasy is another man's reality....and I must ask, what facts are
actually provable? IS the bible provable? IS philosophy even provable?
is knowledge even provable? I have my doubts.. but hay, as they say,

"different strokes for different folks"

Kropotkin

No, absolutely not, to someone who is illiterate as you are. What is proof, by the way, if you cannot even manage the concept that every possible grammar system functions by a standard of behavior, or a unit, recursively applied, and you cannot even imagine what that means.

K: ummm, just because I don't hold the exact same beliefs as you, I am "illiterate",
nice touch to dismiss anyone who doesn't agree with you as "illiterate" ...
in any case, you are certainly free to believe what you wish to believe in,
not being as rigid as you are, I wish you luck in your beliefs..

Kropotkin

Peter Kropotkin wrote: ↑Tue Jul 12, 2022 12:46 am

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 12, 2022 12:10 am

Peter Kropotkin wrote: ↑Tue Jul 12, 2022 12:07 am

K: what is one's man fantasy is another man's reality....and I must ask, what facts are
actually provable? IS the bible provable? IS philosophy even provable?
is knowledge even provable? I have my doubts.. but hay, as they say,

"different strokes for different folks"

Kropotkin

No, absolutely not, to someone who is illiterate as you are. What is proof, by the way, if you cannot even manage the concept that every possible grammar system functions by a standard of behavior, or a unit, recursively applied, and you cannot even imagine what that means.

K: ummm, just because I don't hold the exact same beliefs as you, I am "illiterate",
nice touch to dismiss anyone who doesn't agree with you as "illiterate" ...
in any case, you are certainly free to believe what you wish to believe in,
not being as rigid as you are, I wish you luck in your beliefs..

Kropotkin

Really? Belief is not the product of grammar system so that you can choose to do what is right and avoid what is wrong, grammar is for pulling words out your ass and gluing them together any way that pleases you. And you say you are literate? And then bitch that nothing can be proven, you just gotta pull just right to please and pleasure you? A standard of behavior recursively applied produces not a standard result? Really? That is mental malfunction at its finest.

as stated before, I truly wish you the best in your belief system....
knock yourself out...

Kropotkin