Page 159 of 173
Re: Philosophy of Mind
Posted: Fri Dec 16, 2011 7:44 pm
by SpheresOfBalance
lancek4 wrote:SpheresOfBalance wrote:Barbara Brooks wrote:Stroke yourself.
Barbara, You're probably looking for a scapegoat about now, so help yourself to me. But the "stroke it" bit was in reference to:
"Foghornleghorn thinker is great!"
NOT
"Alright - can we get back to insulting the originator of this thread ?"
I would think it would be self evident to such an awesome philosopher of mind. But I'm obviously incorrect!
Or maybe it was simply, 'birds' of a feather!
Yes; I understood that jjab was for me.
.
Only because I took "Foghornleghorn thinker is great!" to be against me! Gotta defend myself, no one else will!
Though sometimes commentary can be mistakenly misunderstood due to an unintended lack of clarification, thus negating misunderstanding, sometimes it's done purposely, composed as such to insure it, as a means of self stroking, as though the perception of delivering 'over ones head' is somehow noble and self affirming. Of course it's actually an illusion where an unchallenged assertion fools one into believing their superiority.
Sometimes addressing ones illusion it's purposely ignored as the fools game that it is, and at other times it's addressed to hint at it's actual understanding, or was it merely a misconception?
Re: Philosophy of Mind
Posted: Fri Dec 16, 2011 7:54 pm
by SpheresOfBalance
I agree Lance, I too am impressed when Barbara dispenses with her poetry and spouts the facts and nothing but the facts. Maybe she likes to appear as a fool so as to strike once she lures her (male) victim into her spiders web, a true 'Black Widow!'
Just teasing you Barb, while paying you a compliment. (it helps to soften the blow!)
Happy Holidays to 'ALL' in the spirit of selflessly giving! If only we could 'actually' do it any and every day!
Re: Philosophy of Mind
Posted: Sat Dec 17, 2011 5:56 am
by lancek4
How funny - the foghornleghorn comment elicited three totally different notions of direction and intent.
Sob thot is was him and retorted
Barb thought it wasd her, and retorted
I thought the retort from sob was for me (but it was, but not really)
And I was merely being funny about AUKs picture. Because he's a funny guy but astute and silly at times and I just looked at the picture and thought how funny foghornleghorn looks kinda like the famous schulpture 'the thinker'. And I just thought what a great ironic impression of self humility and reflection about what one is doing as a philkosopher (but I may have read to much into AUKs reason for picking that pic for his posts).
Re: Philosophy of Mind
Posted: Sat Dec 17, 2011 5:31 pm
by Barbara Brooks
Lance4,
To follow any conviction is certainly more than to hand over to a jury of opinions. I stick to a system that rest upon knowledge, has no opinion or prejudice.
To follow my conviction is certainly more than to hand over to a jury of skeptics who sometimes rest upon bulling me trying me into submission.
Laboring anything into something has not only positive but also conviction something becomes something through labor.
Labor is the chain that keeps us in bondage from which we cannot sway away in attaining our verdict.
Knowledge is not found anywhere in the field of subjective views, it is not a matter of clever turns of allusiveness phrases, or half utterances but philosophy an open, unambiguous, meaningful, and purposeful expression which is here in this forum.
All one can do in the world is good and that is the highest of all gifts of humanity. Grasp the whole truth in the right way you will have no difficulty in apprehending, that mind can never assure anything if knowledge does not intervene.
I believe philosophers cannot lose sight of the higher purpose we must watch over philosophy like a good farmers nurturing and cultivating it’s gentle qualities, and prevent those wild opinions from growing.
I only want to sooth and remove the dislike of knowledge. I think there is a perfection which all ought to reach and not to fall back on only then will the pursuit have any value.
Re: Philosophy of Mind
Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2011 6:22 am
by lancek4
Barbara Brooks wrote:Lance4,
To follow any conviction is certainly more than to hand over to a jury of opinions. I stick to a system that rest upon knowledge, has no opinion or prejudice.
To follow my conviction is certainly more than to hand over to a jury of skeptics who sometimes rest upon bulling me trying me into submission.
Laboring anything into something has not only positive but also conviction something becomes something through labor.
Labor is the chain that keeps us in bondage from which we cannot sway away in attaining our verdict.
Knowledge is not found anywhere in the field of subjective views, it is not a matter of clever turns of allusiveness phrases, or half utterances but philosophy an open, unambiguous, meaningful, and purposeful expression which is here in this forum.
All one can do in the world is good and that is the highest of all gifts of humanity. Grasp the whole truth in the right way you will have no difficulty in apprehending, that mind can never assure anything if knowledge does not intervene.
I believe philosophers cannot lose sight of the higher purpose we must watch over philosophy like a good farmers nurturing and cultivating it’s gentle qualities, and prevent those wild opinions from growing.
I only want to sooth and remove the dislike of knowledge. I think there is a perfection which all ought to reach and not to fall back on only then will the pursuit have any value.
I am honestly sorry Barb, I have no idea what you are trying to convey here.
It sounds good, but I have to wonder if even you know what you are really saying - cuz I don't.
It sounds poetic but platitudinous. Noble but pedestrian; profound but meaningless.
I think you are saying something to the effect that you don't like to be insulted, but in a way that keeps you distant, like you can't entertain and grow in knowledge and have fun with others.
Its like you are so in earnest you are in pain.
'Soothe and remove the dislike of knowledge' ? What does that mean?
Its like you are proclaiming a sickness upon a whole world without seeing who might really be sick and who might be more well than you, or even who might be 'fighting the good fight' along side of you who you refuse to notice.
Its like you are filled with nice sounding words, but the only consistency I get is that you probably wear your heart on your sleeve and have such deep sympathy for the ignorant you see all around you.
Sorry.
Btw, have you any opinion on Levinas?
Re: Philosophy of Mind
Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2011 2:13 pm
by Barbara Brooks
Then you are no philosopher. You have no understanding nor do you seem to want to . I live as a humble person I do not participate in the societies hoopla, I live a humble life, work for myself for over thirty years and its enough for me to live off,
I work as a laborer and I ask nothing from anyone. As long as I can study and learn I am a happy person. I have given my life to philosophy and work very hard to live my life humbly and good so that my words match my existence.
Re: Philosophy of Mind
Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2011 4:50 pm
by lancek4
Barbara Brooks wrote:Then you are no philosopher. You have no understanding nor do you seem to want to . I live as a humble person I do not participate in the societies hoopla, I live a humble life, work for myself for over thirty years and its enough for me to live off,
I work as a laborer and I ask nothing from anyone. As long as I can study and learn I am a happy person. I have given my life to philosophy and work very hard to live my life humbly and good so that my words match my existence.
Yes quite noble. And perhaps I am not a philosopher. But I believe I have a good grasp of the issues and I have wide experience of the world.
I am not so sure my words match my activity all the time, but I try to be upright in my humanity.
It sounds that we are similar in our temperments though.
I just feel that you want to tell people and not engage with them. Your oration of lofty and speaks through any ability to entertain critique and this seems consistent with your attitude.
To me, it is only in being at least willing to engage with societies hoopla that I might be able to contribute and help, them and my self, and there by grow and be human. If I remain in my library I have only the benefit of one, alone in my cave on the mountain.
Indeed it is easy to be right when one hears no dissention but as the wind outside.
Re: Philosophy of Mind
Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2011 6:04 pm
by SpheresOfBalance
lancek4 wrote:Barbara Brooks wrote:Then you are no philosopher. You have no understanding nor do you seem to want to . I live as a humble person I do not participate in the societies hoopla, I live a humble life, work for myself for over thirty years and its enough for me to live off,
I work as a laborer and I ask nothing from anyone. As long as I can study and learn I am a happy person. I have given my life to philosophy and work very hard to live my life humbly and good so that my words match my existence.
Yes quite noble. And perhaps I am not a philosopher. But I believe I have a good grasp of the issues and I have wide experience of the world.
I am not so sure my words match my activity all the time, but I try to be upright in my humanity.
It sounds that we are similar in our temperments though.
I just feel that you want to tell people and not engage with them. Your oration of lofty and speaks through any ability to entertain critique and this seems consistent with your attitude.
To me, it is only in being at least willing to engage with societies hoopla that I might be able to contribute and help, them and my self, and there by grow and be human. If I remain in my library I have only the benefit of one, alone in my cave on the mountain.
Indeed it is easy to be right when one hears no dissention but as the wind outside.
"The omniscient perspective
By far the most common problem in discourse since the Enlightenment is the assumption of the existence of a God's eye view. That is, assuming that society can select a single perspective and apply it to all events, without needing to take into account the varying point of view of many cognitive beings moving through time and the fusion of this into one, omniscient, unified, perception of what "is". E Prime is a proposed solution to this problem in the field of General Semantics. This objective perspective, as opposed to all other subjective points of view, is also what Georg Lukács refers to with the concept of "totality". Writers and critics of narrative prose call this view the omniscient narrator, who appears to know everything about the story being told, including what all the characters are thinking, and usually speaks in the third person."
--Wikipedia: on the subject of the "Subject–object problem"--
Re: Philosophy of Mind
Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2011 6:15 pm
by SpheresOfBalance
Barbara Brooks wrote:Then you are no philosopher. You have no understanding nor do you seem to want to . I live as a humble person I do not participate in the societies hoopla, I live a humble life, work for myself for over thirty years and its enough for me to live off,
I work as a laborer and I ask nothing from anyone. As long as I can study and learn I am a happy person. I have given my life to philosophy and work very hard to live my life humbly and good so that my words match my existence.
I see Barbara, if one doesn't see things your way then they are no philosopher, because only your way is philosophy because you've worked soooo hard at it and no one else has.
Neither writing, reading, reciting, dissecting, reiterating, nor arguing for or against a books contents necessarily indicates understanding it, it may, but not necessarily.
Re: Philosophy of Mind
Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2011 6:26 pm
by Barbara Brooks
Listen I was asked why I do what I do, like it or not that is what I do.
Re: Philosophy of Mind
Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2011 7:21 pm
by lancek4
Barbara Brooks wrote:Listen I was asked why I do what I do, like it or not that is what I do.
I respect you in your doing what you're doing, but I guess I figure it is not to much to ask that you also have respect for me (or us) doing what we do - which in the case of this thread, is beating my head up against your cave wall.
.
Re: Philosophy of Mind
Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2011 9:18 pm
by Barbara Brooks
What do you do who are you?
Re: Philosophy of Mind
Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2011 9:47 pm
by SpheresOfBalance
Barbara Brooks wrote:Listen I was asked why I do what I do, like it or not that is what I do.
This thing above that Barbara said harmonizes so well with this thing below that Barbara said:Barbara Brooks wrote:All one can do in the world is good and that is the highest of all gifts of humanity.
Come on lets everybody cram our views down each others throats without honestly heeding their rebuttal lets just keep on spouting and spouting, and spouting, and spouting (have you caught the futility in the pattern yet) for the good of all humankind. Yes it's gotta be so good for everyone? because I say so, and I've worked so hard! SOOO HARD!!!! 
I have a right to talk 'at' people in the name of all that's good.
look I'm sorry for being a total ASS! But I think most would appreciate it if you would at least slightly consider them. And please stop trying to be so cryptic as if that lends to your intellect. I want to hear your points for what they are in fact. Do you HEAR that I WANT to HEAR YOU! But I require that you either start putting the conjunctions back in your sentences instead of subject after subject after subject, I think you manage to fit a verb in now and again (of course I'm exaggerating in the interest of being pointed) or continue with your poetry and include footnotes in complete proper English sentences.
Of course this is just a request, so I can interact with you, this and nothing more, unless you're not here for interaction. In which case you can keep spouting to the breeze, while I and others that want to interact with you, but find that you preclude it, shall move on.
Re: Philosophy of Mind
Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2011 10:45 pm
by Barbara Brooks
Don't read it, your eyes belong to you, your mind belongs to you, don't read my writing if you are bothered by it you have every right use your own discretion and not read it, it's as simple as that.
Re: Philosophy of Mind
Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2011 11:50 pm
by bus2bondi
hello lancek and sob, if someone powerful, or with influence or sway came into this thread and disagreed with the both of you, just for kicks, say even Rick Lewis (i'm not saying he would and i hope he doesn't mind me using him as an example)(if he does, i will change it), but hypothetically, if someone like that, or even Rick, entered the thread and sided with Barbara, right or wrong, and told you to piss off like she occasionally does, how would you be acting then?
would you be saying the same things in the same way publicly? i suspect you would cower off. at the very least, your methodology would change drastically. what if everyone in the world started agreeing with Barbara, right or wrong, and there were only the 2 of you that didn't. would you change your tune? if anything, you still might hold your opinion within, but i highly doubt you'd have the balls to be going about it how you do now.
pluto posted a short film clip recently, by i believe it was orson wells. it's a sort of social phenomenon, what was demonstrated within it. this phenomenon is not all that could be found in it, but its one thing i noticed. i could be wrong, but i found it interesting how the 'weak' man who said something within a group of people that was obviously a dangerous and contrary thing to say considering the 'environment' that he was in, right or wrong, was immediately pounced upon, until.... the powerful and influential man in the group stood up and agreed with him. then the entire scene changed and the others went silent.
i'm not saying i agree entirely with the whole clip, i myself appreciate transportation, and those that make it possible (obviously not corruption), although understanding and respecting its point in other various ways, but i won't get into that. but that was not all i noticed in the clip. what i notice is something i notice all the time in the world, that i expressed in the above paragraph. and forgive me, i could be wrong, but the two of you exemplify this, and reminded me of that.
one thing i adore about philosophy, or most philosophers, is that most try and do flow past this sort of thing, it's 'how they do it' that makes it even more beautiful. of course, i'm probably wrong. and no doubt, i've failed at doing it correctly as well. its something worth striving for i guess.