Philosophy Now Forum

Posted: **Sun Apr 13, 2025 5:00 am**

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Sat Apr 12, 2025 6:06 pm
Maia wrote: ↑Sat Apr 12, 2025 8:08 am
attofishpi wrote: ↑Sat Apr 12, 2025 6:56 am

Awesome Maia - I've often wondered where the King Arthur myth came from, what facts of the time so much of the legend were built upon. Will definitely check that out.
Excellent. It's by far the best and most comprehensive book I've ever read on the subject.
One could add an Episode of Babylon 5, as a study in metaphorical association and application.

All of history is about mankind attempting to establish a unified code of justice. We pick and choose our hero's based upon how we imagine that it can be accomplished.

How one works their love of a thing, depends upon their intelligence to achieve it. Most people give up because of the work involved which they actually cannot do.
One can reduce the whole of it to one question; At what point does one give up on finding love? Then one can ask, what are the numberless ways we can excuse our quitting? etc.

I don't really know much about Babylon 5, to be honest. But I certainly haven't given up on the idea of finding love. Quite the opposite, in fact.

Posted: **Sun Apr 13, 2025 3:50 pm**

Maia wrote: ↑Sun Apr 13, 2025 5:00 am
Phil8659 wrote: ↑Sat Apr 12, 2025 6:06 pm
Maia wrote: ↑Sat Apr 12, 2025 8:08 am

Excellent. It's by far the best and most comprehensive book I've ever read on the subject.
One could add an Episode of Babylon 5, as a study in metaphorical association and application.

All of history is about mankind attempting to establish a unified code of justice. We pick and choose our hero's based upon how we imagine that it can be accomplished.

How one works their love of a thing, depends upon their intelligence to achieve it. Most people give up because of the work involved which they actually cannot do.
One can reduce the whole of it to one question; At what point does one give up on finding love? Then one can ask, what are the numberless ways we can excuse our quitting? etc.
I don't really know much about Babylon 5, to be honest. But I certainly haven't given up on the idea of finding love. Quite the opposite, in fact.

And, do you, like most people think it is something easy to find?
Relation to self is inadmissible, i.e., If a person does not care to know what they are, why they are or how to do the job we are bring made for, do you think that it is even remotely possible, that they can love at all? Or are they chasing an illusion? which will always fail? We always do unto others as we do unto ourselves. Always. You do no work to be true to what we are, why we are, and learn our own work, we can never he true to someone else.

Most people do not want love, for th ey do not now what it is, they want someone to fit their delusions. To flatter them.

It is not possible to love, if you do not love what we are suppose to be. Relation to self is not possible.

No greater love is there, than doing our own work.
The job we are evolving to do.
So, I do not think you are looking for love at all.
I have never met, in my life, anyone who was. If one does not seek, all the days of their life to be true to ourselves, they can never be true to anyone else. Love is forever, but today, it is only for the briefest of moments which is not love at all.

We are, as mind, potentially the most powerful life support possible. Therefore we have a well defined biologically determined job to do, and well defined physically determined means of doing our own work. How can anyone, who cares not to do their own work, possibly care for anyone? Everyone I have met in my life has a welfare mentality. Do this or that for me, they say, or you don't love me. They do not see the horror in their words.
So, mankind is stull evolving to know what love is. We cannot change that. Someday, if man survives, we will know what it is, and how to live that life. We will live with our whole mind, body and soul.
To dream the impossible dream, does not mean that the goal is impossible, it means that it is not possible today. Becoming is not being.

So, a bit of advice, You always look for the ability to love, and you look for someone to share in the impossible dream, who believes in it to the point they will never give it up. I have held on to that goal for over seventy years. I still work on it from sun up to sun down.

An idiot believes in falling in and out of love, such a belief is an oxymoron. We are responsible for producing human will such that that behavior maintains and promotes life. Love is what we do, not bump into, fall in or out of. We don't look for it anywhere else but in our own ability. What can we do, now what can someone else do for me. Like everything else, we learn to make it, or we live without it.
You want it in someone else, learn how to make it, and try to teach it. Simple as that.

We have one job to do, one means of doing it, and it takes our entire life. At what point do people believe that job ends, that they do not need to learn to do their own work, or have to do it? What point do they say, I have had enough of love and just toss the empty word around like an old worn out rag? Do we really speak with our words, or with our whole body?

Stupid people are actually so delusional, they believe that they can hide behind the false words.
I think you can still download the whole tv series Babylon 5 with its offshoot, Crusades, from Pirate Bay.

Posted: **Sun Apr 13, 2025 5:30 pm**

Getting back to the topic, right now I am building a virtual library of Clark's grammar, i am probably not related, and Reed and Kellogg's grammar because it is historically the most recent origins of simple minded individuals to graph sentences. Since I have done the leg work in Plato and Geometry, I can show how they went wrong, how to parse a sentence and graph it in geometry just like I had to show how to do it in arithmetic and algebra. It might take me some time to learn myself, but I have the basics down pat.

They are my current authors, not because they were right, but because they were trying to do something above their skill set.

Love, between a man and his wife, is all the things they do together to learn and teach the work of man.

Posted: **Sun Apr 13, 2025 6:10 pm**

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Sun Apr 13, 2025 3:50 pm
Maia wrote: ↑Sun Apr 13, 2025 5:00 am
Phil8659 wrote: ↑Sat Apr 12, 2025 6:06 pm

One could add an Episode of Babylon 5, as a study in metaphorical association and application.

All of history is about mankind attempting to establish a unified code of justice. We pick and choose our hero's based upon how we imagine that it can be accomplished.

How one works their love of a thing, depends upon their intelligence to achieve it. Most people give up because of the work involved which they actually cannot do.
One can reduce the whole of it to one question; At what point does one give up on finding love? Then one can ask, what are the numberless ways we can excuse our quitting? etc.
I don't really know much about Babylon 5, to be honest. But I certainly haven't given up on the idea of finding love. Quite the opposite, in fact.
And, do you, like most people think it is something easy to find?
Relation to self is inadmissible, i.e., If a person does not care to know what they are, why they are or how to do the job we are bring made for, do you think that it is even remotely possible, that they can love at all? Or are they chasing an illusion? which will always fail? We always do unto others as we do unto ourselves. Always. You do no work to be true to what we are, why we are, and learn our own work, we can never he true to someone else.

Most people do not want love, for th ey do not now what it is, they want someone to fit their delusions. To flatter them.

It is not possible to love, if you do not love what we are suppose to be. Relation to self is not possible.

No greater love is there, than doing our own work.
The job we are evolving to do.
So, I do not think you are looking for love at all.
I have never met, in my life, anyone who was. If one does not seek, all the days of their life to be true to ourselves, they can never be true to anyone else. Love is forever, but today, it is only for the briefest of moments which is not love at all.

We are, as mind, potentially the most powerful life support possible. Therefore we have a well defined biologically determined job to do, and well defined physically determined means of doing our own work. How can anyone, who cares not to do their own work, possibly care for anyone? Everyone I have met in my life has a welfare mentality. Do this or that for me, they say, or you don't love me. They do not see the horror in their words.
So, mankind is stull evolving to know what love is. We cannot change that. Someday, if man survives, we will know what it is, and how to live that life. We will live with our whole mind, body and soul.
To dream the impossible dream, does not mean that the goal is impossible, it means that it is not possible today. Becoming is not being.

So, a bit of advice, You always look for the ability to love, and you look for someone to share in the impossible dream, who believes in it to the point they will never give it up. I have held on to that goal for over seventy years. I still work on it from sun up to sun down.

An idiot believes in falling in and out of love, such a belief is an oxymoron. We are responsible for producing human will such that that behavior maintains and promotes life. Love is what we do, not bump into, fall in or out of. We don't look for it anywhere else but in our own ability. What can we do, now what can someone else do for me. Like everything else, we learn to make it, or we live without it.
You want it in someone else, learn how to make it, and try to teach it. Simple as that.

We have one job to do, one means of doing it, and it takes our entire life. At what point do people believe that job ends, that they do not need to learn to do their own work, or have to do it? What point do they say, I have had enough of love and just toss the empty word around like an old worn out rag? Do we really speak with our words, or with our whole body?

Stupid people are actually so delusional, they believe that they can hide behind the false words.
I think you can still download the whole tv series Babylon 5 with its offshoot, Crusades, from Pirate Bay.

No, I don't think it's easy to find, but I do think it's very easy to get bogged down in questions like this, and come to the conclusion that it's impossible to find, but that's not actually the case at all. What we call love is a natural human emotion, built into us, and while we can argue than when we experience it, it is never, or almost never, completely perfect, we very much can and do experience it, for real. If we didn't, we wouldn't have a word for it, or even understand the concept. They say that the difference between infatuation and love is like the difference between a cold and the flu, you only know it once you've experienced it, and while, admittedly, I've had very little experience of the flu, I know exactly what love is like.

I agree that it's important to love oneself, as it were, though not in a narcissistic sort of way, before you can love someone else, because if you don't love yourself, who on earth else will? I don't think I have any particular problems on that score, and while I know I'm not perfect, the fact is, no one is, and that's absolutely fine. Any imperfections that I may have, such as having a bit of a temper, for example, are easily worked on, and, in general, I'm very happy with my life.

So, in other words, I don't think it's rocket science. Be nice to people, and most of the time, people will be nice to you. Do what you can in life, be open and friendly, you know the sort of thing, and then one day, almost always when you least expect it, love will find you. And yes, I do indeed realise that all that probably sounds pathetically trite, but sometimes, that's exactly what life is like.

As for Babylon 5, well, it's not something that has ever appealed to me, to be honest.

Posted: **Sun Apr 13, 2025 6:39 pm**

So, you believe that the mind is supposed to effect behavior in accordance with emotion, like any other animal?

That we are suppose to have our behavior the product of some particular and unshareable, feeling?

That the mind is not to be the master of the intelligible? All of Science fiction is campy humor. It is not designed to be honest.

So, the greatest behavior of all, is not intelligible, but only personally perceptible? What a very important ego event it is then!

As I said, you are so far gone in delusion, you are incapable of love.

Posted: **Sun Apr 13, 2025 6:54 pm**

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Sun Apr 13, 2025 6:39 pm So, you believe that the mind is supposed to effect behavior in accordance with emotion, like any other animal?

That we are suppose to have our behavior the product of some particular and unshareable, feeling?

That the mind is not to be the master of the intelligible? All of Science fiction is campy humor. It is not designed to be honest.

So, the greatest behavior of all, is not intelligible, but only personally perceptible? What a very important ego event it is then!

As I said, you are so far gone in delusion, you are incapable of love.

Humans are animals and are driven by emotion.

And I assure you that I am, indeed, capable of love. From what you've said, it seems that it's you who isn't.

Posted: **Sun Apr 13, 2025 7:01 pm**

Of course, you must be right, there is no objective standard for love, and it is a standard which is not a standard.

LMAO.

So, according to you, a mind is not designed to live by standards of behavior.

which means, a mind is designed not live by life supporting judgements.
The very ability to parse information is to construct a unit, a standard of behavior.

You cannot spot a contradiction which it is biting you in the ass.

Posted: **Sun Apr 13, 2025 7:09 pm**

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Sun Apr 13, 2025 7:01 pm Of course, you must be right, there is no objective standard for love, and it is a standard which is not a standard.

LMAO.

So, according to you, a mind is not designed to live by standards of behavior.

which means, a mind is designed not live by life supporting judgements.
The very ability to parse information is to construct a unit, a standard of behavior.

You cannot spot a contradiction which it is biting you in the ass.

If there's any objective standard for love, it has to be based on what people actually experience, when they are in love, in all its imperfections and contradictions.

A mind is designed, if that's the right word, to navigate the world in which it finds itself.

Posted: **Sun Apr 13, 2025 7:12 pm**

Maia wrote: ↑Sun Apr 13, 2025 7:09 pm
Phil8659 wrote: ↑Sun Apr 13, 2025 7:01 pm Of course, you must be right, there is no objective standard for love, and it is a standard which is not a standard.

LMAO.

So, according to you, a mind is not designed to live by standards of behavior.

which means, a mind is designed not live by life supporting judgements.
The very ability to parse information is to construct a unit, a standard of behavior.

You cannot spot a contradiction which it is biting you in the ass.
If there's any objective standard for love, it has to be based on what people actually experience, when they are in love, in all its imperfections and contradictions.

A mind is designed, if that's the right word, to navigate the world in which it finds itself.

So, our behavior is based on perception, which is true, but it is derived not by the perceptible but by the intelligible.
Therefore, nor the perception of our own personal emotion, but by objective fact on what people do. Are the consistent or not? And if not, are they working to be better or worse, etc.,

So, where is your emotion in all of this, emotion, which you either manage or you are managed by it?

Review your history. Which people in history have shown that they felt love the deepest, the greatest love. Those who have done noting to further humanity, or who gave their life,
No greater love has a man but to give his life for humanity.

deny that.

Posted: **Sun Apr 13, 2025 7:19 pm**

Is love simply self gratification, or is it a species imperative to "have life and have it more abundantly'/

Posted: **Sun Apr 13, 2025 7:27 pm**

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Sun Apr 13, 2025 7:12 pm
Maia wrote: ↑Sun Apr 13, 2025 7:09 pm
Phil8659 wrote: ↑Sun Apr 13, 2025 7:01 pm Of course, you must be right, there is no objective standard for love, and it is a standard which is not a standard.

LMAO.

So, according to you, a mind is not designed to live by standards of behavior.

which means, a mind is designed not live by life supporting judgements.
The very ability to parse information is to construct a unit, a standard of behavior.

You cannot spot a contradiction which it is biting you in the ass.
If there's any objective standard for love, it has to be based on what people actually experience, when they are in love, in all its imperfections and contradictions.

A mind is designed, if that's the right word, to navigate the world in which it finds itself.
So, our behavior is based on perception, which is true, but it is derived not by the perceptible but by the intelligible.
Therefore, nor the perception of our own personal emotion, but by objective fact on what people do. Are the consistent or not? And if not, are they working to be better or worse, etc.,

So, where is your emotion in all of this, emotion, which you either manage or you are managed by it?

Review your history. Which people in history have shown that they felt love the deepest, the greatest love. Those who have done noting to further humanity, or who gave their life,
No greater love has a man but to give his life for humanity.

deny that.

We collect information about the people and the world around us, imperfectly, of course, but well enough to function, most of the time, then make decisions about how to proceed, and these decision are led by emotion. We can sometimes override these emotions, but most of the time, don't. The idea that we make decisions based on logic is just something that we tell ourselves.

The love that you're talking about there is a different kind of love. I was talking about romantic love, but there are other sorts too, of course, such as love for one's family.

Posted: **Sun Apr 13, 2025 7:31 pm**

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Sun Apr 13, 2025 7:19 pm Is love simply self gratification, or is it a species imperative to "have life and have it more abundantly'/

It's a species imperative to perpetuate itself.

Posted: **Sun Apr 13, 2025 7:41 pm**

Maia wrote: ↑Sun Apr 13, 2025 7:31 pm
Phil8659 wrote: ↑Sun Apr 13, 2025 7:19 pm Is love simply self gratification, or is it a species imperative to "have life and have it more abundantly'/
It's a species imperative to perpetuate itself.

So, what is suppose to differentiate man from other animals. Hint, as in the Bible, as in the dialogs of Plato, etc, as your computer demonstrates? Is it not called literacy, the ability to use grammar to effect life supporting behavior? And, if you are serious, you learn to become self taught, relying on those who actually understood how we do our own work?
We, above all other animals learn to first regulate our own behavior, and learn how to apply it to all life.
I only have time while my computer is processing. sorry

Posted: **Sun Apr 13, 2025 7:57 pm**

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Sun Apr 13, 2025 7:41 pm
Maia wrote: ↑Sun Apr 13, 2025 7:31 pm
Phil8659 wrote: ↑Sun Apr 13, 2025 7:19 pm Is love simply self gratification, or is it a species imperative to "have life and have it more abundantly'/
It's a species imperative to perpetuate itself.
So, what is suppose to differentiate man from other animals. Hint, as in the Bible, as in the dialogs of Plato, etc, as your computer demonstrates? Is it not called literacy, the ability to use grammar to effect life supporting behavior? And, if you are serious, you learn to become self taught, relying on those who actually understood how we do our own work?
We, above all other animals learn to first regulate our own behavior, and learn how to apply it to all life.

Well, yes, humans are certainly in a different class to other animals, though it's worth pointing out that we had already existed for many thousands of years before the need for literacy arose with the first cities. The actual thing that differentiates us from other animals is spoken language. But I suppose you could say that oral history is a form of literacy, in the widest sense of the word, and it allowed us to store knowledge and pass it down, always in the form of poetry, because that's much easier to remember.

Posted: **Sun Apr 13, 2025 8:15 pm**

And has that history done much in the way of teaching you that all information processing is binary and produces exactly four specific systems of grammar all humans should be able to use to make judgments?

As I said, it is intimated in the Bible, and in Plato, etc., have you studied what it means that we are first born through a physical matrix, but must become born again through an intelligible matrix?

Do you know that life is both perceptible and intelligible?

Mankind is still being made. That is what I was asked to help with and that is what I do.

To know one's self is to not confuse the body with the mind.

Philosophy Now Forum

Your favourite authors, and why?

Re: Your favourite authors, and why?

Re: Your favourite authors, and why?

Re: Your favourite authors, and why?

Re: Your favourite authors, and why?

Re: Your favourite authors, and why?

Re: Your favourite authors, and why?

Re: Your favourite authors, and why?

Re: Your favourite authors, and why?

Re: Your favourite authors, and why?

Re: Your favourite authors, and why?

Re: Your favourite authors, and why?

Re: Your favourite authors, and why?

Re: Your favourite authors, and why?

Re: Your favourite authors, and why?

Re: Your favourite authors, and why?