Philosophy Now Forum

Posted: **Thu Jun 22, 2023 2:21 pm**

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2023 11:37 am
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Jun 21, 2023 7:31 pm Can a person be an Alexisite, while denying all that Alexis has done and taught? Yes, or no?
Sometimes, I think my most aggressive interpreters, who I used to think mangled me, are actually onto something. But then the Old School say to me “No! Alexis! We and we alone truly understand what you said and what you mean!”

You're ducking the question again.

Are they Alexisites, if they do not follow Alexis?

But I will provide the answer you know is obvious, but which you are so reluctant to admit.

I don't get to be a turnip by calling myself one. I don't get to be an Alexisite by calling myself one. And a person doesn't become a Christian by saying, "I'm a Christian." One gets to be any of those things only if the fundamental reality it signals is in place...namely, that one actually IS one.

That's so simple to see that any child can get it. But its implications for syncretism and the theological departures of the various cults are significant. There is a point at which one is simply too far from actually being what one claims, and can no longer believably claim it.

Posted: **Thu Jun 22, 2023 2:29 pm**

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2023 2:21 pm
Are they Alexisites, if they do not follow Alexis?

But I will provide the answer you know is obvious, but which you are so reluctant to admit.

I don't get to be a turnip by calling myself one.

Indeed not: One has to first become an Alexisite, and then progress towards being a turnip.

Posted: **Thu Jun 22, 2023 2:32 pm**

harbal declared: "I just don't see any reason to believe there is an overall, objective purpose."

There may not be. I don't recall sayin' there was or is.

"but intuition is just a feeling."

Not as I see it.

"In what way is your claim to your life, liberty, and property inviolate, when they can all be taken away from you?"

Legally, if someone steals your car, does your ownership cease to be? How about morally?

I'm guessin' if your car were stolen, you wouldn't say 'oh well, it belongs to someone else now'. I'm bettin' you'd say 'my car was stolen!' 'My' car, 'my' property. And I'm thinkin' the anger you feel wouldn't be simply becuz the 'law' was broken. No, your sense of bein' wronged would go far deeper. Intuitively, you would understand you'd been wronged. Even as some hooligan is choppin' your ride for parts, or toolin' around town drinkin' malt liquor and burnin' holes in your car seats with his Newports, you'll still lay claim to that car. Even if the 'law' sanctioned the theft (thru non-prosecution or non-investigation) you would still know what was yours had been wrongly taken.

That's what inviolate means. Yes, your life, your liberty, your property can be infringed on, or stolen, or damaged, but your right to them isn't negated becuz of that infringement or theft or injury. It is precisely becuz your right to your life, your liberty, your property is inviolate/inalienable that you would look to get your car back instead of shruggin' it off.

Posted: **Thu Jun 22, 2023 2:37 pm**

AJ posted: "Intuition (Latin intueri, to look into) is a psychological and philosophical term which designates the process of immediate apprehension or perception of an actual fact, being, or relation between two terms and its results. Hence the words Intuitionism or Intuitionalism mean those systems in philosophy which consider intuition as the fundamental process of our knowledge or at least give to intuition a large place (the Scottish school), and the words Intuitive Morality and Intuitional Ethics denote those ethical theories which base morality on an intuitive apprehension of the moral principles and laws or consider intuition as capable of distinguishing the moral qualities of our actions (Shaftesbury, Hutcheson Reid, Dugald Stewart). As an element of educational method intuition means the grasp of knowledge by concrete, experimental or intellectual, ways of apprehension. The immediate perception of sensuous or material objects by our senses is called sensuous or empirical intuition, the immediate apprehension of intellectual or immaterial objects by our intelligence is called intellectual intuition. It may be remarked that Kant calls empirical intuitions our knowledge of objects through sensation, and pure intuition our perception of space and time as the forms a priori of sensibility. Again, our intuitions may be called external or internal, according as the objects perceived are external objects or internal objects or acts."

Posted: **Thu Jun 22, 2023 2:41 pm**

Gary, at the urging of the forum's preeminent autist, wondered: "If it is true that Henry does not have liberty, then I suspect that's what Henry wants/has guns for; to take liberty away from others who won't also give it to him."

I am free. I own a shotgun to hunt and self-defend. Liberty can't be given (see my post to harbal, just above).

Posted: **Thu Jun 22, 2023 2:43 pm**

harbal asserted: "I'm sure we knew what we meant by, "intuition"."

Obviously, no, 'we' don't.

Posted: **Thu Jun 22, 2023 2:44 pm**

AJ assessed: "I am quite sure, Harbal, that you do not, except superficially, understand what the dynamic of intuition alludes to. I am also sure that in a great many areas your understanding is at the level of a child, and a child who does not care, who is not concerned to understand more deeply. You are modernity’s superficial man."

Posted: **Thu Jun 22, 2023 2:46 pm**

harbal guessed: "That's okay, I think the term was only being used superficially."

Not by me.

Posted: **Thu Jun 22, 2023 2:47 pm**

henry quirk wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2023 2:32 pm harbal declared: "I just don't see any reason to believe there is an overall, objective purpose."

There may not be. I don't recall sayin' there was or is.

"but intuition is just a feeling."

Not as I see it.

"In what way is your claim to your life, liberty, and property inviolate, when they can all be taken away from you?"

Legally, if someone steals your car, does your ownership cease to be? How about morally?

I'm guessin' if your car were stolen, you wouldn't say 'oh well, it belongs to someone else now'. I'm bettin' you'd say 'my car was stolen!' 'My' car, 'my' property. And I'm thinkin' the anger you feel wouldn't be simply becuz the 'law' was broken. No, your sense of bein' wronged would go far deeper. Intuitively, you would understand you'd been wronged. Even as some hooligan is choppin' your ride for parts, or toolin' around town drinkin' malt liquor and burnin' holes in your car seats with his Newports, you'll still lay claim to that car. Even if the 'law' sanctioned the theft (thru non-prosecution or non-investigation) you would still know what was yours had been wrongly taken.

I agree that we have legal rights, and I agree that I would be angry if someone stole what I considered to be my property.

That's what inviolate means. Yes, your life, your liberty, your property can be infringed on, or stolen, or damaged, but your right to them isn't negated becuz of that infringement or theft or injury. It is precisely becuz your right to your life, your liberty, your property is inviolate/inalienable that you would look to get your car back instead of shruggin' it off.

You can have rights under the law, or even rights by agreement between others and yourself, but there are no rights outside of those arranged between human beings. Nature grants no rights.

Posted: **Thu Jun 22, 2023 2:48 pm**

henry quirk wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2023 2:43 pm harbal asserted: "I'm sure we knew what we meant by, "intuition"."

Obviously, no, 'we' don't.

Okay, I knew what I meant, but I won't speak for you.

Posted: **Thu Jun 22, 2023 2:50 pm**

harbal declared: "I would be angry if someone stole what I considered to be my property."

Why?

Posted: **Thu Jun 22, 2023 2:51 pm**

henry quirk wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2023 2:46 pm harbal guessed: "That's okay, I think the term was only being used superficially."

Not by me.

If you "intuit" that you have natural rights, henry, then I'm afraid you are using the term as superficially as is possible.

Posted: **Thu Jun 22, 2023 2:52 pm**

henry quirk wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2023 2:50 pm harbal declared: "I would be angry if someone stole what I considered to be my property."

Why?

Posted: **Thu Jun 22, 2023 2:52 pm**

Harbal wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2023 2:29 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2023 2:21 pm
Are they Alexisites, if they do not follow Alexis?

But I will provide the answer you know is obvious, but which you are so reluctant to admit.

I don't get to be a turnip by calling myself one.
Indeed not: One has to first become an Alexisite, and then progress towards being a turnip.

It's a short arc.

Posted: **Thu Jun 22, 2023 2:53 pm**

indeed, hobbes wuz right. like my last wife, nature too is nasty, brutish and short, and with no regard for my 'rights'.

Philosophy Now Forum

Christianity

Re: Christianity

Re: Christianity

Re: Christianity

Re: Christianity

Re: Christianity

Re: Christianity

Re: Christianity

Re: Christianity

Re: Christianity

Re: Christianity

Re: Christianity

Re: Christianity

Re: Christianity

Re: Christianity

Re: Christianity